First Time - Rebuild Fact Gathering Post

Hi All,
First Post here...
I have done some searches but am only getting more confused and looking for some guidance. This is my wife's dream car -- she sold her 1967 base coupe to pay for her tuition way back in the day. After much searching she finally purchased this car. The car runs rough but in great project condition.

The car is a 1967 completely stock I6, automatic. - being new to Mustangs and even newer to I6 engines I'm clueless to what we even have. I assume it is a 200ci. Our goal is to freshen up the auto transmission and rebuild the 6 cylinder top to bottom and to be able to run smoothly with todays gas, as well as make it run as strong as possible, similar to a stock 289/302. Nothing crazy, just reliable. I do plan to upgrade disc brakes, 5 lugs and Air Conditioning but keep the stock rear end and transmission.

Reading the posts I know a mild cam and machine work can go a long way but again I have no clue. Can you please chime in with you recommendations to get a well running 6 with the power of a stock 289?... go with a 2 bbl carb?... which carb?... What specs would I give the builder? ...What cam would be mild and run with a stock converter?

I'm in So. California if you know of any Ford 6 builders, please let me know.

Please Feel free to Rant and provide your wish lists "if you were in my shoes".
Any help is appreciated.
 
I'll be perfectly honest.
While I am happy driving my little six around I think I would go with a small block V8 if I were you. :|
The reason being is that with the passing of Mike and subsequent limbo of Fordsix, obtaining parts and support could difficult.
The website is non-functional.
The only reason anyone is getting anything is that Does10s is essentially doing something for nothing, for the community.
 
Find a being junked 81 Fox body car that has passed its IM test, and do this....



Here's my prescription for a car which really needs another 50 hp like the Aussie Ford 3.3 or 4.1 with the cross flow head had. They were 121 to 164 hp, depending on induction. Basically puts a 3.3 into 4.2 and 5.0 territory. The bare minimum for a 3.3 to survive.

Although I liked my 81 3.3 automatic Mustang Hatch. It was butter smoooth, and would cruise at 85 all day until you met with a steep upgrader or big truck on a slope. I got 20 US mpg best at 55 mph, not wonderful. And 13 around town in San Francisco steep Dunedin.
Stock 81 Mustang even with power windows, a/c, light group, etc. was only 2640 pounds before driver an fuel. Stock box tops were about the same, but the 81's got pretty heavy in some versions...a station wagon or four door would be pretty heavy, and the Mustang Hatch is the slickest car, with reduced frontal area from less height and width, and the sedans and wagon’s won't do 95 mph all out like mine could do.

When driven in modern traffic, the 3.3 is Heavier on gas than any Auto or Manual 5.0, (which is probably the stock Fox Ford engine with the best hp mpg balance).
Which wasn't an option that year on small Foxes.
The C3, C4 or C5, or 4-speed T4 1981 3.3 was rated better MPG as the 4.2 C4 or C5 for fuel economy, but was less powerful than that engine.
The C3, 4 and 5 speed 2.3 was rated way higher for fuel economy, but it doesn't have the torque of the 3.3.

It depends on how it was rated (there are a few different figures for the 1978-80 T, 1981-82 B and 1983 x -code), but one things for certain, 1981 was the year when it got at least 91 stunning horsepower, at least up 7% and 6 hp on the 85 hp 1978-1980 T-code.

1982-1983, the B and X code again lost 4 hp with slightly different emissions gear, so you'll have gotten a real hot machine there!


If you get one, do this.


1. Safely take a 9" grinder to it, make a plate, and DO THIS http://sport.motiontopic.net/355428139465-200-log-milling


2. fit a 38 DGES Electric Choke to it. Be sure and fit it so the 2-bbls are cross wise, as the 1970 onwards carbs require the stock across valve cover cable, and the way they are commonly bolted on will create problems.

Don't fit it the same way as everyone else.

It’s a 140 hp carb that is used in the 3 liter European Capri engine. Use the stock air cleaner assembly with the base cut to suit. No-one will know its 2-bbl.

3. Add a Clay Smith 264-110, Schneider 270, or Oregon 268 cam.

A good example of cam, valve springs, lifter type, and set up is MT63AFX, Rod C on this forum http://www.network54.com/Forum/7418...inions+on+my+Oregon+cam+currently+in+my+66+SW.................

Don't fit the carb the same way as RodC did because he runs a rod throttle linkage.

Do it the way former member 250mav does





4. Shave 90 thou off whatever head you use, and back cut the intake valves. Use a composite Victor Reinz gasket. If you can find them, Thomas 1.6:1 rockers and adjustable valve gear from a 1960-1966 Ford will work. The stock rocker cover will hit the baffles, so you'll have to get a 10 mm alloy spacer made up to raise the rocker cover on two cork gaskets, or rtv it on. Valves need new seals, and a 3 angle valve grind to improve port flow.

5. Duraspark II requires huge initial advance (15 to 20 isn’t too high), and pulled back total timing to no more than 34 degrees.

6. Use a Twin row timing chain set.

7. Make sure (if you want to the engine swap to pass an IM test) your primary light off cat is not choked up. If you have to run cats, check if you can run a no CA approved replacement.

Exhaust header is 4 -1/4" diameter, the world’s biggest ever passenger car cast iron down pipe. It’s a great lumping hunk which is mainly why the 81 made such A 7% power increase.


The log heads have peak flow limits, but the head itself can breathe quite well. A cam will bring out every ounce of power the stock item is losing.
The original carb doesn't work well enough without modification.
The stock cam is way too tame for power.

8. The stock C4 or C3 transmission holds it back. The in line six has great torque offline, even with a bigger cam. If you drop the stock 2.73:1 gears for 4.10's, you can use the stock moon shot top ratios 2400 rpm at 65 mph, and get a 3600 rpm kick down, and 5300rpm if you’re really game. Up changes in drive are normally 4400rpm, sometimes more held using the 3-2 shuffle. Remember, stall is normally 2350 in the HO/3.8 stall ratio converter, which is cheaper than the stock 1650 rpm one...and a lot 'betterer"

9. Add the 2350 torque AOD converter, the Canfield 2.3 to SBF block plate adaptor

adaptor_plate_hdwr.jpg


(which needs redrilling to the 3.3 block, and then grinding with a big abrassive disc to get clearance for the starter motor).

You then find either the Grey B or X code engines 164 teeth 3.3 flexplate. (Or, as it's not a common item any more, the FoMoCo Basic Part Number is E1BP-6375-AA, but the Pioneer Y code 4.9 164 teeth flexplate can be slotted down to suit, and is like 35 bux ).

The 1989 F150 transmission, it has the 7 teeth drive driving the speedo gear. You probably need a 21 tooth purple gear, and then a $100 "reducer adapter" from a speedometer repair shop.

10. Then add some 4.11:1 gears in a transplanted Maverick 8", or Ranger 7.5" or 8.8" axles. The upshifts are limited to a certain rpm, the AOD requires a certain axle ratio and stall rpm to cope with a small 3.3 in line six, but the gears are the solution, and still allow you to cruise and down change without spending dollars correcting the standard problems.

11. The AOD Throttle Valve linkage can use the early AOD 4.9 truck TV linkage. It runs off the base of the 1-bbl carb for the 1983-1986 1-bbl 4.9L 300CI L6 Carb VIN Y which came with the first year the 4.9 got the aod, it has a Throttle Valve TV kick down cable, rather than a linkage setup... rod lever.

The witness mark, if your car is IM tested, needs to be indicating 9 if they check it, so here’s the deal. The stock crank balancer is 9 times out of ten totally shot, so have its elasmer inner rebound, and ask the binder to have its outer ring remounted 11 degrees off so it reads 9 dbtc at 20 degrees.

The key to making this all work is that only the Australians ever got the factory automatic in line small sixes Ford sixes to perform, and these modifications are what Australians and smarter Americans do.



There is another 65 hp hiding there for later, (91hp net stock, plus 40, plus 65 is 205 hp or more) when you get the funds. It comes via a special AOD shift kit, a wilder 274 degree cam, and modifications to the internals of the 38 Weber 2-bbl carb. Some underdrive pulleys and a special modification to the stock exhaust system. Most of these have been done on this guy’s 2640 pound, two barrel 15.17 second automatic car...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjQJ8btRbLY&feature=youtu.be
 
xctasy has some great recommendations for you.
I have just one.

CZLN6 on this forum co-authored a handbook on performance upgrades for the Falcon 6.
It is called TA DA..."The Ford Falcon SIX Cylinder PERFORMANCE HANDBOOK" :duh:

He has a website you can order it from: http://falcon6handbook.com/
I'd recommend getting it directly from him since it is constantly updated.

Buy it. Read it. Reread it. Reread it again.
You will then have a better understanding of the 200 in your wife's 67, and what you can and can't do/afford.

Welcome to the forum. Ask any questions you want. A lot a people on the forum are willing to help.
 
I'm intrigued. What are Thomas 1.6 rockers? I tried usin the Googles to look 'em up and didn't really get anywhere.
 
cr_bobcat":1yv8b4vm said:
I'm intrigued. What are Thomas 1.6 rockers? I tried usin the Googles to look 'em up and didn't really get anywhere.

You find them on ebay as old 60's equipment. 1.6:1 Ford small six rockers. I might remember what member of the 10,000 got them for his Mustang six. :hmmm:
 
JackFish":39tjffo0 said:
The only reason anyone is getting anything is that Does10s is essentially doing something for nothing, for the community.

Sounds like Mike?
how can we support...it's a community, is there a way to pitch in (while NOT living in AZ)?
I've received as much, if not more (frm the commercial aspect) since Will chipped in.
Thanks 4 the honesty,JackFish, it's needed.
Onto the other posts ~
 
I don't know if it will fit easily but a mild built 250 will probably be somewhat close to a stock 289. As suggested by the truly visionary xctasy an AOD would make it nice on the highway for effortless cruising although I do not know how much work it is to swap but if your current trans need s a rebuild why not have one with od. There is also an AODE which you could control with a Baumann controller and program your shift points although apparently they are about $500.
 
67blinkerhood":7l4xt6np said:
Thank you all fro your input - I have a lot to digest :D
search google "SNAKE AFTER SWALLOWING A BIG ANIMAL"


Then relax and digest....the application of a little science, and you'll always get good results. Its all about "how little you can spend" verses "watcha wanna get". Its a sure shot if you do it right. Do it wrong, and you'll blow it up. Pistons mostly. Some people here have blown three in a row racing them at 24 Hours at Lemonz, or with 20 pounds of boost, or with conrod failure, or with piston failure from street use.

Any 3.3 built right can out do a 140 hp junker 5.o engine with just those modifications above. A manual transmission swap is like adding another 50 cubic inches.


155 rear wheel hp or 205 flywheel hp is achievable with the same out lay you'd spend on a fitting up a stock 1985 to 2001 5 liter engine taken out to 85-95 Mustang spec ( 200 to much more hp dending on whatcha get)


Good thing is if the basic engine is in good shape, a blister pack rebuilt in line 200 (or an 250 engine) with new rings, bearings and pistons and reground crank and a rebored block is very cheap and very reliable. Stock any 3.3 from 1964 to 1983 is a 20.3 second quarter mile car with an automatic .

Ford Fairmont Futura Sports Coupe 3.3L automatic, model year 1981, version for North America U.S. (up to September)
2-door coupe body type
RWD (rear-wheel drive), automatic 3-speed gearbox
petrol (gasoline) engine with displacement: 3273 cm3 / 199.7 cui, advertised power: 94 hp ( SAE net ), Torque net: 158 lb-ft
characteristic dimensions: outside length: 197.4 in, wheelbase: 105.5 in
reference weights: shipping weight 2672 lbs base curb weight:
how fast is this car ? top speed: 97 mph
accelerations: 0- 60 mph 15.1 sec; 1/4 mile drag time 20.3 sec
fuel consumption and mileage: 20/28 mpg (U.S.)

Ford Mustang Convertible Six Cruise-O-Matic, model year 1965, version for North America U.S. (up to September)
2-door convertible body type
RWD (rear-wheel drive), automatic 3-speed gearbox
petrol (gasoline) engine with displacement: 3273 cm3 / 199.7 cui, advertised power: 120 hp ( SAE gross ), Torque net: 190 lb-ft
characteristic dimensions: outside length: 181.6 in, wheelbase: 108 in
reference weights: base curb weight: 2791 lbs
how fast is this car ? top speed: 96 mph;
accelerations: 0- 60 mph 14.3 sec 1/4 mile drag time 19.7 sec
fuel consumption and mileage: average estimated by simulation 16.2 mpg (U.S.)

Add a turbo, and you can make it a 13.5 second ground pounder like First Fox3.3 turbo 5 speed and Lincs 200 3.3 turbo 3 speed automatic for about 3500 dollars all up. Rear wheel horsepower effectively goes up 3-1/4 times from 65 to 210 rwhp.


as it says on Wallace Racings 1/4 mile calculation

our ET / MPH computed from your vehicle weight of 2640 pounds and HP of 210 is 13.54 seconds and MPH of 99.78 MPH.

Image_13.jpg


viewtopic.php?f=99&t=24859
Linc's 200":7l4xt6np said:
WHOOOOOHOOOOOOO!!! OhmyGodOhmyGodOhmyGod......6 cylinder 200's aren't supposed to MOVE like THIS!! 20 PSI is a RUSH!!!!!!!


You are right, Will.....As soon as it cools down the wastegate goes on.......

And thats what a little 1-bbl 3.3 can do with a little work


The 215 hp 1997-2001 5.0 Explorer or Mountaineer GT40P engine can be picked up for 350 bucks from a junked SUV. With another 1500 dollars of parts and work to deliver, you can rebuild it, add a nice roller cam and a little head work, drop it into your car with lots of other changes, spend over 3500 dollars and get 210 rear wheel and take on 3.3 turbos with factory parts.


Its like this....You can't front on that
So what'cha what'cha what'cha want what'cha wantwhatcha whatcha watcha wannt?
 
cr_bobcat":1siu27dm said:
Are we talkin parts from a 215/223/262? Because I've found some at a reasonable price and would love to go with a higher than stock ratio.


Subject: First Time - Rebuild Fact Gathering Post




xctasy":1siu27dm said:
cr_bobcat":1siu27dm said:
I'm intrigued. What are Thomas 1.6 rockers? I tried usin the Googles to look 'em up and didn't really get anywhere.

You find them on ebay as old 60's equipment. 1.6:1 Ford small six rockers. I might remember what member of the 10,000 got them for his Mustang six. :hmmm:


To cr_bobcat and co

Scratch the non roller Thomas alloy rockers. There is a place that does alloy rockers on Thomas.net, but I can't find the reference to the Thomas 1.6:1 shaft rockers for Ford sixes.


Sorry if I sent you on a wild goose chase...but the was a link back a while ago that I copied....somewhere...


Update: October 2015

xctasy":1siu27dm said:
Bill Thomas of Thomas automotive Products. They are sadly New Old Stock if you eve find any of them...

file.php


http://forum.britishv8.org/read.php?6,12477,page=2


I PM'd you the member who has some NOS ones for the Ford 200/250. I'm glad that I remembered, but it was jogged by two long term members here (64 200 ranchero and sp_alloy_head)
 
CI had "new" 1.6 rockers available on their website. An insight as to where those came from?

I've found that there were Y-block rockers that were 1.54:1 but I don't know if these will actually fit the small-6 shaft and/or be the right geometry.

Ya got me excited and all tingly xctasy. I thought I was going to find a high-ratio rocker solution for less than $50...
 
Back
Top