'Mostly' stock 170 whp expectations

[62Cometman]

Hi all, I was hoping those of you with more incite might be able to answer my pondering question. I have a mostly stock 170 getting a mild rebuild with new rings bearings head mill .040, NOS headgasket, upgraded 1100 carb and dual outlet exhaust. Now this engine previously ran ok, cylinders 2 & 5 seemed to have a slight miss but after a slight valve job and 2 NOS pistons I should be back in action. I was hoping someone might be able to give me an estimate on expected whp ranges. I'm running a rebuilt 2.77 3 speed with a stock 3.10 7.25 rear. This motor is from a 62 so it does have the adjustable rockers and I'm still running the stock cam as no one that I've found, other than a custom grind from Schneider, has a cam for the non hydraulic motors .

Also does anyone have any idea of what the suggested Rev limit on this motor should be? I previously didn't push it much past 3,500 rpm and that was usually only on the highway when I felt very, very, brave and/ or needed to get around traffic.

Thanks for any and all help or suggestions.

 

[chad]

WELCOME 62Cometman!
You've come to the right place. The 4th horrozontal line from the top (above) has the answers to just bout all the Qs any1 could have. Just click on Classic Inline archive for hrs (days?) of info on these falcon motors (144 - 300 ci). It's free & extensive. If you want to complete your knowledge base on ur 170 I'd also recommend a purchase (?$25?) of "the Performance Handbook" written by 1 of our members & sold by another who's filled in since the demise of Classic Inlines - Matt, at vintageinlines dotcom. These 2 sources (& ur support from us here on this forum & the whole site) could go far in straightening out that 2.8L They helped me rebuild a carb I'd ran for 30 some yrs on the rig in my sig…something I never attempted in all those yrs.

The Handbook is in the garage so I'll look on the archive… if I don't come back you can guess Y


EDIT:
105 (just 50 less than my current 250 I& I have 80 more ci, That 170 is 'a lill tractor'). Not sure on 2nd Q - these engines have very stout bottom ends. My tq comes on at 1500 rpm (240 ft.lbs) as many of these guys do but there's plenty of 'racers' that have built motors reving near 7,000 I believe (see our trubo forum at the "Board Index").

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy Cometman:

And welcome to The Forum. I like the sound of your budget rebuild. With tightening the engine, increasing compression, bigger carb and dual outlet exhaust I'd guess your power to be in the 100 to 110 rear wheel HP range. On the rpm red line, I'd guess in the 4,500 range- possibly higher but revs will be slow due to the stock cam limitations.

You said a '62 model year, but are they the stock head and block for '62? You said you have upgraded the carb to an 1100. Which one? A Autolite 1100 from a later 200 engine would be a nice step up. From 150 cfm to 185. It would be a direct bolt-on and stock appearing. The '62 block had a 5 main bearing crank where as '65 and later blocks have a 7 main bearing block for a little more strength and smoothness.

A little extra valve seat work would have helped too. If it's not back together yet talk to your machinist about a three angle valve set grind and a 30 degree back cut on the intake valves. These improvements don't add much to the cost and do help with flow throughout the rpm range.

FYI- make sure that the carb SCV and the Load-O-Matic distributor are working. An upgrade to a Petronix Ignitor in the distributor would be a plus also. You didn't say where you are from, but an extra 5 degrees of initial advance would also be a plus.

Again, welcome. And keep us posted. I'm anxious to hear how it does once you get it back together again.

Adios, David

 

[bmbm40]

Sounds like a nice rebuild with performance mods.I would definitely look into the Pertronix as the block will not accept the DSII as far as I know. Electronic ignition is where it's at you get a better spark and no points to be adjusted.
The Handbook is really a must have for the Ford six owner and you will see for yourself if you get one.
I am not an authority by any means on cams but if you got a stock cam from the same era 200 that might help. It should have more lift? And while your at it a later model larger log head to go with your larger carb could be good.
What transmission do you have?

 

[edgewood bronco]

bmbm,
I ran a DSII on my 66 170. Is that different than 62?

 

[RichCreations]

bmbm,
I ran a DSII on my 66 170. Is that different than 62?

1/4" vs 5/16" oil pump drive...

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy Back:

That and the mounting hole that the distributor passes through to go into the block is a larger diameter hole. And for comet man it would require a different, non SCV carb.

bmbm40- he's got a non synchro 2.77 three speed.

Adios, David

 

[bubba22349]

Hi all, I was hoping those of you with more incite might be able to answer my pondering question. I have a mostly stock 170 getting a mild rebuild with new rings bearings head mill .040, NOS headgasket, upgraded 1100 carb and dual outlet exhaust. I'm running a rebuilt 2.77 3 speed with a stock 3.10 7.25 rear. This motor is from a 62 so it does have the adjustable rockers and I'm still running the stock cam as no one that I've found, other than a custom grind from Schneider, has a cam for the non hydraulic motors .

Also does anyone have any idea of what the suggested Rev limit on this motor should be? I previously didn't push it much past 3,500 rpm and that was usually only on the highway when I felt very, very, brave and/ or needed to get around traffic.

Thanks for any and all help or suggestions.

On cams getting a custom solid lifter cam grind from Schneider or Clay Smith would be a great way too go, solid cams are probably still available from Isky too as well as some of the other cam companies if you call and ask them. X2 some mild port work in the valve bowls with a 3 angle valve job plus back cutting the valve's will be worth the extra cost while its apart. As far as a Rev Limit I used to go just by feeling the engines torque cruve. There is no real point in Reving the engine much beyond when it stops pulling. i.e. Then it's the time to shift gears or too take your foot out of it! I still like those old 170's and there were lots of Hot Rodded ones running around on the streets back in the 1960's, good luck on your build

 

[ledslinger29]

Sounds like a cool project, Im knee deep in my 68 170, gonna degree the cam if I get the chance this weekend.

 

[bmbm40]

Yeah I missed the trans details last night my eyes were getting tired. I spend hours at a screen for work.
A hopped up 170 is pretty cool and in a lighter vehicle it should have some good power. With a Pertronix you could get a hotter coil and performance wires with extended tip plugs gapped more than stock. It's all in the Handbook.

 

[powerband]

4 Mains' can perform,
My '63 more-door wagon has a C8DE Maverick 170 and has performed well for over ten years. The 170 was from a low mile 4dr Maverick 3OTT donor, 170 Cylinder walls and brgs. looked brand new. I freshened timing set with the OEM cam and added 2Bbl progressive H/W carb, Hooker dual out long tube headers and a T5 tranny mated to the original 3.50:1 rear gears. Cylinder head is D7DE with SBF springs, 3/4 Port divider, backcut valves and milled @ .070 for a SCR @ 9.5:1 with a steel shim head gasket. Torque curve with original cam flattens out at @ 3500 but has plenty of mid-power withT5 Overdrive 70mph - @2200rpm cruise.

With the T5, 93 Octane and a heavy foot, the wagon easily cruises at interstate speeds and carves rural roads through the gears with the performance 170. BTW - still using original Points Ignition with no problems.

have fun .


. .

 

[62Cometman]

Thanks everyone for the responses, I'm actually a returning member to the forumn.
I've already installed a pertronix unit with a flamethrower coil, the carb is an auto lite 1100 from a later 200 with 185 cfm which should fit the calculated VE for my engine, I also already have the Ford six handbook and read it like a bible.
Ive been playing around with the idea of porting and polishing my head but know the short comings of the fuel distribution, and worry that with the casting flash gone from the inside of the runners the fuel atomization might me worse and actually decrease performance even thought it'd increase cfm's.
Maybe one of you fine people who have already done such a job could calm my fears?
As for the 3 angle valve job i'd honestly love to completely rework the engine top to bottom but don't currently have it in the budget nor do I want my car to be down for another year while I get the machine work done, however I was planning on possibly in the future swapping the little 170 for perhaps a 250 or at least a 200. I want to keep it straight six but get a little more push out of it.

 

[bmbm40]

That is a good plan, get your 170 going soon so you can drive and look for a 200 or 250. If my decision I would not put many dollars into the 170 just locate and build a mild 200 or even a stock 250 at your leisure. At a certain hp level , not sure how much, you could break the rear axle with spirited driving as you know. If it was mine I would go for a warmed up late model 200 it will drop in basically and give you more than just a little extra push.

 

[chad]

It's all bout application, U have a tudor or sedan?
What will it's purpose B?
Track, back rds (twisties?), tq, 2 lane, suburban,
mall crawl, strip, hi HP, stop'n go, freeways? (U
have no IDs or info in yer signature).

As U may C in the avatar I seek low rev tq.
(retired soon 2 daughter's DD & mild trail
a change from last 30 + yrs).

 

[62Cometman]

The car will most likely be a weekend cruiser and occasionally take "small" trips like 100 miles or so to a show across the state. So as for use its not expected to be a HP monster. Also I've always heard that my tranny is likely to go before my rear but then again who could know if I'm attempting to spin up those tires .

I originally wasn't planning on spending half the amount I have on my motor rebuild but such is life, you almost get tired of thinking "well, while I'm in here". But it'll be nice to have a restored engine bay with painted parts and a sound mind when it comes to my drive train

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy Back Cometman:

I love your signature tag, "She ain't fast, but she's fun!"

Double clutching that non-synchro three speed trans is a whole world of fun. You could open a school teaching the technique to youngsters who have never experienced that kind of "Fun".

I'll be looking forward to hearing from you once you've got it on the road. Good luck and keep it coming.

Adios, David

 

[62Cometman]

Believe it or not CZ i am one of those youngster
I was graced to have a father who loves old cars as well so this was my first car that i bought when i was 14. It took me a little while to get used to driving a non-synchro first transmission, but i slowly learned. Sometimes i do wish i had that extra synchro though

 

[chad]

when a clutch 'went' I used the skinny peddle to go thru the (forget now) 3 or 4 gears till finances allowed a replace
(ie if U get the perfect rev the shift lever slides/meshes the trans. gears w/o any clash).
'Double clutching' (w/o syncros) can B more labor intensive.
I don't recomend either…
:roll:

 

[CZLN6]

Howdy Again:

FYI- a three angle valve seat and a back-cut on the intake valves may be the most cost effective modifications you can make to these engines. Both increase intake flow at all rpm ranges from idle to where your engine will top out. Next time you are having a head off for a valve job, check it out with your machinist.

But, where you're at is where you're at. Enjoy. Your comments about doing more than you planned reminds me- Murphy's law of auto mechanics- What ever it costs it costs more. How ever long it takes it takes longer. And what ever can go wrong will, and it will likely be the part that costs the most to repair. But, go ahead and enjoy, while you can. (he he)

Adios, David

 

[62Cometman]

Hey david, quick question since im sure your endless knowledge has a reasonable answer. I was "gifted" a ford 8" from a buddy from a 63 fairlane 500. If i were to build up a 250 with a cam, lots of head work, exhuast, upgraded dist., and a good 2 barrel, do you think that 8" would be enough still?
I know ill have to shorten the axle tube to fit and all that, but i was more thinking that the torque wouldnt be too much for it.

Thanks for any help , Darrian