All Small Six Newish 200 for the free Ranchero: Question about valve springs and carburetor linkages

[Treozen]

Hello folks -

While I have still not actually towed the "free 1962 Ranchero" to my house, (though I did hear it run for the first time in years) I did manage to acquire a 200 inline 6 from a 1965 Mustang to replace the reportedly tired 170. [If you want to just skip to the actual questions, free free to jump a paragraph ;-) ]

The "story" on this 200 is that it was a completely rebuilt motor and that the work included some forged internals, hardened seats, etc. The engine saw a mix of highway and city miles in the 1965 mustang, but not many - claimed 1,500, and then the owner of the mustang was deployed elsewhere and the car was left behind in a garage. Fast-forward three or four years and the car is sold to the guy I bought the engine from - young guy, seems to know his way around cars, and he didn't need the 200 -I am assuming there is a V8 coming to that '65 Mustang. Unfortunately, and somewhat typically, there are no records or documents to support the rebuild or work performed claims, but the engine looks clean and a cursory inspection with a boro-scope seems to confirm the engine is at least fresh and clean, inside and out. The price was right, even for an unknown history motor, and I figured it was a no-brainer - worst case its a rebuildable core I didn't have otherwise ;-) Naturally, I am also looking at performance improvements I can make to the Ranchero, but I am a novice as it pertains to the ford inline 6. SO.....a question or two:

1) What is the max lift that can be supported by the stock 200 valve springs and rocker assembly? I'd like to change the cam while the engine is hanging on a stand, but I'm not really looking to modify everything and create a never ending project cycle that never gets done because you always have to change the next thing, to support some other thing. So ideally I'd like a mild cam, perhaps something like a Comp 260H (as a general example of specs) but would prefer to not worry about changing springs and rockers, and pushrods.....etc, etc... So, how far can I go with the stock spring? FYI the intended use of this car is to toodle back and forth to work, some rides to the grocery store. If it sees 4000 RPM and 60 MPH, it will be feeling lucky that day.

2) I've been looking at 2-barrel carb options, I think the Autolite 2100 1.08 makes the most sense, assuming I can find or rebuild one. My question here is on the throttle linkage - is there a common solution for this adaptation, or is everyone just crafting their own custom linkage? It seems to me I could install the adapter plate so that the 2100 sits with the linkage outboard (as stock), inboard, or in fact facing the firewall or radiator - the adapter plate (several options) seem to provide that flexibility. I am also aware of a Clifford kit that includes linkages if using the Weber 38/38 - but although I am not an expert in the Ford engines, that seems like a lot of CFM (350 CMF+?) . Also, the Weber while a good carb, seems to be a royal pain to get dialed in correctly - just as soon avoid that.

Obviously there are more mods to come - headers, exhaust, C4 rather than the Ford-O-Matic, DUI ignition is likely - but I've not explored those things yet...on the list.

Thanks,
Allan.

 

[B RON CO]

Hi, I used the Comp cams 206 (not 260H), and I am happy with the performance in my 66 Bronco. I got the kit with the valve springs. This cam is mild, so you don't have to worry about lift, or valve springs. There are plenty of cam choices and I am a believer in the cam companies "kit" with lifters and springs.
I have a head with the 2 barrel conversion brazed on. I used a Lokar 24 or 30 inch cable, with minor fabrication for the cable holder at the carb to stop the holder from twisting. I have a 3 speed and no kick down lever.
Before spending money get the Ford Falcon Performance Handbook from Vintageinlines and come up with a plan for your Ford six.
Good luck

 

[drag-200stang]

Can you show us some pics of the engine, back, both sides, and the head straight down. A lot can change with car this old, and it may not be as represented.

 

[pmuller9]

1) What is the max lift that can be supported by the stock 200 valve springs and rocker assembly?

The Comp 260H cam has .440 valve lift with the stock 1.5 ratio rocker arms.
We just measured .430 valve travel on a 250 2v head.
You need to put a dial indicator on the valve spring retainer and push the valve down as far as it will go and measure the travel.

 

[Treozen]

Thanks all for the replies.

@B RON CO : I'll check into the 260. I did pick up the handbook you mentioned - lots of good data, and some frustrating gaps, lol....like stock spring lift! Overall though, it seems like a great resource.

@drag-200stang : I can grab some pictures. It appears to be a fairly standard motor - The block casting under the exhaust manifold reads: C5DE 6015-H, and the head reads : C5DE-6090-A. There is also a number stamped into the pad next to the distributor, which reads 5A15A

@pmuller9 : Well, if the stock spring taps out at .430, sigh..... I had read an article that suggested it was closer to .450. If I can change the springs without removing the head....maybe I'll do it. Otherwise I might as well drop the thing off at a shop and just tell them what I want done - I hate messing with heads.

 

[pmuller9]

@pmuller9 : Well, if the stock spring taps out at .430, sigh..... I had read an article that suggested it was closer to .450. If I can change the springs without removing the head....maybe I'll do it. Otherwise I might as well drop the thing off at a shop and just tell them what I want done - I hate messing with heads.

It has nothing to do with the springs as long as the springs are not going into coil bind.
The valves are short, and the valve spring retainers run into the valve stem guides at relatively low valve lifts.
The valve needs to travel the amount of valve lift from the cam plus another .050" for clearance.

Take off the valve cover, put a dial indicator on the valve spring retainer and push the valve down as far as it will go and measure the travel.

 

[Treozen]

Well, here are some pictures. The more I look into the engine, the more I feel like its clean, but not necessarily freshly rebuilt 4 years and 1,500 miles ago. I also thought I saw a note that indicated you needed to remove the head to change the lifters on this engine - if so, the head is coming off regardless with a new cam and in such a case, might as well change the springs. I'm actually wondering if I shouldn't just have the whole engine rebuilt just to be sure.

 

[drag-200stang]

Thank you for taking the time to post the pics. It looks like it is as advertised. Single small 8.5 bellhousing block and small log head.
It may be possible to change the lifters from underneath with the pan off and the cam out, but most people just take the head off and work from above and leave the pan on. Of course, it may depend on the whole plan.
It looks like the engine could be in good shape.

 

[Treozen]

Thank you for taking the time to post the pics. It looks like it is as advertised. ........Of course, it may depend on the whole plan.
It looks like the engine could be in good shape.

No problem, thanks to you all for looking at them!

In terms of the "whole plan", its sort of evolving. The back story is that I got this 1962 Ranchero for free, almost. Basically I took it in trade for some other mechanic work I'd done on a '63 Thunderbird. Believe it or not, my initial plan was to use the Ranchero to drive around the property and deliver hay to horses - and then a planter maybe? BUT - when I actually got to see it in detail, it was in much better shape than I thought, and we recently confirmed it starts, moves and stops under its own power. Being a car guy, I decided it was too nice to ruin, and that it deserved a 2nd chance. So PLAN B - Put it back on the road and make it nice, if not perfect. The stock 170 is known to be tired so I figured I might as well get a 200.....so I did. and then I figured, well if I have a bigger engine, I might as well give it a boost in the exhaust and carburetor department - which naturally lead to "wait.....you mean these things sound THAT GOOD with a split header?" ...and so came the split header.....and if I'm going to have a split header...it may as well have a cam and bigger tires ......and ....well.....you can see how this has started to spiral. Its gone from a back-field junker to..well....who knows how far.

My main overriding objective is to try stay somewhat controlled. I have other cars that need work and attention, and I want to avoid the trap I usually get into - the sort where you decide to change "just door handle", and six months later the entire car is disassembled into 5 gallon buckets. The 6-cylinder Ranchero is a car I'd not normally go after, so it a brand new direction for me, but I have to keep in mind that the car needs pretty much everything, and its supposed to be a budget build to get it respectable, but not a full on restoration and not so expensive and time consuming that it pulls me away from the other projects. I guess you could say this is the sort of build where you might just commit a couple of shade-tree mechanical sins, in the name of getting her going, rather than spending all the bucks to do it by the book.

 

[bubba22349]

X2 that 200 looks real clean and seems like it hasn't had much use so might be a good runner just as it is. Since your Ranchero is really nice overall condition plus your leaning now towards making it good driver and going for the Headers and a Duel Exhaust system. You will need a better Distributor like a DuraSpark II and a later type Carb like a Carter YF or up to a 2V Carb would also be a good choice. Once you get the head off and can see the over all condition of the short block, from what I am seeing in your above pictures I am thinking it's going to be in great condition. So yes maybe just the new Cam and Lifter upgrade and the short block is basically done, unless if you want to take it a little further in that case Mill the block deck so the Pistons are at Zero for excellent for an Quench Distance with todays Composition Head Gaskets. The next big improvement would come with finding a Later Model Big Log Head. With that Combo you would have a great running 200 Six for use with a C4 or a Manual Trans. If you keep and the Lifters in order with your take out Cam you probably can resell it to someone along with, the small Log Head, Exhaust Manifold, plus the flywheel and clutch assembly, Carb and Distributor good early parts like that are getting harder to find now. Best of luck on the Ranchero.

 

[Treozen]

....... Since your Ranchero is really nice overall condition

Well, lets not get too far ahead of ourselves. lol. I guess its all perspective - she's in one piece, little to no rust and no holes I could find, floors are good, starts and runs.... BUT - interior needs complete overhaul, will need some body work, paint is peeling so that'll be a strip and re-shoot - $$$$ - needs wheels and tires, chrome has seen better days, current brakes are essentially shot, has some sort of mickey-mouse rear window replacement that doesn't fit, will certainly need an entire front end replacement - everything is pretty bad and worn, exhaust is falling off, all the levers and buttons on the inside turn to dust when you touch them - for real....dust....headliner - bad, seats - bad, carpet....well...mostly moss right now.....and so forth. I'll post pictures when I get around to dragging it home.

 

[wme013]

Sounds like a strong reason to just drop in the engine as is and make it a runner.
After all else gets done and working right, then add HP.
Logic says its several years to that point. Rude comment Why spend $$ on an engine that's never going to get driven.

 

[Treozen]

Sounds like a strong reason to just drop in the engine as is and make it a runner.
After all else gets done and working right, then add HP.
Logic says its several years to that point. Rude comment Why spend $$ on an engine that's never going to get driven.

Well, its good logic, but it goes against the grain for me. I have the engine on the stand, its almost painful to consider just chucking it in as-is. To your point though, that may end up happening - but because the car does run already, I plan to leave it with the 170 until some of the other things are done, to make certain its actually worth the effort. Stage 1: Get it clean and moving. Stage 2: Assess if its really as solid as it looks. Stage 3: assuming all good on stage 2, give it brakes and suspension that work. Stage 4: Assuming all has gone well, and I still like it, drop in the 200. Then will come the more costly things like interior and paint, so that's when I'll need to decide if its a keeper, or not.

I grabbed the engine early, largely because it sort of landed in my lap - or Facebook feed...I guess. Since I don't have the car home yet, I'm obsessing over the engine.....

 

[Treozen]

The Comp 260H cam has .440 valve lift with the stock 1.5 ratio rocker arms.
We just measured .430 valve travel on a 250 2v head.
You need to put a dial indicator on the valve spring retainer and push the valve down as far as it will go and measure the travel.

Ok - so I acquired myself a dial indicator and took measurements. Here is what I did and what I found:

I chose a valve that was fully closed for the measurement and set the dial indicator on the spring retainer. I then depressed the valve as far as I could (until the spring coils were all touching each other and no more compression possible) and the needle went around 5 times + 10, which I read as 0.510 inch. I repeated this three times with a fresh reset each time, same result and also repeated the spring compression several times per set up. Obviously 0.510 is not a workable valve travel since the springs would be binding. If 0.060 is the coil bind safety margin, that would suggest a lift of 0.450 would be acceptable - if you used the same stock springs, which I imagine you wouldn't with a performance cam. I have no idea what springs or valves for that matter are in the head. I was told the entire engine was rebuilt and the head set up with hardened seats - so perhaps springs and valves were replaced - I could not find any numbers on them.

I later found the following article (if you trust wiki) that also suggests 0.450 lift is the limit on stock equipment. http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Ford_144-250_inline_6_high_performance_building

I like the Clay smith H-267-8-B, but may go with the Howards CL280028-08 as its a little more conservative with both lift and overlap, and is right in the intended RPM range (1200 - 4800), so I shouldn't need a uprated stall. The clay smith sure sounds good though:

14" of vacuum (claimed) from the Clay Smith cam might be enough to add power brakes.....maybe.....and I'm not sure the Howards will be that much better, but the howards has a 0.420 lift versus the Clay Smith 0.448 - so the Howards is well within the saftey margin - again assuming a spring change doesn't radically alter the specs.

Also thinking of using either 289 or 302 springs, with a mix of retainer parts to account for the difference in valve stem diameter.