I have 2 200s that I need info as far as the casting numbers. The first is C40E on the block (this one has a busted sleeve and locked up so I will not use it if anyone can use it let me know I am located in northeastern Tennessee) and head isC6DE. The other head is D0DE and block is C8DE. I am wanting to build a strong engine to boost later. Is the C8DE a good block to build on? And I am pretty sure the D0DE head is a large log but not sure of valve size.(it is still together) Last question. Is their a book on translating these engine codes? Thanks in advance.
Casting numbers
- Thread starter Tugg1202
- Start date
The 4th horizontal line frm the top of this page above if clicked on is the free 'CI' archive.
L O T S of good info there. I'd suggest a read while waiting for delivery of 'the Handbook' -
(may B ordered from Matt & vintage inlines dot com). Can't recommend anything above
these as they're the best to me (& many others here). I know both will help w/way more
than block/head casting numbers but ur on the right track if these R ur 1st steps!
U Go Man!
W E L C O M E Tugg!
L O T S of good info there. I'd suggest a read while waiting for delivery of 'the Handbook' -
(may B ordered from Matt & vintage inlines dot com). Can't recommend anything above
these as they're the best to me (& many others here). I know both will help w/way more
than block/head casting numbers but ur on the right track if these R ur 1st steps!
U Go Man!
W E L C O M E Tugg!
ledslinger29
Well-known member
I believe D0 would indicate the year 1970.
Hi, the C8 block would be worth building as long as it has not been over bored by now. The pistons will be marked oversize if the engine has been rebuilt, as well as the bearings marked under size if the crank has been cut. The C4 may be a first generation and only take the very small bell housing and small distributor shaft. I wouldn't put a lot of money into those heads because much better heads are out there from the late 1970 s that are much better than what you have. Get the Falcon Performance Handbook and work out a plan to get the most from your Ford 6. I had trouble with an old head that after all the head work needed was done to bring it back it just wasn't worth it. More about that soon on a new post I am planning.
I don't agree about the head. If it's a large log head it's pretty much as good as any other if you are going to upsize or do any valve work anyway. They all need guides, seats, grinding, deshrouding, porting ect. The main thing is whether it's intack or not. Have it dissasembled, cleaned and magnafuxed before you do anything. There is some anecdotal evidence I've heard here and there and from my machinist as well that pre 73 ford cast iron is better than later castings and better in general, year regardless, to GM cast iron. Something to do with the nickle content. Could be BS, I don't know. It's out there though in the common lore. I didn't put hardened seat's in mine after my machinist insisted they weren't needed with my C9 head. Saved me a few bucks and it's just a stepping stone to a 2v head anyway so wtf.
RichCreations
Well-known member
Econoline":n5eqpe7m said:
Heh, still plugging away as cash allows...
Thanks guys. I have another engine now. I found a 81 Granada engine that is locked up so unless I can free up the block I at least got the E0 head off of it and a little better option for a distributor (for beginners I guess). I read somewhere that the 80 and up heads had hardened valve seats. Does anyone know for sure. I plan to take that engine apart this week so I will probably figure it out then.
Howdy Tugg and All:
THe '68 block is a good one for a rebuild with forged steel connecting rods and a slightly thicker thin walled casting. Either block is a good candidate for rebuilding so long as the need to overbore is not excessive, say .030" or less. Once you get them disassembled and inspected you'll know. The fact that the E0xx block is stuck is not an indication, but getting it apart and assessing is the only way to tell for sure.
The '68 block should be drilled to accept both large and small bell housings. The OEM three speed trans in '68 Is a fully synchronized three speed called a "3.03". It is identified by its 9 bolt top cover. The 'E0xx block will likely only accept the later transmissions,like the 3.03.
On the heads, the D0xx casting is at the beginning of some positive upgrades yet to come between '69 and '75. The changes came randomly so this is an era makes it difficult to use words like "Always" and "never". The good news is it will have a 1.75" carb hole. The down side is that it will have 1.65" intake valves, NO hardened seats and likely a 1240 cc log volume.
So, if putting many miles on this engine is in the cards the E0xx casting is a better, less expensive rebuild bet. It will have a larger intake tract volume of 1,420 cc, 1.75" intake valves and hardened valve seats. Both heads have 62 cc combustion chambers.
You didn't mention what you have planned for exhaust, but FYI the '68 exhaust manifold is a good one if you plan to use stock type exhaust.
Keep it coming.
Adios, David
THe '68 block is a good one for a rebuild with forged steel connecting rods and a slightly thicker thin walled casting. Either block is a good candidate for rebuilding so long as the need to overbore is not excessive, say .030" or less. Once you get them disassembled and inspected you'll know. The fact that the E0xx block is stuck is not an indication, but getting it apart and assessing is the only way to tell for sure.
The '68 block should be drilled to accept both large and small bell housings. The OEM three speed trans in '68 Is a fully synchronized three speed called a "3.03". It is identified by its 9 bolt top cover. The 'E0xx block will likely only accept the later transmissions,like the 3.03.
On the heads, the D0xx casting is at the beginning of some positive upgrades yet to come between '69 and '75. The changes came randomly so this is an era makes it difficult to use words like "Always" and "never". The good news is it will have a 1.75" carb hole. The down side is that it will have 1.65" intake valves, NO hardened seats and likely a 1240 cc log volume.
So, if putting many miles on this engine is in the cards the E0xx casting is a better, less expensive rebuild bet. It will have a larger intake tract volume of 1,420 cc, 1.75" intake valves and hardened valve seats. Both heads have 62 cc combustion chambers.
You didn't mention what you have planned for exhaust, but FYI the '68 exhaust manifold is a good one if you plan to use stock type exhaust.
Keep it coming.
Adios, David
Hey so sorry for such a slow response but I am going very slow on the build so I do not rush into anything and waste money. (tight budget, kids are expensive to raise) I have not totally decided on the exhaust but I am thinking of getting a stainless header from vintage inlines. I really like the way the duals sound on them. I really want to get the most out of the engine I end up using so the later model head will be the one I use. I also have a 64 head with adjustable lifters. Would it be a good swap to go to the adjustables or just leave it as the solid lifters? It has been a long time since I have done any major engine work and I have never done any performance work so a lot of this is new to me. I am thinking the 80s block is the small block bolt pattern so unless I get a different bell housing It would not be compatable. I think I need to just bite the bullet and pull the engine out of the car to get a better look at it.
"... unsure of what transmission it has but I think it is a maverick transmission It is really worn…"
E TN must have alotta recyclers…I C a T5 in ur future for $75 - 200. Have U seen the 'scarebird' frnt disc conversion?
:nono:
sorry, off track again.
Just thinkin of how (a 55 y/o stang)'d do on the back rds and open hwy
E TN must have alotta recyclers…I C a T5 in ur future for $75 - 200. Have U seen the 'scarebird' frnt disc conversion?
:nono:
sorry, off track again.
Just thinkin of how (a 55 y/o stang)'d do on the back rds and open hwy
It's an oddball pattern that is a parital sbf pattern
This archived CI tech article goes into depth on the 80's 200 low mount bell pattern:
archive/www.classicinlines.com/V8Bell.html
This archived CI tech article goes into depth on the 80's 200 low mount bell pattern:
archive/www.classicinlines.com/V8Bell.html
Howdy Back Tugg:
Glad to hear from you. I thought we may have scared you off. Slow and thoughtful is a good way to go.
"I also have a 64 head with adjustable lifters."
I'm hoping you mean Adjustible Rocker Arms. If that is what you meant, yes, by all means clean them up and use them on the new head. The adjustible rocker arms were standard on solid lifter engines and continued to be used with the introduction of hydraulic lifter engine around the 1965 model year. They are a direct bolt-on to the later hydraulic lifter engines and usful in optimisming lifter preload for best cam performance. The inside of the rocker shaft is the main cleaning target. Also the oil holes on each rocker will likely need attention. Check each push rod for straightness and a shiny round ball on the ball end. Prepping the Rocker arm assembly is time intense and messy- but necessary. Oil to the front of the engine passes through the shaft.
Adios, David
Glad to hear from you. I thought we may have scared you off. Slow and thoughtful is a good way to go.
"I also have a 64 head with adjustable lifters."
I'm hoping you mean Adjustible Rocker Arms. If that is what you meant, yes, by all means clean them up and use them on the new head. The adjustible rocker arms were standard on solid lifter engines and continued to be used with the introduction of hydraulic lifter engine around the 1965 model year. They are a direct bolt-on to the later hydraulic lifter engines and usful in optimisming lifter preload for best cam performance. The inside of the rocker shaft is the main cleaning target. Also the oil holes on each rocker will likely need attention. Check each push rod for straightness and a shiny round ball on the ball end. Prepping the Rocker arm assembly is time intense and messy- but necessary. Oil to the front of the engine passes through the shaft.
Adios, David