Cast Iron crossflow & ADRs

[Anonymous]

I bought cast iron crossflow from wreckers yesterday for project engine. It has original bore size.(head weighs 42 kg)
Could someone tell me what month it was made from these numbers on the side of the engine (76DA6015 and 30 J 6)? I was hoping to not be subject to any emission control standards for re-rego once it is fitted. I beleive these were the first of the emission control engines introduced in the XC. Although I have heard that October 76 was when the new standards were implemented??
Also does anyone know what is biggest inlet valve and exhaust that comes standard with XF engine was it 1.80 or 1.85 what is exhaust. Surely 1.85 is not too big for my cast head with a bit of bowl porting??? I noticed there is lots of clearance around valves not like my 2V.

Thanks Tim

 

[alloydave]

INTAKE VALVES EFI # XF6507A 46.75MM HEAD
#XC6507A 44.05MM HEAD
EXHAUST #XC6505A 38.10MM HEAD

DAVE

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks David
46.75 is 1.84" for the XF. I was cleaning up the head with a cheap dremel tool I bought for $40 new it was doing a fine job until it stopped after about an hours use.
Ill have to find out where the correct engine code is and find out the info on the sticky on casting numbers.

 

[xctasy]

ADR 27A came into being in July 1976. Many TD Cortinas had emissionised 200 and 250 x-flows. From the revolving table look-up, the car code 30 is standard Falcon wagon.

I don't know what Ford did, but J isn't part of the revolving table Ford used for 1976.

http://www.falcongt.com.au/codebrk.jpg

These cars sometimes were fleet vechicles. Addo has noted that 24 is the code for the base taxi. Some, if they were 3.3's had the low compression Falcon taxi fleet engine. There were a few regular petrol 3.3's which got 4.1 pistons for an 8.2:1 compression and about 78 to 80 killer watts, verses 84 kw for the XD 3.3 with about 9.15:1 compression.

The normal convention is is somrthing like JG30SD.
JG is a Geelong built and assembled car, 30 is the Falcon Wagon, S is the year, D is the month code for July. It may be that Ford fragmented the stampings like they did on the log head and pre-crossflow engines, and that there may be a further code on the block esleware.

Happy hunting!


Not quite sure. I'd say that there are no non-emission, non 27A Australian design rule X-flows out there. I haven't ever seen any evidence to the contrary.

 

[Anonymous]

Oh well, it looks like Im going to be subject to ADR 27A when its all fitted and I go for inspection prior to re-registration. What does it mean how much does it restrict power? will the 465 holley I have be OK?
I found this below its Western Australian requirements. Do some extractors come fitted with all this extra stuff?

"Where the vehicle is subject to ADR 27A - Emission Control. Extractors may be fitted, but the features of the original manifold must be maintained (i.e.. hot air transfer tube, manifold to air connection). Vehicles subject to unleaded fuel control emissions (ADR 37) must remain as specified by vehicle manufacturer.."

xtaxi
The following is from a previous post of yours, was this a cast iron crossflow engine?
Cheers

"I rechecked some issues of Wheels, the September 1979, Vol 51, No.4 one.

On Page 35, the Falcon, Commodore and Holden Kingswood were retested, the same models but the Falcon was an XD this time. The variance was interesting, with the Falcon six worse performance wise than the 330 pound XC tested in March 1979.

It's interesting to note the differences.

The Falcon XC 4.1, in good tune, gave 18.6 sec 1/4 mile

RPM_____kW_____ Nm_____RWHP_____RWLB-FT
4500____47.0_____99.6_____63.0_____73.4
4000____58.9_____140.6____79.0_____103.7
3500____62.6_____170.8____84.0_____125.9
3000____56.6_____180.3____75.9_____132.9
2500____48.4_____185.0____64.9_____136.4

92 kW[DIN Net] (123 bhp) @ 3700 rpm
288 Nm[DIN Net] (212 lb-ft) @ 2400 rpm
9.0:1, 1-bbl, 4089 cc.
BW 35 Automatic, 2.92:1 diff
Tare weight 1540 Kg, or 3395 pounds. Test weight approx 3800 lb's
Average Imperal mpg was 18.6 mpg.
Power loss factor was 1.46.

 

[xctasy]

The XC in the 1979 test above was indeed quicker than the cast iron XD tested in September.

The more aggressive spark advance curve, cleaned up ports and loss of 150 kilograms sure helped give an overall 17% fuel economy improvement!

The heads on the cast iron and early XD 1/2 and XE's were all very similar in the chamber. The XF got the high-swirl 2.3 HSC/'86 5.0-style swirl ramp head.

A point of note from my literature search of Aussie performance mags show a stunning, flagrant disregard for the postion of police when you do car mods. It's not just the engineering road worthy you have to pass. It must pass the cops looks. If you can get away without a vapour can, then good on you, but if I was a cop (and I'd be a nasty one), I'd go nuts with the pink sticker if it had none on it. It seams that because of the immense difficulty of keeping all laws unform between Aussie states, people flaunt the freedoms and end up with good cars getting taken off the road with a 'please fix' canary when it may have passed the inspection.

Since the main desire of the regs was to ensure new cars met the regs, modified cars need only comply with a visual inspection. Despite the current strict stance on new cars, the rego authorities are quite liberal over the ADR 27a rule. They primarily don't want to see people ripping the doner engines emissions package off, and returning the later engine to the earlier non emissions cars dirty state.

As long as the stock post 76 emissions engine gear is on, (egr, tvs, heat stove, vapour canistor) it's okay. I don't agree with the statement 'hot air transfer tube, manifold to air connection'. The law states that all engineers doing an assessment police the regulations privy to the engine at the time. ADR 27A was a full performance based smog test that needs all the original gear. In the case of Ford X-flows, thats egr, tvs, heat stove, vapour canistor. If you had an early Daihatsu Charade or Suzuki , it had only vapour recovery and still passed the regs.

The assessor will love you for not being aggressive. Try submitting it. At the very worst, the 4-bbl may need some idle CO settings checked if they ask. It is best to tender it as is, and comply with there requirements gracefully. I spent 300 bucks certifiying my Falcon when I could have got away without it, and I had nothing but good times with the cops after that. The amount of money you can loose by antagonising the wallopers by flaunting the fact that you got away without being asked to add the vapour canistor. The highway patrol may be guilty of trying to look for faults to wind up people in old cars, but it's like a red rag to a bull if they see no emissions gear at all.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks xtaxi, some years ago here in Tassie things changed and transport dont do the inspections for rego anymore its now all left up to busineses.
Saying that, I dont think many of them know what they are doing. When I got my 2502V put in after having a 4 cylinder in it they missed the cannister that I threw out (I did not even know what it was or that i could not turf it).
Also of critical importance they missed that I was still running 4 cyl front stub axles not the recommended thicker six ones. I did not know I should do this till latter and if a wheel had fallen off and if I was not killed first I would have considered them fully responsible (comes with the territory of doing an inspection).
As a result I am a compliant rebel as far as ADRs go if they are going to implement these laws they should be enforced consistantly and evenly otherwise it becomes a point of ridicule and actually incites many to disregard these standards. Not that this is the correct responce but I DO understand it as a source of contention for many.

 

[Anonymous]

So what's the position with Tassie, do you have to run the engine's emission gear if you put a new engine in an older car? I know you do in mainland states, but I though in Tas you just had to run the emission gear for the age of the vehicle, not the engine.

 

[Anonymous]

I've been speaking to a bloke from Transport, and he said that if the engine is newer than the car then the emmision gear only needs to be from the date of the car, if the engine is older than the car then the engine needs to be brought up to date, but if you stick a new engine in then you can throw all the emmission gear away.
He said that they would prefer you to have all the emmision gear for the engine or the car whichever is newer, but you only need the stuff for the build date of the car.
That is only in Tassie though, don't know abou anywhere else.