Did a '63.5 170 come w/hydraulic lifters?

Just bought a sweet looking 63 Futura hardtop with a 170 build date of 1/22/63. When I went to adjust the noisy valves I couldn't get the feeler gauge under the rocker. I also noticed there's not much more adjustment, if any, left on the rocker arms. When I push down on the wrench to get a better grip to loosen the adjustment, the pushrod went down about half inch. I removed the spring and pushrod and I can see a hydraulic lifter also notice the valve tips were almost gone. I have read that the 63's were solid lifters and sometime in 64 they saw the hydraulic lifters. I'm thinking someone in the past saw the adjustable rocker arm and thought they were working with solid lifters is the reason the valves were noisy and stem tips were worn or maybe someone replaced the lifters with hydraulic lifters causing the pushrods to be too short and rocker arm hammering the valve stem tips. I guess the question is what do you think is going on? Did 63.5 170's have solid or hydraulic lifters? Will an engine run with the wrong lifters? Or are we looking at what happens when the valve train is just worn out. To make my day worse...I found out that I can turn the engine with the fan blade with the rocker arm shaft removed and all spark plugs installed.

HOwdy Jeff:

You are right. Hydraulic lifters and cam did not arrive until late '64, with the all new 64 1/2 Mustang. All divisions, supposedly got the same in the '65 model year engines. Since this engine is now 53 years young, anything is possible. I can say for sure that hydraulic lifters will not function in an engine with a solid lifter cam- unless, totally collapsed???? and that would be weird- like your rockers.

This is an interesting mystery. Sorry, I'm not much help but I'll be waiting to hear what you find out.

Adios, David

Yes you can often find a mixture of parts all used together as Ford would use all the parts it had in stock until they were gone. This is why you can sometimes find solid iifter valve gear (push rods and adjustable rocker arms) also used with the early Hyd. Lifters and Cams. It can also be that over all the years sometimes the wrong years of parts get installed too like a Hyd lifter on a solid cam which won't ever work correctly. But it also looks from your pictures that your engine is showing signs of excessive wear to some of those parts like to the cam and lifters. If the engine still runs good you could get a set of longer push rods (.060) and or install a new cam and a set of lifters to bring it back into tolerance though it might also be a good time to think about doing a full rebuild. Good luck

hydraulic lifters will work on a solid lifter cam, as long as the lifters get the oil they need to operate properly. that said, i dont recommend that set up. it does seem like your valve train does need a good going over to put things back right.

David- Other than busting my bubble...to told me what I wanted to hear. I will let you know what I find.

rbohn- I think the oil running down to the lifter was enough to fill the lifter some. The engine ran but didn't have that much power, more like the 144 I remember. But just a wild guess...pushing down on the wrench was enough to kill the engine by bleeding out the oil that wasn't under pressure (?)

bubba- I knew about the empty bin policy. I do agree with you on someone not use to working on Fords didn't do their homework and thought everything would be the same. I tell my chevy friends that working on a Chevrolet is like working a crossword puzzle on a box of Cheerios...working on a Ford is like a crossword puzzle in the New York Times. I also had an old drunk tell me at the junkyard 45 years ago that you can't take parts off a red Ford and put them on a blue Ford because they won't fit. Here is a pic of a 60 Falcon glove box lid stop and a 61 Falcon glove box lid stop I was getting that day at the junkyard when I learned to old drunk knew more than a 16 year old kid.

Then you could try a good set of solid lifters in it that would sure fix part of it and at least it would open the valves properly again and it probably would take care of the rocker arm over adjustment too. Those 1963 1/2 Futura's hard tops and Sprint's are a big favorite of mine one of the very best looking Ford Falcons. Good luck

The valve stem tips are too far gone and will need replacing along with the compression is about as much as my fish aquarium pump...I gonna do what needs to be done and bite the bullet and do a complete rebuild. I do have two '66 200's in my pile of parts but I kinda want to keep this car more date code correct since it's mostly original. I got to agree the 63.5 HT was the best looking Falcon. I still have the '60 Falcon that my dad bought new and gave it to me on my 16th birthday so you know I have a soft spot for a '60 and it's hard for me to admit that the 63 HT does looks better.

:wow: very nice I think your right to want to keep it all numbers matching there are probably very few left that still are. Besides a 170 is a real decent engine too. I forgot to add in the before posts that those early blocks were not drilled for Hyd. Lifters so that's why it's never going to work right. Well maybe you could swap one of your 200's in while you rebuild the 170. I could see it done up with an Offy 3x1 intake and a set of duels and a few other vintage type parts. Good luck on that beauty!

Howdy Back Jeff:

Hey, that's a looker. Keep us posted on your progress.

Adios, David

bubba22349":3v20tapw said:

:wow: very nice I think your right to want to keep it all numbers matching there are probably very few left that still are. Besides a 170 is a real decent engine too.... Well maybe you could swap one of your 200's in while you rebuild the 170. I could see it done up with an Offy 3x1 intake and a set of duels and a few other vintage type parts. Good luck on that beauty!

Click to expand...

glass bowl carbs too?
nice fender skirts.
I love the originals (appearance over all - inside & out)
& restorations (even when "incorrect")
rather than lots of customizing (huge engines, lowering excessively, etc).
Thanks for the pic!

I have a repro copy of the 1960 1961 1962 Ford Falcon Shop Manual with the 1963 Supplement . It was misplaced but here is what I remembered now that I found it . The following is from page 6 of the supplement under
GROUP 1 - ENGINES AND EXHAUST SYSTEM
VALVE TRAIN
"The 1963 144 and 170 Six engines utilize hydraulic valve lifters to provide zero lash ."

Though there might have been a bit of "use up the left-overs" apparently Ford intended to change over to a hydraulic valve train in the six for '63 . They even promoted it - http://www.fordfalcon2000.com/cgi-bin/pic.pl?id=P631 - scroll down to bottom left of the ad [may need to be "enlarged"] .

This could explain a lot why I have hyd. lifters. Block was cast 1/26/63 so it should be the new design. I notice the Master Parts Catalog saying 60/62 were solid and 63-up were hydraulic. This makes me wonder if all of my lifters are collapsed being why I have too much valve lash with the adjuster screws all the way in and still have the rocker arms slapping the valve stem and pushrod. I will be pulling the engine in the next day or so and doing a complete rebuild.

1bad6t":m7zdifh9 said:

I will be pulling the engine in the next day or so and doing a complete rebuild.

Click to expand...

take notes on what U find for the next guy?

The machine shop guy said the problem was a nasty dirty sludge engine...the lifters and oil passage were full of dirt. He said he cooked the block 3 times to get it clean. On a good note the crank will clean up with a 10/10 cut. I told him to shave the head at least .040 and go with .060 shims under the new springs. He will be doing harden exhaust seats and replacing all the valves and it got me thinking about the larger '65-up valves. Can anybody think of something else that I need to tell him before we get too far down the road??

You should have him open up the carb base to atleast 1 3/4 inch this will help and also allow you to try different size carbs. Pocket porting, back cutting valves. Maybe install a port divider in the center exhaust port too, if it's fitted well and welded should help a little. Good luck

That is a real nice ride.
If you are going bigger carb and valves why not a mild cam? And Pertronix.

HOwdy All;

Bigger valves may not be an option depending on which head casting you have. The head with the 'Kidney bean" shaped combustion chambers is very shouded. And it should have the 1.52" intakes. If I were going that way, I'd be inclined to try fitting 1.38" exhaust valves if space limits choice.

So is your intent to build a fairly correct 170 '63 engine, with mild machining and parts upgrades? or???? What is your intent with this engine beyond good running?

Keep it coming.

Adios, David

The combustion space can be reduced "quicker" by decking the block before the head. The bore in the block has a larger area than the combustion chamber, so with each 0.010" pass with the milling machine the CR will be increased more with material removal from the block. Obviously someone will have to measure how far the pistons are down the bore before milling. You'll also need to know the thickness of the head gasket. Assuming you don't have a 0.025" thick OEM steel head gasket the composites head gaskets run around 0.045" thick.

Here's an update and new problem on the rebuild. Machine shop boiled the block 3 times to get it clean, decked the block .030, shaved head .015, turned crank 10/10 and bored block .040 over. They also put the pistons on the connecting rods and installed new cam bearings. All I had to do was the freeze and oil galley plugs, paint job and put it together. After I got everything together with new cam, lifters, rocker arm shaft, distributor gear and a box full of other stuff I decided to prime the oil pump. I screwed an oil gauge in the side of the block and I'm getting right at 50 lbs. of pressure and this is when I notice no oil getting to the top of the engine. To make a long story short...I removed the head and I still cant see oil coming from the cam bearing to the top of the block. I pulled the camshaft out of its bore to check to see if the bearing was install correct and both holes align with cleared ports. I was told the distributor needed to be installed because of the oil passage needed to be blocked by the distributor housing to get oil on top. Only passages I see is around where the shaft rides in the block casting so I measured my oil primer and distributor shaft diameter and they are .022" difference with the oil primer being the smallest. Could this gap be enough to keep oil from reaching the top of the block? I have an extra 5/16" drive distributor to gut but it doesn't fit my block, I don't have an extra 1/4" drive distributor to gut and I had a hard time finding the correct gear for my distributor. I ended up having to buy NOS and don't won't to take a chance removing/replacing the gear. Could there be anything else that I am missing that is preventing oil from reaching the top of the block?

Hey Jeff,
Just an idea, but what if you use an oiling can to squirt oil from the top down, and see if it comes out in the distributor hole ?
Keep us posted,
DannyG