Spare head "In trunk" ID ..
- Thread starter 1965Pony
- Start date
That would be a 200 head from 1963 to 1965 if you need to know exactly find the casting date 
IIRC 1965 was the first year for the venerable 200, if that head was from '64 or earlier it should be from a 144/170..
From the tech pages
http://fordsix.com/castings.php
it looks like in '65 they had a new head also.. my money would be on an earlier model.
-ron
From the tech pages
http://fordsix.com/castings.php
it looks like in '65 they had a new head also.. my money would be on an earlier model.
-ron
Yup. My current ride uses the C1DE-6049 head with 54 cc chamber. Its the same design as the ex 1961 170. When the 200 came out in 1964 in the Fairlane, it might have gotten a C4 code head, but the C3 is certainly the 144/170 small chamber head.
Any old iron head will do. Pre 72 heads don't flow well and loose about 15 hp on the same compression D3 to EO head, but the C3 has a nice small chamber for good compression. The smaller chamber is worth 6 hp or so, the small log cross section looses about 20 cfm on a good E0 head.
If its sat around for a while after a diet of good 1960's leaded gas, it won't need valve inserts, but I'd keep it as a spare. My 170 head runs on unleaded, I've done many miles on it just unbolted from a 40 thou over 1966 200 engine I had laying around. I haven't even replaced the valve seals yet, but the head is great.
Any old iron head will do. Pre 72 heads don't flow well and loose about 15 hp on the same compression D3 to EO head, but the C3 has a nice small chamber for good compression. The smaller chamber is worth 6 hp or so, the small log cross section looses about 20 cfm on a good E0 head.
If its sat around for a while after a diet of good 1960's leaded gas, it won't need valve inserts, but I'd keep it as a spare. My 170 head runs on unleaded, I've done many miles on it just unbolted from a 40 thou over 1966 200 engine I had laying around. I haven't even replaced the valve seals yet, but the head is great.
Ahh .. That's great news guys. I'll pull of that Big bell head and swap the 65' head on it. That will give me a bit more performance correct? Or will the flow benefits be better than the compression benefits of the big bell head?
I may stick with the big bell head for the low compression though. I am not to fluent on domestic cars in general 6 or 8 cyl . But I am very fluent on turbo charging having made several systems from scratch and owning DSM's all of my driving life. I'll most likely go the turbo route. All of my family build muscle cars. I was the black sheep and only built Imports.
I have full access to a machine shop , exhaust shop , and Dynomometer. (Family business') .
I'm so glad I found this site with a bunch of knowledgeable fellows.
The 65 mustang block needs machining and I want a runner ASAP so I can move it to the body shop under it's own power. I know the big bell block has been redone very recently .
I may stick with the big bell head for the low compression though. I am not to fluent on domestic cars in general 6 or 8 cyl . But I am very fluent on turbo charging having made several systems from scratch and owning DSM's all of my driving life. I'll most likely go the turbo route. All of my family build muscle cars. I was the black sheep and only built Imports.
I have full access to a machine shop , exhaust shop , and Dynomometer. (Family business') .
I'm so glad I found this site with a bunch of knowledgeable fellows.
The 65 mustang block needs machining and I want a runner ASAP so I can move it to the body shop under it's own power. I know the big bell block has been redone very recently .
Actually the 200 six (T code) was first offered in the 1963 Ford Fairlane's (at least here in the US) most people forget about those early 200 engines as they were four main bearing blocks and had three freeze plugs. They look like the 170's and are hard to tell the differance without some investigation. Early 200's have a T stamped in the block pad above the road draft tube. As for the casting numbers on heads and blocks they only tell you when the part was first designed it's an (engineering number) they will get you real close to year the part was used, but they can could be used on a number of year models. The parts casting date code will give you the rest of the story down to the year month and day it was made.
I was aware of the early four bolt 63 Fairlane, but its sort of like the early L code 1968 250 Mustang and late 1967 and 1968 250 Ford Tornio/Fairlane/Ranchero engine option...technically on the options list, but hard to find.
No, I'd slap on an EO, E1, or whatever late model big bell head first, always, even if I lost compression. For 30 bucks, you could plane the head 60 thou, slap on some new valve seals, head lap and reseat the valves, and just add 60 thou flat washers and get another 16 hp with out any problems. A C3 head is just plain nasty for air flow, like trying to run an UPS van body in NASCAR..
The earlier C3 head will loose about 10 hp for the reduced head flow on a 1981 E0BE-6090-BB head, but you might gain about 6 hp from a compression ratio rise. I pulled my 1981 head (same as big bell 200 head) and put the early head in, but I had to make a carb adaptor, special vacccum port take off from a 1972 XA Falcon, and swap out the adjustable rocker gear and use the later rocker cover to run it. Early rocker covers don't have provisions for PCV and are a different shape.
Any C3 head should just be looked at only as a viable spare part for an early pre emissions 1060-1965 Ford six...its inferior to all D3 to E0 heads in flow, valve seat durability, valve materials but often has small chambers which can boost compression ratio. It has nothing to recommend to it except for compression ratio and probably its ability to adapt to cheap spare parts that might be laying around (Old Offenhasuer or Edelbrock intakes, for instance). It often comes with adjustable rockers, which might be helpfull, but in my case, it wasn't.
If you put a C3 head on a 1965 ot 1966 Mustang 200, you'll probably get no change in perfromance over the stock head.
The early heads have awfull cfm flow rates, but quite small chambers. Mine was 54 cc, but 52 cc is typical. On the later heads, 62 cc chamber is common.
My 1981 runs fine on thew poorer flowing C1 cylinder head, but its looses 10 hp from the poor head flow, and gains 6 hp from the higer compression.
1965Pony":1bypqyu9 said:
No, I'd slap on an EO, E1, or whatever late model big bell head first, always, even if I lost compression. For 30 bucks, you could plane the head 60 thou, slap on some new valve seals, head lap and reseat the valves, and just add 60 thou flat washers and get another 16 hp with out any problems. A C3 head is just plain nasty for air flow, like trying to run an UPS van body in NASCAR..
The earlier C3 head will loose about 10 hp for the reduced head flow on a 1981 E0BE-6090-BB head, but you might gain about 6 hp from a compression ratio rise. I pulled my 1981 head (same as big bell 200 head) and put the early head in, but I had to make a carb adaptor, special vacccum port take off from a 1972 XA Falcon, and swap out the adjustable rocker gear and use the later rocker cover to run it. Early rocker covers don't have provisions for PCV and are a different shape.
Any C3 head should just be looked at only as a viable spare part for an early pre emissions 1060-1965 Ford six...its inferior to all D3 to E0 heads in flow, valve seat durability, valve materials but often has small chambers which can boost compression ratio. It has nothing to recommend to it except for compression ratio and probably its ability to adapt to cheap spare parts that might be laying around (Old Offenhasuer or Edelbrock intakes, for instance). It often comes with adjustable rockers, which might be helpfull, but in my case, it wasn't.
If you put a C3 head on a 1965 ot 1966 Mustang 200, you'll probably get no change in perfromance over the stock head.
The early heads have awfull cfm flow rates, but quite small chambers. Mine was 54 cc, but 52 cc is typical. On the later heads, 62 cc chamber is common.
My 1981 runs fine on thew poorer flowing C1 cylinder head, but its looses 10 hp from the poor head flow, and gains 6 hp from the higer compression.
Similar threads
All Small Six
Any Large Log Head Blueprints Available?
All Small Six
I have a few questions about the 250ci
