Messages

Peculiar. This 325 cu in hp/tq interplay is way off (by being the same) for a 90 degree presumably hi-perf V-8 (as opposed to say an agricultural pump-motor).
Although it could be many things, most initially look to an intake tract/ cyl head restriction, especially if/when the tq is in an 'expected ballpark'.

Vern,

Thank you for posting and populating this substantive thread. Really 'ups the game' for our forum.
Two points:
-McCoy Ford is still around, under the same family ownerwship: https://www.ocregister.com/2012/11/14/after-75-years-ford-dealership-keeps-rolling/;
-thanks, especially, for the inclusion of those 'staff meeting minutes'. They are dense in factual detail on matters in addition to the package tray carpet topic.
For instance, over the years my tracking of initial Ford VINs, to assigned 65 SAI VINs, to chassis component date codes, to engine block date codes clearly (empirically) showed that batched 271HP engine availabilty drove deliverlies (in the mid-production period) for Mustangs from Milpitas to SAI.
The April 7 minute report of Bruce Junor is the first document I've seen addressing this.
Arcane, I know! but of interest to certain 65 GT-350 owners.

-Steve A

Thanks guys!

Been trying to contact Jack for weeks on the company phone/email without response.
Has anyone had better luck recently?
Thanks!

Brian,

Thanks for all of your efforts (including the hyperlinks).
It is such a help to so many of us.

Can't help but notice the obvious: Mecum has really cornered the Shelby-American market.

-Steve A

FWIW: my ancient files label these as JFK/Idelwild, see attached (despite the thumbnail mis-label jpegs).
Aircraft is a CL-44 of Slick Airways.

I am so impressed to see mention of Valley Clutch on this Forum!
I had the distinct pleasure of knowing both Frank and Pat going back to the Quonset Hut days on Arrow.
Those men live on to this day with the racers of the original Irwindale. Absolute classics! Esp Pat's legendary 'dead squirrel' toupé. Frank passed early and Pat closed up the new shop perhaps 20(?) yrs ago. But boy do they live on in bench-racing circles in these parts.
One of my cars (at 500hp) still has a 'gold' clutch, with numerous disc changes/surfacing and has never slipped. My GT-350 ran a solid roller B302 until recently, again w one of Pat's gold clutches, same, nary a problem and I'm thinking of putting that mid-80's long plate behind the recently stock spec'd original 306hp just out of a wierd 'nostalgic loyalty' (?). I can't come up w a reason why-not-to. Crazy.

Yes, a 52" like out of a 1957~ Ford will work, the tubes do not narrow down so you'll have to switch plates and u-bolts, was very popular mod in the day when '57 Fords were in junkyards.
Granada style 9in housing, w factory disc brakes, are also 52" width is also a popular easy option for a non-concours application. 
Curries' used to use 8" tubes on a 9" pumpkin which was 'ok' but noticeable for those really looking, they may have since changed (?). Mitch Jackson used to supply them to Currie, but he has since passed.
There were 100% reproductions being made a few years ago, when the Hipo K Exchange Forum was up, status unknown now.

https://youtu.be/j03RWXoGoYU?si=eTqLOfJJE6uz_Rlv

...that classroom of girls-sooo cute. where are they now?

PM sent

you have been very fortunate.

to clarify: this discussion is about a 2:36 'Sebring box"' T-10m/l. vice the contemporary 2:43 super-t-10 installed in a phony T-10m cast housing currently allowed in vintage racing.

Scott,

Thank you. Not untrue.

It is my belief that the main web structure/ stress cracking was the effect of the problem, not the cause.

From the effect I would think one would work backwards, especially when a damaged passive piece (such as a block) houses dynamic pieces and their incumbent oscillatory harmonics (such as both a rotating and reciprocating assembly under varied loads and speeds).

A sporting rhetorical question:  the orientation of the axis of the application of their engineering discipline, that's all  .

In my former career we would often simply say: 'what were they thinking ?'.

-Steve A

Never heard of nor seen a C7FE block. Would love to see some evidence.

Here is what I've found (and open to editing):
-XE sm block development was a product of the GT40 program;
-1964 used 255 aluminium which cracked block webbing before the trans' went out;
-1965 used basically stock 271hp shortblocks which blew head gaskets and cracked webbing and 325 cid Bechtloff strokers which didn't hold head gaskets;
-1966 used a robusted 2-bolt block C6FE-6015-A, main web cracking. Repros of these enhanced  2-bolt blocks are presently being cast in the UK being used in FIA legal vintage Cobras primarily because they are restricted to a 2-bolt block;
-1967 first 4-bolt block XE-136136 followed by the XE-136505 which is the pic I posted, these engines too were plagued with internal cracking;
-the XE-136505 was integrated into the parts system as the C8FE used for the 302TP and initial Boss production followed by the D0ZE and the D1ZE.
 

-the thin wall 8.2 blocks have notoriously weak block webbing. Today hi-HP SBFs split OEM blocks due to HP (go boom-boom). In yesteryear, such as GT40 LeMans, the engines were low HP by todays stds (375-400 HP 289s, 400-450 HP GW 302s). Today's aftermarket 8.2 blocks have 40+ lbs of iron in the webbing over a 4-bolt Boss block. It's also weight over the nose.
Sustained externally balanced hi-rpm is what killed these blocks in the 60s, not splitting the block, but stress cracking discovered on forensic teardown. How they missed identifying the source for so long is puzzling. I have heard that Hank's 1965 325 strokers were fully counterweighted billets, but have not verified;
-I presently run a D1ZE, but it's risky sustained over 500 hp;
-I have endured the Boss 302 cracked skirts, passive damage, luckily never scored a cylinder.

XE 289 (attached)

exactly, in ineptly attempting to setup a three-engine go for training they intentionally/incorrectly removed their flight control hydraulic pumps and killed themselves.

"The cause of the accident was found to be poor procedures for simulating engine failures and failure to apply the correct procedure for hydraulic failure, as well as loss of hydraulic power to the rudder in a critical flight condition."