226 and 254 flathead or 223 and 262?

[Anonymous]

I am in the thinking stage of building a HamB rail. I'd like to run a Ford 6 but can only run a Flathead six or the 226 and 262 OHV engine as 1962 is the cutoff .
I could go flathead six and build a stroker 226 as Calf. Bill tells you how to--just use new rods instead of the olds rods.Might get lucky and find a 254 and stroke it the same way. But are there any Alum Heads for the Ftathead six out there that I don't cost an arm and a leg ?
I read a post were a guy was going to redo a 262 with 300 rods 292 60over pistons and a stroke to the crank. Sounds like a neat engine. Whats the stroke on a 262 ? The 226 is 3.6, but I don't know if the 262 is both a bigger stroke and bore. I also from reading on this forum see that the 262 is very hard to find.
Just thinking can I make more HP with a stroked flathead six--with Alum head or with a OHV 223?
:

 

[Fred]

You will make more power with the overhead valve motor.

On the other hand, if you are willing to drive to central Texas I will sell you a possibly rebuildable M flathead six (254 cube motor) for $50. I need it gone.

I don't know of any inexpensive flathead six speed parts. Check ebay and inliners international and things may pop up occasionally. I don't see why the parts should be expensive thought, the market is small.

 

[Cool23]

I have a friend who has just built a HAMBster. Motor in that is an inline 6 from a Commer truck - Rootes group Humber etc. All Pom running gear except for the chassis and Ford 9 inch rear.

 

[eeyore]

I've been looking for info on the 223 and 262 sixes as well, it seems hard to come by. Here's what I've found on internals so far, the first number is the 223, the second is the 262. There are still some gaps, I'd like to know deck height for one, it helps when thinking about mixing parts and possible strokers. There is apparently a 277 stroker combo, but I haven't found much information. Offy has intakes, Clifford has intakes and headers, Patriot has headers. You are also suposed to be able to make a two carb intake from two stock intakes, but no one has replied to my post on the subject, which is just a few down from yours.


Rod Length, 6.2500, 6.0370
Comp Height, 1.8750, ?
Bore, 3.6250, 3.7180
Pin dia, 0.9122, 0.9122
Crank Journal, 2.298- 2.2988, ?
Stroke, 3.6000, 4.0300
Displacement, 222.93, 262.52
Rod/Stroke, 1.7361, 1.4980
Compression Ratio, 7.2:1, ?
Firing order, 153624
Port Arangement, EIEIIEEIIEIE

 

[CoupeBoy]

If you want some specs and which cars used the 223 go download this file from my webserver
Ford Sixes
There is more information in there then just the 223 stuff, including the 215 (223/262's little brother). Also somewhere on here I've posted pictures on how to adjust the valves with their 'bulb' for currect valve lash.

-ron

 

[CoupeBoy]

Here ya go, some light reading...
Valve adjustment 63/223

223 ?s(Mentions brazing together a 2x1bbl)
'64 Ford 262 I-6 Performance Package? (277 Stroker)
223 performance... (tips on using a Duraspark II dist)

I know there was a thread on here that either had pictures or lead to a page on building a custon 1x2bbl intake. I'll search some more later.

-ron

 

[Anonymous]

Dave
Thanks for the info. More than I had before. With that intake setup it would be better for me in a racing engine to build a custome log intake. The Offy 3 carb intake is ok but was designed to fit under a hood. In a race car/rail I wouldn't have that limit and could build a better intake. Key is to feed each half of the two siamesed intake ports as a single intake port. Basicly I'd build three intakes in one. First would feed #1 and #2,second would feed #3 and #4 and last would feed #5 and #6.
I'd like info on installing a 262 crankshaft into a 223 block. I read a post that someone said Cliffford use to have that info in there catalog. I have a 1991 catalog and nothing about it. I'd love to get that info as I am sure 262 cranks can be found if you know were to look(and I think I do).
John

 

[JimKoz]

A copy of "1963 Ford Service Specifications" might be helpful. It has most of the internal specs for all of Ford's engines. There's one for sale on eBay right now, but it's $20.

I've got a copy of Clifford's information worksheet for a 223, and it's dated Feb 1996. It mentions that stroker pistons are available, so you might try to find a catalog from that time frame.

 

[Anonymous]

Fred,
If I can find someone to haul it up to me in Illinois I just might buy your 254.

 

[eeyore]

Sorry, I hadn't checked this forum in a while, but your welcome. I really don't know that much about these motors. I'm really a big fan of the 300, but was looking for something more period correct for a traditional rod (rat I suppose). I few weeks ago I was in the junk yard looking for parts for a late model driver and came across a 63 (I think) Ford with a straight six a 3sp, I thought that might be good for the rod since I'm a six cyl freak, so I started looking into it. Thanks to Ron for his additions as well.

As far as the intake is concerned, the firing order works for the intake you suggest. If you look hard enough there is alot of info out there on runner lenghts and sizes that may be helpful. I don't know what rules you are under but the Clifford 4brl manifold is probably going to make good power. The Offy manifold looks more traditional and is probably what I would use. Altimately for a six the best manifolds will separate each cylinder to it's own carb venturi, or pair as in a tripple 4 barrel set up. That may be way to much for these old slow turning motors though. The other problem is you can't really separate the siamessed intakes completely, but I like your idea of a manifold that is ballanced that way any way.

I guess right now that the 262 is going to be the way to go just for pure displacement, but additional stroke looks very limited. I guess I need to find an actual motor to figure that out. I don't know how hard they are to come by, around here all the yards seem to have mostly late model stuff, thats why the aforementionded 63 caught my eye, it was unusual in that yard.

Got to go to a family thing now, when I get a chance I can give this more thought and maybe find some more info to send out.