Is this an odd ball Ford 170?

[ACampbell]

Hi, I have been a long time reader of FordSix and really learned a lot. Great site. On to my little situation. I have an early '66 Bronco built roughly Oct. '65. I have no proof the engine hasn't been swapped, but I don't believe it has been. The block casting # is C6DE-6015-A, but it still has the solid lifter camshaft and four main bearings instead of seven. The oil pump driveshaft is the bigger 5/16". The head casting # is C6DE-6090-B with a date code of 5k5.
I was under the impression that all little sixes changed to 7 mains and hydraulic lifters in 1965. Or was that just for the 200? I have the Falcon Six Performance Handbook, but there is little info. on Broncos. Please help.
Thank You, Aron

 

[kukm66]

Aron:

Shoot some pics showing the casting number and bottom of crankcase if and when you have the pan off. We need this for data.

 

[ACampbell]

If I pull the engine again soon I will try to take pictures and post them (never done that before, maybe my wife knows how to do that stuff). I took the engine out a couple years ago to clean it up and check it out. I looked everything over and just put new main and rod bearings on and reamed the ridges, honed the cylinders and installed new rings.
I live close to Pueblo, Co at 4800' feet and only go up from there to the mountains, and the Bronco lacks in power. You guys have great power mods, but I don't want to sacrifice low end crawlin' torque. Any ideas there?

 

[Rinke]

My 63 170 cid has hydr lifters.
also a 61 144 i had.

I was under the impression that ford actually changed from hydr lifters to solid lifters around 65

Rinke

 

[Lazy JW]

.....
I live close to Pueblo, Co at 4800' feet and only go up from there to the mountains, and the Bronco lacks in power. You guys have great power mods, but I don't want to sacrifice low end crawlin' torque. Any ideas there?

Yikes! Sounds like you go from high altitude to higher..... The first thing that comes to mind is the same thing that airplanes use.... TURBOCHARGER! With a stock cam you retain the smooth idle and low-speed torque, but it will certainly pep things up as it revs.

If that is not to your liking, then the next best thing is to get some compression into that thing. Like 10:1 or thereabouts, even if it means running premium fuel. And more displacement is always a good thing.
Joe

 

[kukm66]

According to the data compiled, 1966 was the first year for 7 mains on the 144. It is highly possible that you might have an early 1966 block that preceded the changeover. If so, that is why we could use some pics at some later date.

http://falconperformance.sundog.net/facts.asp

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy Back Aron:

And Welcome to The Forum.

FYI- the last year the 144 was offered as a factory option in the Falcon line was 1964. I don't believe it was ever an option in Mustangs or Bronchos. 144s, 170s and the earliest 200s were all 4 main bearings and solid lifters until the 1964 - 65 model years. The 7-mains engine was bally-hooed as the "new and improved" six for the new Mustang. However many Mustangs ended up with 200s with 4 mains and solid lifters- due to FoMoCos emty bin policy. So it was not uncommon for an earlier engine to end up in a later model year. 170s mostly remained 4 bearing blocks, for several more years, but most changed to the later style oil pump drive and larger distributor mount hole. Both solid and hydraulic lifters could be found in 170 engine through 1966(?).

Aron- you C6 engine with solid lifters and four mains, and a mismatch of the oil pump shaft is an enigma. The oil pump shaft can be explained, but not the casting code and main bearing count. The third digit in the block casting code "D" indicates a Falcon line. My guess is that this engine was destined for an agricultural machine of some kind. That casting code in the 3rd digit would typically be a "J", indicating an industrial application. Many industrial engines have a "D" casting code. My guess is that the Broncho production line ran out of their Broncho engines and simply had one/some sent over from the ag dept. to complete the production run. The Ag. engine Dept. adapted six cylinder engines for a wide variety of farm machinery as well as Ski hill maintainance equipment and trail packers. They were favored in golf course maintainance equipment because of the (relatively) light weight. To the best of my knowledge, no documentation exists, of what went to what dept. and/or what it consisted of. It is likely that FoMoCo could not use early block castings in car lines after the PR campaign extolling the virtues of new 7 main sixes. So where do they go. Lord knows FoMoCo couldn't throw them away.

Aron- please note that this is just a guess. If you can find out anything else about the vehicles history prior to you ownership, it may reveal more of the mystery.

What clues causes you to believe that this is the engine was installed by the factory and not swapped out later?

Also- When you did the clean-and-freshen rebuild, did you have a valve job done? If so, what head gasket did you use? IF you didn't use a factory style shim head gasket without milling you lost compression. As Joe pointed out, high altitude needs more compression and more initial advance to make up for the lack of oxigen.

Another very interesting FoMoCo mystery! As always with FoMoCo, never say "Never" or "Always"! Oops, I just did it!

Keep the clues coming and start looking for a late model head, to begin the upgrade process.

Adios, David

 

[powerband]

Odd castings do show up, sure the casting number is C6 and not C5 ? ... .

Here's early 200 that was swapped into a '61 that is a C5xx casting with C6 head, it only is drilled for the small-early bellhouse, 'thought it was a C6 until I looked closer:





Free for the taking by the way ,,, PM me if you want it.

Have Fun

 

[kukm66]

The 5's can look a lot like 6's on those castings.

 

[NC-Fordguy]

I have the same casting code on the head on my 66 Bronco(aug 1965 production) as yours with solid lifters. It also came with 5/16 distributer bore as I replaced the load=o=matic distrubuter with a DUI from performance distrubuters.

Ironically I'm in the middle or replacing the head with a remanufactured one...the reman has the same casting code

 

[ACampbell]

So I spent like an hour typing a reply this morning, and I don't know if I hit the wrong button or what, but it's like disappeared, and stuff.

Joe- Yeah, I thought long and hard about the turbo way, even talked my brother out of a small turbo and intercooler he was going to use from a Mitsubishi. I didn't know if the bottom end could handle the extra pressures being 4 mains, so I didn't do it. Can't afford to blow my bottom off any more.

I am short in the compression department, it's exactly like David said, got the thicker Fel-Pro gasket on it now and couldn't afford any machine work when I had it out. That is on my list to do next time I take it out though.

David- You're working my poor worthless memory awful hard! I bought the Bronco in '01 from a friend. He bought it in '89 from the original owner as a parts rig, and never changed the motor. I tried to get a hold of the original owner because of a small title problem (not goin into that story) and turns out he had passed away. I found his daughter and she told me she remembered the Bronco. She said he drove it for a while, wrecked it and parked it. That makes me think the motor is original, but by no means proves it.

My best guess on when I had the engine out is winter '05. I know its sad that I can't remember better than that, but this whole decade is a blur.

Just double checked on the casting #'s. Definitely C6 not C5. Even had to write it down so I wouldn't forget from the garage to the house.

NC Fordguy- Do you know if your 170 is four mains also? How bout your block casting #? I thought my Bronco was early, that is incredible to have one of the first ever, congrats.

I really would like to install a little bigger cam, but am having trouble finding anything in the solid lifter department. All I can find is stock or radical. Does anyone know of any?

Thanks guys,
Aron

 

[Lazy JW]

.... didn't know if the bottom end could handle the extra pressures being 4 mains, so I didn't do it. Can't afford to blow my bottom off any more....

Don't sell those 4-main engines short, they are stronger than given credit. Yes, a 7-main is a bit stronger, but working on the premise of making one horsepower per cubic inch there is plenty of strength to spare. The Chrysler slant sixes only have four mains and those boys make some bodacious horsepower.

Those in the know say that high rpm's are harder on an engine than boost. You could put 7-8 lb of boost in that little engine and wake it right up, especially at altitude, but building an equivalent normally aspirated engine will take some careful planning.

Remember, to make more power, you have to pump more air mass in, then move it back out. At high elevation and lacking boost, you really need more cubic inches to get the job done, and plenty of dynamic compression.
Joe

 

[NC-Fordguy]

NC Fordguy- Do you know if your 170 is four mains also? How bout your block casting #? I thought my Bronco was early, that is incredible to have one of the first ever, congrats.

I really would like to install a little bigger cam, but am having trouble finding anything in the solid lifter department. All I can find is stock or radical. Does anyone know of any?

Thanks guys,
Aron

Block Casting is C6DE 6015-A. I know this is the original engine to this truck. Don't know about the mains as I haven't ever pulled the pan

Reading this thread and digesting your desires for your Bronco let me interject nearly 30 years of wheeling/rock climbing experience.

I will probabably get flamed here but here goes.

With the elevations your stating and the desire to hit the rocks, you'd be better off to ditch the six cylinder and go to a 302 roller with the ford efi. The thriftpower sixes should have never been put into the first generation broncos. The 240/300 series would have been a much better choice. Don't get me wrong here, the thriftpower sixes are good little engines and work well in mustangs, falcons, mavericks etc but a bronco weighs twice as much. 4.11 axles gearing was standard and 4.56 was an option for the sixes. This is what Ford had to do to get some power to the tires.

With a 302 you'll get a whole lot more options for a better tranny. I'm not sure what you can get behind a thriftpower six other than than than the stock 303 tranny. The c-4 came in broncos beginning in 1973 but the bronco c-4 is externally different(and some internals) than a car c-4 and was only available behind the 302. Not sure if you can get one of those behind a six.

As far as my 66 Bronco, because it is one of the first to roll off the line the six is staying as It won't see extreme elevations or any wheeling that exposes it to body damage. I have other Broncos for that

 

[ACampbell]

Thanks Joe, I wasn't ever sure how strong the bottom end was. Everyone acts like it's junk.

NC-Fordguy,
When I pulled my little six out a few years ago, that was the plan. I took the 289 out of my 67 Cougar and was going to drop it in the Bronco. The more I thought about it, the less I wanted to go that route. I know mine isn't as early as yours, but it's still one of the first and the six is staying with it. It does pretty well up in the mountains, just getting there is tough.

I think I will plan on .030" bore, bring the compression up, three angle valve job, maybe some valve unshrouding and polishing of the comb. chambers. I installed a Pertronix Ignitor in my Load-O-Matic, Flamethower coil, 8mm wires, and regapped the plugs, but I'm still not impressed with the distributor at all (although I love the Autolite carb). So I might change to the Duraspark II some day also.

Thanks for all the great wisdom guys,
Aron

 

[Lazy JW]

..... might change to the Duraspark II some day also.....

Check out www.gofastforless.com for some good info on upgrading a Duraspark distributor to enable it to use a GM HEI module firing a TFI coil. This is what I'm running in my F-350.
Joe