Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
60s-70s big Chevrolets vs. big Fords
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
But yes, you are right in the sense that let us not get off topic with the tired old American vs. Japanese thing.
Let the sales record of Japanese cars the last 30 years prove them or condemn them.
Back to Big Chevys and Fords then!
Get real folks, we wouldn't have the quality of cars we have today if the Japanese hadn't kicked our butts all over the automotive world in the last 30 years!
I loved my '72 Mustang convertible, 351C, 4V, and all the goodies, but it was a quality nightmare! When you think of that wistfully nostalgic phrase, "They don't make 'em like they used to." add, "Thank God!".
Ok, enough of that.....back to the "good ol' days" when gas was cheap, tires were skinny and bumpers were chrome!
A co-worker and I were talking today about the Mercury Cyclone, remember them with the "gunsight" grill? Would that be politically incorrect these days?
Have a great weekend!
The 69 CJ 428 fastback in orange with blacked out hood was one of my favorite cars. Didn't care too much for the Dan Gurney/Cale Yarbrough specials; too gaudy with the wing and multi-color paint.
Saw a 70 Cyclone Spoiler for sale at a car show in Manchester, NH about a year ago. Gorgeous, orange, black buckets, 4 sp 429, gauges spread across the dash but canted towards the driver.
Owner wanted 16K. If I didn't already have two old cars, I just might have bit.
The 71's, I think, started to back off on the power. 72's and 73's were not the same car.
Could never figure out why the Merc Cyclone didn't go over bigger saleswise. Too much competition from General Motors and from within (Torino/Mustang/Cougar)?
My 68 only had the 302-4v 4 sp, 3.50 rear, but it was peppy. (351's didn't come out until 1969.)
Could have bought a 390 2v or the 335 HP 390 4v, but decided against it as the 390's were not noted for performance, although they were bulletproof and had plenty of torque.
I added a CJ 428 hood scoop (including hood blackout) and cold air package to my 68 along with Keystone Classic wheels, Holley carb, Goodyear Polyglas tires, Stewart Warner gauges in the dash (similar to the 70 model, a 3.50 rear, and, thanks to a sunlamp, removed some of the body side tape (between the front/back wheels) which looked too overdone on the 68. (Even placed a screw/nut in the Holley's linkage wich forced the secondaries to open mechanically instead of by vacuum.) Flat black painted the headlight rims to match the flat black grille and added 69 "tear drop" side view mirrors to replace the 68 regular chrome mirrors.
Madras Blue (deep turquoise)/black buckets; great car.
Even back then the Mercury name plate didn't evoke great visions of performance--why? I'm not sure, they had a fantastic NASCAR record, but like Buick with the GS-455, they just didn't sell as many as they did Chevelles and Torinos! But if I recall correctly, no car on the street looked as good in orange and black as a Mercury Cyclone!
Enjoy!
Hal
Generally, if one has a mid 60's Ford with a 390, completely stock except for a dual exhaust, what is the first and easiest things to help improve performance without prematurely destroying the engine or fuel economy?
I know I need to play with the timing, as it has been retarded due to poor modern gasoline. My problem is finding anyone who is good with that skill anymore.
I also know helping the engine breath is beneficial, but I would like to keep the stock carburator just for originality sake. If I was buying an older car, an original carburator may indicate the engine has not be monkeyed with too much. I'm not really interested in a new cam, or tearing up the engine too much.
Would electronic ignition help with the retarded timing issue, or am I stuck unless I want to do some top-end work on the engine as well?
It also has the original tranny, and the stock 2.75 rear end gearing.
Sometimes compression is raised by carbonization over the years on these old engines, so part of your timing problem might be do to excess carbon buildup (decreases the volume of each cylinder basically and also creates hot spots for pre-ignition).
I agree with you, though. If you crack open the engine, be prepared to do a lot.
It would be great if someone could recurve your distributor on a machine but with all the factors involved it would be trial and error unless you found an old-timer who knows what 390s like. You can buy a recurve kit and mess around with it yourself but be careful about pre-ignition. You can't always hear it so check the spark plugs periodically. If you have any pre-ignition, audible or inaudible, your plugs will look really beat up. That's a tipoff as to what's going on inside the combustion chamber, and the pistons won't last long under those conditions.
If you're going to do it yourself I'd buy a book on ignition systems so you have a basic understanding of what's going on. I have two, Basic Ignition and Electrical Systems (6th ed.) from Green Hill Publishers and The Doctor's Step-by-Step Guide to Optimizing Your Ignition by Christopher Jacobs, Ph.D. These are some of my "newer" books, going back to 1985, and may still be available. It's interesting and very effective stuff, well worth the cost.
However--your car's weight and the tall 2.75 gears may limit how much advance you can run. But it's certainly worth the effort.
As far as keeping the car stock, a Holley 4160 is the stock four barrel IIRC. To me any 4160 or 4150 would be "stock enough" and I'm kind of a purist. OEM carbs don't last forever and a period-correct replacement is just fine.
An aftermarket intake manifold, especially the Edelbrock Performer street manifold, will really wake up that engine. Just paint it Ford blue and no on will know the difference. Grind off the "Edelbrock" casting if it bothers you.
A cam change will also make a huge difference, even with automatic and tall gears, but here you're getting into removing not just the intake but also the front cover and timing gears and chain. Might not be too bad an idea, though, because it's typically the chain that wears out before the rest of the engine's components.
1964 352 4V 250hp; 1958 352-4v 300 hp
If you read the old road tests, a '57 Ford with 312/245 was faster than a '58 with 352/300. The 352/300 was missing a few ponies, probably around 50. Part of the problem may have been that the first few 352s (built in late '57 IIRC) had a solid lifter cam that apparently produced an idle more lumpy than the average Ford driver could tolerate. Ford quickly switched to a smoother (and presumably milder) hydraulic cam.
The next year Ford reduced the compression ratio a full point but still kept the 300-hp rating, further reinforcing the idea that the 300 hp rating had been pulled out of a hat. In '60 Ford brought out a 360-hp 352 that was the real deal, capable of pulling NASCAR Galaxies around at 160 mph IIRC. Special heads, intake, cam etc.
So much for the history. They'll respond to the same modifications as the 390. The stock heads are the limiting factor, as they are with the 390. IIRC the "low riser" heads first used on the 406 and early 427, then later on the 428 Cobra Jet, are the hot street set-up. I imagine they're really expensive by now and not worth the expense on a large street-driven car.
I was able to make the stock heads work surprisingly well in a '68 Cougar 390 using a Comp Cams 270 hydro, Edelbrock Performer intake and some kind of Holley (probably a 4150, it's been a while). And that was with 9:1 CR.
You've got a Galaxie convertible and T-Bird so you've got more car to pull around with less displacement so a less aggressive cam would work better.
I've bought the shop manual, so I'm good to go there. Parts don't seem to be a problem either, so it appears money (as always) and how far from stock I want to go is the limiting factors.
I just cannot see spending money to modify a newer car when I can get away with a lot on my much more simpler Galaxie.
Good luck!
Must have weighed 200 pounds!
Later,
Hal
I guess 1966 was the last year for the 427. This same book (The Standard Catalog of American Cars) states that only 237 Ford Motor Company products were so equipped for that year. Apparently two were offered, the 410hp four-barrel, ('Thunderbird High Performance V-8', code W) and the dual quad 425hp ('Thunderbird Super High-Performance', code R). Good luck finding one!
The 406 and 427 didn't sell well because they were way too much engine for anyone but the dedicated racer, a lot like the late 409s. They were streetable but just barely, especially the 427/425.
Ford sold a lot of 390s in their full-size cars but it was usually the two barrel version. Torquey and durable.
Ford's problem in the mid-'60s was that it had some very strong racing-oriented big blocks, some underachieving street big blocks and nothing in the middle--no strong street big block. The 428 Cobra Jet fixed that but it was never available in the full sizers.
'A 428.'
'Really, I thought it was a 429.'
'My cousin had that 427 in a Mustang.'
BTW, what's the difference between a 'regular' 428 and the CJ?
As best I recall, the 427s were of a different "family" of engines than the 428s, 429s, 430s and 460s. I believe the 428--460 engines were from the Ford FE engine family and were generally high torque, workhorse engines. The 428 CJ was a different configuration, a derrivative of the 427 "wedge head"--Ford's version of the Hemi and was more suited for high performance applications. Though, a 429-4V was a hoss in anything you dropped it in! I always thought it curious that Ford had so many engines right in the same size range 427, 428, 429, 430.
Geez, it's been a long time since I talked big block Ford, I'm a little rusty! Was it Carroll Shelby that said, "Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races."??? Anybody verify that?
Thanks!
Hal
332-352-360 (truck only)-390-406-410-427-428: same FE family. Dates to 1958, wedges only. Late '62 406 with Low Riser (named after intake) heads was the first of the hot ones. '63 427 (early) is just a larger 406, late '63 has better Medium Riser heads. '64(?) has best High Riser heads, in production through '67. 425-hp version with 2x4v the most common although a 4v 400-hp version built to satisfy NASCAR regs. '68 427 is an attempt at a more streetable engine, has Medium Riser heads and 390 GT hydraulic cam. Replaced mid-'68 with 428 Cobra Jet, same heads and cam, very strong, very streetable engine rated at 345-hp, 15 less than the Thunderbird 428 boat anchor. Somewhere along the line they also made a very limited run of SOHC 427s.
429-460: Introduced 1970, staggered valve "semi hemi" layout similar to Chevy big block. Boss 429 has different heads, often referred to as "hemi". Modern, very heavy, never all that successful as a street performance engine although that's due partially to its timing, just in time for smog controls and gas shortages.
383-430: Introduced 1958 in big Mercury and Lincoln, used mostly as 430 in Lincolns through the '60s. Mercury 3x2v version in the '50s but never popular with the hotrodders.
That's off the top of my head. Some of the dates may be off by a year or so but that's the general idea. There will be a test.
And now that I think of it, there were two 410s. One was standard in mid-to-late-'60s Mercurys, a 390 with a 428 stroke. The other was a small bore version of the Lincoln used in Mercs in the late '50s. That's the one that had the three deuce set-up and hot cam in '58.
And you're right, there was a 462 version of the Lincoln engine that replaced the 430 in the mid '60s.
I think that pretty well covers it. Anyone still awake?
Not looking for a dragstrip setup, but a good running, faster (than the 352), street car.
The easiest and cheapest way to get more power is a 390. Ford sold a gazillion of them and there must be plenty still around. That'll get you another 50 or so lbs.ft. of torque. Wake it up with a street package like the Edelbrock Performer cam/intake/carb. Don't bother with better heads, headers or anything else except maybe a breakerless distributor.
But if it was me I'd hold out for a 428, just the regular "Thunderbird" version, not the Cobra Jet. Must be lots of these still around too and cheap. You need torque and lots of it, and torque comes from cubic inches.
A 406 or 427 would be great but these are rare, very expensive and high strung versions of the FE that won't be happy bolted to an automatic.
There was also a SOHC 427 and if you run across one in a junk yard it will fit :-).
This will be my first classic Ford show; I'm taking the Galaxie, but not showing it. Also don't think I'll be running a quarter mile time in it either. I'm already starting to see some old Fords out and about in Columbus.
The link, if interested.
http://www.fordexpo.com
the car has backfired twice in the last 4-5 weeks when starting it when the engine is hot, and the air temperature is around 80 degrees and muggy; I have not examined the points, so I don't know how old they are.
and, the vendor has marked down the above items so I can get the entire set for $132. The reason is he has a newer microcontrolled ignitor, but since I don't think this Galaxie has ever been over 3,000 rpm, I don't deem that necessary.
Or, I can remain stock and invest the money in a dwell meter, points, condensers, etc.
This upgrade will still require me to refine the vacuum advance issues on the distributor discussed earlier in this thread, correct? I have the shop manual, and there are about a dozen different types of distributors used in the 67 model year, but I think I narrowed it down to the one that was stock.
Oh, yeah, it is a 390 stock Autolite 2 barrel, rated at 275 horsepower stock. Starts instantly and runs nearly flawlessly, but I just know refining the timing will help midrange power.
Backfiring through the carb would indicate retarded timing.
I haven't had to diagnose an engine in years (I'm happy to tell you) but I think a worn secondary ignition system (points, plugs, rotor, cap, plug wires) would be a problem during cold as well as hot starts.
Since the backfire is related to heat, my guess is that maybe fuel is boiling over from the carb float bowl into the manifold. Or maybe the choke isn't releasing fully.
My opinion of aftermarket electronic ignition systems isn't high, mostly because the one time I used one it quit on me catastrophically. In other words, it didn't fail gradually like points and a condensor would. One minute the car was running fine, the next I was by the side of the road.
I've heard claims that the Pertronix(?) ignition increases power but I have to think it's because their distributor has a recurved advance. I don't think a mild street engine places enough demand on the secondary ignition system to get a big jump in power just by converting to an electronic ignition.
Just converting to electronic ignition won't involve the vacuum advance. Vacuum advance is your friend unless you start playing around with the initial and mechanical advance.
When I hear "high performance plug wires" I think copper core unshielded. Maybe no one makes them anymore but back in the day they were responsible for lots of lousy TV and car radio reception. Personally I'd stick to good quality OEM (graphite?) plug wires. Again, you're just not going to notice any difference with a mildly tuned engine that doesn't turn more than 3000 rpm.
You definitely don't need a high-performance coil. An OEM unit is fine unless you're regularly taking it over seven grand.
Have you done a compression test by the way?
But if the engine is running smoothly your compression is probably okay. Of course all eight cylinders might be even but low, but it seems like usually one or two cylinders go before the others.
An even quicker and cheaper way to see if you've got any bad cylinders is to buy the insulated pliers designed to remove plug wire boots one by one while the engine is running. If the engine doesn't run any worse with a plug boot removed you know that cylinder isn't doing much. Also a quick way to evaluate an engine before you buy.
The car doesn't burn any oil, and I don't see any signs of bad compression. I think it is a timing issue. However, it had never done any backfiring in the past, so I was wondering if the points were going, and if upgrading would be beneficial. Apparently that would not be the solution.
I don't run the engine that hard, so I don't have to worry about mechanical points and their rpm limitations.
It sounds like I need to find a timing light and a compression gauge at a garage sale, and go from there.
Lining up my winter projects.
Compression tests should be done with engine warm, and gas pedal to the floor when you crank.
I had a test for that but I don't know how accurate it is--take off the distributor cap, turn the crank manually with a socket on a breaker bar and see if there's a delay before the rotor turns. I don't know if this really tells you anything.
Just like working around the house. You start off painting the hall, and before you know it, you spent 20K to remodel the kitchen. Once you do the first thing, the next piece looks shabby,,,
Just have to know enough to stop before you have the car in baggies and are powder coating the frame rails.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I've never looked at the front end, nor rebuilt the carb either. Hey, never took the brakes apart yet either....
Guy buys a pretty brass compass for the ship, and sets in in the old compass's pedestal. Then the pedestal looks old and worn upside the shiny new compass, so he replaces that. Then he has this finely varnished wood pedestal, on a worn old wooden deck, so off comes the deck. By the time it's all said and done, he's refitted his entire ship at 3x what it would have cost him to buy a new ship, and it all started with "Honest, honey, all I want is a new compass! Sure, I'll buy you that new dress."
Oh, brothers, I have seen this dreaded disease ravage the human body so many times where I live (we are a sailing people). Normally sane and rational individuals develop this far away look in their eyes, Wooden Boat magazine firmly clutched in their sweaty hands, as they rummage for their coveralls, goggles, work hat and electric sander.
About three years later, they re-emerge into society, mere shells of their former selves, and ask to borrow ten bucks until payday.
But perhaps it was all cheaper than therapy at the shrink's. I hope so.
Per the 67 Shop manual, setting the timing seems deceptively easy. However, I'm supposed to pull spark plug #1 and put it into the spark plug adapter, and clamp the timing light spark plug lead to the adapter. Is this something that comes with the timing light, or a separate tool? Also supposed to disconnect the vacuum advance on the distributor, wherever that is.
The correct timing is 10* BTDC, but can be set to a max of 5* over max setting, and down to 2* BTDC for poor quality gas. The timing marks on the 390 go from 0* to 30*.
So questions are as follows:
Which direction is 5* over, 15* BTDC? Why would being closer to TDC retard the ignition, it seems it should go the other way? Isn't TDC where the piston is at the absolute top of it's movement up?
Is the adaptor something that comes with a timig light? Also, does anyone know where they still sell a timing light?
Also, what is "specified idle rpm"? It appears to be dependent on the carburator, and would that be the "curb idle" setting? Do I have to adjust the carb first, meaning I need a tachometer as well?
Last one, better to adjust the distributor before the timing, or set the timing to spec, then set the distributor, and then reset the timing?
Let's see; timing light, tachometer, compression gauge.... wonder if I can find an old "Rotunda" oscilliscope they mention in the shop manual....
Yes, 5 degrees extra timing would then be 15 degrees BTDC (before top dead center). If you go from 10 degrees BTDC to 15 degrees BTDC you are "advancing" the timing.
This term "advance" and "retard" is confusing unless you think of it all as a 360 degree circle, with TDC at 12 o'clock noon position. So as the piston spins around, the plug normally should fire at 10 degrees before TDC. But if you "advance" the timing, it will fire sooner, or farther away from TDC.
"Retard" means postponment of the spark until TDC or even after the piston has come around and starts to go down again.
As you can see, having too much advance can get ugly, as you would have an explosion while the piston is way down there still trying to come up. So you have opposing forces and ultimate destruction.
On the other hand, if you wait too long to fire the spark (retard), the optimum fuel mixture will dissipate through the just opening exhaust valve and you'll get a weak explosion.
All this has nothing to do with an engine being old or new. The principle is exactly the same for a 1915 piston engine or a 2003 engine. Of course, there is no more distributor or mechanical points to fire the spark or even a normal coil or timing adjustment.
Mr. Computer is our Friend, and least until he spits up and dies.
What you need is something that checks dwell, the amount of time in degrees that the points are in contact. I remember 30 degrees as being a typical dwell but check the manual.
A tach would be handy to set the idle speed, and you can buy a multi-function tester that measures dwell, rpm and charging output. Or you can set the idle speed by sound. Too low and the engine will stumble, the radiator fan and accessories won't spin fast enough, the engine will overheat and the charging system won't charge. Too high and the car will lurch when you shift into gear, damaging the transmission. I always liked to set the idle as low as possible to give the engine that cammy sound but that's my problem.
Setting the points won't affect the idle speed or initial advance. However, advancing the advance will raise the idle speed, retarding it will lower the idle speed.
Ignition advance is a lot like skeet shooting, not that I've ever done that, but the principle is the same: lead the target. The target is top dead center. Advancing the timing means advancing the firing of the plug, and therefore combustion, earlier in the piston's upward travel toward TDC.
At idle the engine needs only a minimum of lead, say 5 degrees or so, but as it revs it needs more lead. As the engine revs the distributor rotates faster and the centrifical advance begins to come in. In high vacuum conditions the vacuum advance also speeds up the distributor advance.
There's a metal can attached to the distributor and that's the vacuum advance. There's a hose running from that to (it sounds like) the manifold or the carb underneath the throttle plate. That's why they want you to disconnect the vacuum advance--at idle, a high vacuum situation, the vacuum advance will kick in a few more degrees of advance.
15 degrees is earlier in the piston's upward travel to TDC than 5 degrees. It may be helpful to visualize the crank to which each piston and rod is attached rotating 360 degrees through a circle, with each of the four events in a four stroke engine taking 90 of those 360 degrees.
Changing the point setting does change the timing. These are related directly.
So set your dwell then your timing.
Also, if your idle speed is way too high, or you haven't disconnected your vacuum advance, that will also affect timing, as both the vacuum and the mechanical centrifugal weights in the distributor are at work manipulating the timing.
SS, do you remember the vacuum gauge method of setting timing?
Just curious, isn't manifold vacuum related to valve timing--short duration means both high vacuum and a higher octane requirement, all other things (like compression ratio) being equal? Not that high vacuum causes the need for high octane. What am I talking about?
Point taken on setting the dwell. I'm not sure I ever knew that.
I'm not sure of the exact relationship of engine vacuum to valve timing. I need to think about that. Obviously it is related as the vacuum measured cylinder filling, right?