Click Here -> Please Consider Making a PayPal Contribution to the FordSix Forum!
2019 Contributors:
NJwpod, 1strodeo, mightynorseman, maxtrux, 6d7coupe, broncr, Phase3, 68Flareside240, bmbm40,
mustang6, WorldChampGramp, justintendo, BigBlue94, ags290, motorsickle1130, Rooster, ousooner919, ethanperry
rzcrisis, DoctorC, jamyers, Motorboy, fastpat, Silverback280, chad


<<< New Site Update >>>

200 65 Mustang

Moderator: Mod Squad

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

200 65 Mustang

Post #1 by ob1murry » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:50 pm

Hey guys, I picked up a 65 Mustang with the 200ci I6 last weekend. The previous owner told me that "it cranks, but won't start" and suggested a likely timing issue. He said the guy he bought it from had rebuilt the shortblock and sold it to him in its current condition. He apparently lacked anything beyond very basic mechanical knowledge, and stated that he had a friend who had promised to help him get it running, but got a new job and could no longer help him out, and that his wife was sick of it sitting in the garage now.

Now, I'm not new to building/working on cars, but most of my experience in doing so is in early 90's import fuel injected DOHC turbo engines, so a lot of what I am experiencing here is new to me.

Tonight was really the first chance I had to really try to get it going. Aside from some very obvious issues that I started taking car of right away (trashed carb, plugs gapped out of spec, etc...), I wanted to check for fuel and spark. It's not getting any fuel (an issue I have to investigate farther, as I didn't get beyond the "well doggie doo" phase). Before I went to check for spark though, I wanted to make sure that the ignition timing hadn't accidentally been set 180 out, which speaking to the previous owner and his son, seemed likely. When I went to turn the engine over by hand, I noticed that the engine seemed to turn over VERY EASILY despite the fact that I still had plugs in every cylinder except #1. How easily should this turn over? If I had encountered that feeling in something like a 4G63, I would immediately begun swearing and conducting a leak down test to see where it was leaking. Seeing as to how this setup is so new to me though, I figured I would ask if maybe it was possible that maybe the pushrods were the incorrect length or something else that could be causing the issue, or even if that is just normal for this engine. Prior to this, I had been holding out hope that the timing issue the previous owner mentioned was going to ignition related, and not mechanical, as the "previous previous owner" who had done the shortblock rebuild had timed it, and seemed to understand what he was doing.

Basically, I guess that I am just looking for someone who has a better understanding of this motor to guide me on where to go from here. My original plan had always been to swap the 200 for a 289 or 302 later down the road, but over the last week, the idea of keeping the 200 had really begun to grow on me, so it would be a bummer to hear that there is something wrong with it that is going to necessitate tearing it down.

User avatar
B RON CO
VIP Member
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:02 pm
Location: Long Island, NY
Contact:

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #2 by B RON CO » Sat Sep 02, 2017 7:34 am

Hi, since you don't know anything about the engine, let's assume it can be anywhere from very good, to very bad. Everything may be right on the money, or what needs fixing. So, I would think as you turn this engine by hand you may not feel major resistance, but you should get the normal hissing sounds of air entering and exiting. Bring it up to #1 on the balancer and see where the distributor is. Pull the plugs and check compression. Go from there. Does the fuel pump pump fuel, do you have spark? The simple things first. Also get the Falcon Performance Handbook, and a Chilton's manual. Good luck
B RON CO. Still workin' on it!

1933 Ford Pickup - 59A Flathead V8
1966 Ford Bronco - U14 - 170/200 Straight 6
1966 Ford Mustang - 289 V8

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #3 by chad » Sat Sep 02, 2017 10:31 am

go B Ron!
2X
:thumbup:
Congrats on ur purchase (of a motor) that has many yrs of improvements, rd race & track titles, etc. Also on ur desire to stick w/it rather than go bent8.
The 'thumb' is also for the "Handbook" purchase. Matt at vintage inlines dot com has 1 for bout $25. Oneada best prts bout the book is a staged build process (drive it while U incrementally improve performance, MPGs, durability, handling, etc) so while waiting for delivery of the publication click on the above link (middle blue horizontal bar above) at "Tech Archive". Look at the carb/dizzy feedback system esp - it will B quite different frm ur other project.

My thought is:
to begin ownership of a non-running engine, one U may B unfamiliar w/in design or past ownership - start at the beginning.
Learn about what it can offer, decide the level of return on investment (i.e. match it to ur use/application desires level), and begin at the beginning on degreing the cam, ID the cam, measure the deck/compare to oe, ditto on head, ck about piston/rod composition/over boar, C if it still has '65 LOM/SCV feedback sys for carb/dizzy advance, and so forth.
Just one man's opinion. Some 1 who is not a mechanic, some 1 who is very low budget, some 1 who has plenty of time....me!

Finally, thanks for stopping by! Hope to see more of ya~
W E L C O M E !!!
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #4 by ob1murry » Sat Sep 02, 2017 11:49 am

B RON CO wrote:Hi, since you don't know anything about the engine, let's assume it can be anywhere from very good, to very bad. Everything may be right on the money, or what needs fixing. So, I would think as you turn this engine by hand you may not feel major resistance, but you should get the normal hissing sounds of air entering and exiting. Bring it up to #1 on the balancer and see where the distributor is. Pull the plugs and check compression. Go from there. Does the fuel pump pump fuel, do you have spark? The simple things first. Also get the Falcon Performance Handbook, and a Chilton's manual. Good luck


It is definitely moving air, and has at least slight compression and vacuum when turning it over by hand, it's just the fact that there was practically no resistance at all that led me to immediately suspect there may be an issue. I'll see if I can find some time today or tomorrow to compression test it, and report back on the numbers. That said, it would have to be super low in at least 5 cylinders to explain the issue, which would indicate an issue with assembly. I'm right with you on the could be anything from something minor to something necessitating a complete teardown, which is why I came here.

I was bringing it up to TDC on #1 to check the ignition timing, which is when I originally noticed the potential compression issue.

There is no fuel flowing, unfortunately by the time I got to that, it was getting kind of late. Hopefully with a 3 day weekend here, I can spend some time in the garage and get some more answers.

I agree, simple things first. I was checking for fuel and spark, which is what led me down the compression hole. No sense in potentially sinking money into a new distributor, plugs, wires, fuel pump, etc... if after it's all done, it turns out the motor is trashed.

I had looked for a Haynes or Chilton manual before, but all of them were marked for the V8, I take it the Falcon manual contains all of the information for the 200ci?

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

trouble shooting engine systems

Post #5 by chad » Sat Sep 02, 2017 8:16 pm

an expensive shop manual would B best ($100 + ?) and
the "Handbook" is something many here use along with the "Tech Archive" above.
If U have access to a computer, this site.
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
B RON CO
VIP Member
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:02 pm
Location: Long Island, NY
Contact:

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #6 by B RON CO » Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:46 am

Hi, my Chilton's manual for my Bronco has V8 and 6 cylinder info. If you remove the fuel line at the carb and crank the motor the fuel should come pulsing out and fill a coffee can pretty quickly. Good luck
B RON CO. Still workin' on it!

1933 Ford Pickup - 59A Flathead V8
1966 Ford Bronco - U14 - 170/200 Straight 6
1966 Ford Mustang - 289 V8

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #7 by ob1murry » Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:55 pm

B RON CO wrote:Hi, my Chilton's manual for my Bronco has V8 and 6 cylinder info. If you remove the fuel line at the carb and crank the motor the fuel should come pulsing out and fill a coffee can pretty quickly. Good luck


That's exactly what I did to verify that it had no fuel no matter how long it was cranked.

I was able to verify it has spark today, and ALMOST got it started using started fluid.

Pretty sure the pump is junk luckily the local AutoZone seems to have one in stock, so I'm gonna shower and then go grab it. Hopefully it flows after that, and I can get it started. There weren't any leaks after I topped off the gas tank, so if it isn't the pump, I'm guessing blockage in the line somewhere.

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #8 by ob1murry » Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:39 pm

Well, the new fuel pump is in, but it's still not moving enough fuel. If I pull the feed line off after I try to crank it, there is definitely some gas in there, but just a bit, no where near enough to actually do anything. No leaks. Any ideas? And before it gets suggested, yes there is gas in it, I put in about 6 gallons this morning just in case.

User avatar
B RON CO
VIP Member
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:02 pm
Location: Long Island, NY
Contact:

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #9 by B RON CO » Sun Sep 03, 2017 5:12 pm

Hi, since you don't know what kind of gunk is in the tank, I would put a small gas can on the floor, under the fuel pump, and feed it through a rubber line from the gas can to the pump. I would check compression first. Good luck
B RON CO. Still workin' on it!

1933 Ford Pickup - 59A Flathead V8
1966 Ford Bronco - U14 - 170/200 Straight 6
1966 Ford Mustang - 289 V8

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #10 by chad » Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:27 pm

i've blown out lines, used a can, rebuilt carbs, new filter B4 starts in some cases
(never mind unfrz a stuck motor, etc). No need 2 "tear it down".
U (I hope) got it easier than this, keep in touch.
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #11 by ob1murry » Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:41 pm

B RON CO wrote:Hi, since you don't know what kind of gunk is in the tank, I would put a small gas can on the floor, under the fuel pump, and feed it through a rubber line from the gas can to the pump. I would check compression first. Good luck


See, things like that are what I tend to overlook. I'm so used to having in-tank pumps that it never occurred to me to just bring the fuel can up and try to pump it out of the can. It did move some gas this way, and the engine seriously tried to start, but just wouldn't do it. I'll have to look over the timing again and make sure it is ok, and then clean out the tank and try and blow out the fuel line.

Unfortunately, I seem to have missplaced my compression tester during our move last year, and may need to go pick up a new one.

chad wrote:i've blown out lines, used a can, rebuilt carbs, new filter B4 starts in some cases
(never mind unfrz a stuck motor, etc). No need 2 "tear it down".
U (I hope) got it easier than this, keep in touch.


Yeah, like I said, not the first car I've worked on, and I've certainly had a few that required some pretty serious work before they moved, so it's not too big a deal to me, I just want to make sure I'm running my steps by people more familiar with the setup that I am, to make sure I am not overlooking anything.

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #12 by chad » Tue Sep 05, 2017 2:30 pm

:...running my steps by people more familiar..."
ahhhh, the benifits of frd6 membership,
what else R we here for (each other)?
There's all ways some 1 'more familiar' here than ones self.
Nice thing here? they do so w/o ego - so I keep commin back.
& keep learnin!
Last edited by chad on Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
ludwig
VIP Member
Posts: 3262
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Las Vegas, baby!!

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #13 by ludwig » Tue Sep 05, 2017 3:45 pm

Yeah, don't those simple ideas just kill you? Sometimes you get a couple guys whose opinions go in different directions. But that's okay, because if the one doesn't work the other one just might. And now you know even more than before. This is THE place to ask questions and get answers without flames.

Several people came and went because we are not excitable. You look like one who might stay.
Image

Livin' the dream. Dad n' daughter.

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #14 by chad » Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:58 am

Hey! I'm excitable, I'm excitable!
:twisted:
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
ludwig
VIP Member
Posts: 3262
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Las Vegas, baby!!

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #15 by ludwig » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:18 am

Yeah, but it's a mellow kind of excitement.
Image

Livin' the dream. Dad n' daughter.

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #16 by ob1murry » Sat Sep 09, 2017 3:28 pm

B RON CO wrote:Hi, since you don't know what kind of gunk is in the tank, I would put a small gas can on the floor, under the fuel pump, and feed it through a rubber line from the gas can to the pump. I would check compression first. Good luck


Well, I gave up on trying to find my compression tester and just bought another one. I finally got a chance to head out to the garage and check it out this afternoon....not encouraging. Everything seemed fine up until the end:

#1 - 140
#2 - 150
#3 - 140
#4 - 145
#5 - 135
#6 - 70

Legit bummer, I was really looking forward to trying to drive the car around while I worked on all the body work, and if the engine needs torn out that probably won't happen. I suppose it could be something simple, but I'm not betting on it, I'm guessing the rings are trash.

User avatar
B RON CO
VIP Member
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:02 pm
Location: Long Island, NY
Contact:

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #17 by B RON CO » Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:12 pm

Hi, that 70 is not good. Squirt oil in the cylinder and test it again. If the compression comes up it means bad rings. If it stays low it is probably valve job time. I would get it started and running as best as possible, then figure out what you need to work on in what order. Good luck
B RON CO. Still workin' on it!

1933 Ford Pickup - 59A Flathead V8
1966 Ford Bronco - U14 - 170/200 Straight 6
1966 Ford Mustang - 289 V8

User avatar
Econoline
Registered User
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:37 pm
Location: Anacortes, WA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #18 by Econoline » Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:50 pm

+1, you'll know everything you need to know after you do a leak down or do what B RON CO says. It may be a valve or lifter/valvetrain issue.

The #6 cylinder seems to be the most susceptible to lean burn and detonation damage from too much timing or heat. I wouldn't be surprised if a ring land is broken or damaged. My 250 had visible pitting on the piston crown only on six when I got it and tore it down. If that's what it is the good news is that it really isn't that bad if everything else is still ok. You'll need to find an oem piston, used or otherwise. I have several in the scrap pile. As do probably many members of this forum. Ream the ridge, pull the piston, hone, swap piston and re-ring that one cylinder. While you have the head off have it checked and milled .025" to compensate for the felpro gasket if needed. Check the rod caps and mains while you're down there, at least the one rod anyway. I did this job with a friend on his 170 last summer. Supervan fully loaded 3000 miles cross country in the summer mountains, etc with 30+ deg of initial, #6 cylinder lands gave way past portland heading north. The thing still made it all the way up and out to San Juan island and back to my house nearby before repair. It's running to this day and running well, daily driver.

Or swap to a V8, once you go down the path of the lowly straight 6 you can get hooked. Turn back while you still can! ;)
It ain't gonna fix itself

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

6 for 8; 8 for 12

Post #19 by chad » Sun Sep 10, 2017 12:10 am

"...Turn back while you still can!..."

No can do, Capin.
- -a Mutineer
:twisted:
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
B RON CO
VIP Member
Posts: 815
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:02 pm
Location: Long Island, NY
Contact:

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #20 by B RON CO » Sun Sep 10, 2017 12:52 pm

Hi, yes poor #6 runs hot and lean. What is next? I would get it running and put Marvel Mystery Oil int the crank case and the gas. When it runs I would look at the tank and fuel line. Did you know your gas tank has a drain in the corner? They come out pretty easily up through the trunk. I needed to wash my Mustang gas tank out because of dirt. In the old days it was common to just wash them out and let them drain and dry. If it is really bad I would just replace the tank and sender. Good luck
B RON CO. Still workin' on it!

1933 Ford Pickup - 59A Flathead V8
1966 Ford Bronco - U14 - 170/200 Straight 6
1966 Ford Mustang - 289 V8

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #21 by ob1murry » Mon Sep 11, 2017 1:10 pm

Econoline wrote:+1, you'll know everything you need to know after you do a leak down or do what B RON CO says. It may be a valve or lifter/valvetrain issue.

The #6 cylinder seems to be the most susceptible to lean burn and detonation damage from too much timing or heat. I wouldn't be surprised if a ring land is broken or damaged.


Well, unfortunately, it's my understanding that the engine hasn't been run since the rebuild the owner before last did. Which means if it's a problem with the rings, it's probably an actual broken ring, which means hoping it didn't score the heck out of the bore, or get stuck in any of the bearings.

Econoline wrote:Or swap to a V8, once you go down the path of the lowly straight 6 you can get hooked. Turn back while you still can! ;)


Unfortunately, that's the likely scenario if the motor needs pulled and rebuilt. The car would have already gotten an upgraded rear end, and then new 5 lug hubs in front to match, so dropping a V8 in isn't going to be that much extra work when it comes to it. It's probably also likely to be a similar price, which really doesn't leave much downside to doing it in my mind.

I'll check out the valves and wet test it before I write off the motor, but I'm not hopeful, a mechanical timing issue with the cam should result in low readings in at least one other cylinder, and any pushrod/rocker/valve issue should result in a reading of closer to 0.

The problem here is that getting it to run if it has low compression is great for moving it around as needed, but I'll never actually be ok with it. It's just ignoring an obvious issue. I've wanted this project for a long time, and got rid of my MK3 Supra Turbo in order to make room for it, so I'm not going to cut corners and half ass the project. If I drive it around, it's going to be because it's ready to be driven around, not because I'm willing to ignore an obviously sick motor.

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #22 by chad » Mon Sep 11, 2017 8:57 pm

may depend on the "sickness"?
Also
ur interest in application (end goal)?
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
Econoline
Registered User
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:37 pm
Location: Anacortes, WA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #23 by Econoline » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:34 pm

Is there an adjustable rocker set on this engine? It could be the original owner either set the timing 'by ear' and burnt something or he over adjusted some rockers and has one hanging open or even bent. I take proclamations of "rebuilt" with a grain of salt. Who knows what was done, by who and how. Could be a "Tijuana tune up" for all we know.
Last edited by Econoline on Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
It ain't gonna fix itself

User avatar
chad
Registered User
Posts: 4787
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:51 am
Location: Lawrence Swamp, S. Amherst, MA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #24 by chad » Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:03 am

same w/carbs - right outta the corporate 'rebuilder' (just sales, really).
"Big thing is only make one change at a time. Change 2 or more things at a time it becomes difficult to figure which change helped or hurt" turbo2256b » 1/16/2017
Chad - '70 LUEB on '77 frame (i.e. PS, D44, trapezoidal BB 9", 4.11), 250, NV 3550 & DSII to B transplanted, "T" D20/PTO, 2" SL, 1" BL, 4 discs, 33"X15", tool boxes, etc. Seeking: Hydraulic gear motor for Koenig pto. chrlsful@aol.com (413) 259-1749

User avatar
Econoline
Registered User
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:37 pm
Location: Anacortes, WA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #25 by Econoline » Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:41 am

You know, it's possible the rings haven't fully seated as well if it truly is just rebuilt...

Those compression #'s won't keep it from starting and running. Get it started and drive it like you stole it
It ain't gonna fix itself

User avatar
bubba22349
Global Moderator
Posts: 9087
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Flagstaff, Az. 86005 near the old Route 66

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #26 by bubba22349 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:07 pm

ob1murry wrote:
Econoline wrote:+1, you'll know everything you need to know after you do a leak down or do what B RON CO says. It may be a valve or lifter/valvetrain issue.

The #6 cylinder seems to be the most susceptible to lean burn and detonation damage from too much timing or heat. I wouldn't be surprised if a ring land is broken or damaged.


Well, unfortunately, it's my understanding that the engine hasn't been run since the rebuild the owner before last did. Which means if it's a problem with the rings, it's probably an actual broken ring, which means hoping it didn't score the heck out of the bore, or get stuck in any of the bearings.

Econoline wrote:Or swap to a V8, once you go down the path of the lowly straight 6 you can get hooked. Turn back while you still can! ;)


Unfortunately, that's the likely scenario if the motor needs pulled and rebuilt. The car would have already gotten an upgraded rear end, and then new 5 lug hubs in front to match, so dropping a V8 in isn't going to be that much extra work when it comes to it. It's probably also likely to be a similar price, which really doesn't leave much downside to doing it in my mind.

I'll check out the valves and wet test it before I write off the motor, but I'm not hopeful, a mechanical timing issue with the cam should result in low readings in at least one other cylinder, and any pushrod/rocker/valve issue should result in a reading of closer to 0.

The problem here is that getting it to run if it has low compression is great for moving it around as needed, but I'll never actually be ok with it. It's just ignoring an obvious issue. I've wanted this project for a long time, and got rid of my MK3 Supra Turbo in order to make room for it, so I'm not going to cut corners and half ass the project. If I drive it around, it's going to be because it's ready to be driven around, not because I'm willing to ignore an obviously sick motor.


The compression numbers you have are more indicative of a valve seal problem (top end) than the rings! If you have adjustable rockers it maybe as simple as a rocker arm or two on # 6 that needs readjustment, or with non adjustable rockers it might be that a push Rod is too long. Pulling the valve cover and rocker arms (keep the push rods in order and check the lenght of them against each other) also put a straight edge across the tops of the valves to check for any differance in the valve heights especially on those of # 6's valves compared to the rest. With non adjustable rockers it is important that valve stem tops all match closely in height sadly many machine shops don't take the time to check that this is done correctly. All of these above checks are fast to do and very low cost at only the price of a valve cover gasket and maybe a couple different lenght push rods.

Lastly it could also be a valve or valves in #6 chamber that haven't sealed due to a poor valve job you could hand lap those two to get a good seal. This would be fairly easy & fast too check or repair, cost wise would also only be a little more (for a valve grind gasket set or just the head gasket) to pull the head yet it would still be quite reasonable to be able to fix your engine right. It would also allow you to see the condistion of the cylinder walls on #6 Ie to be able to verify if there is any damage from a ring problem. In my experience and in my OPIN when I see a compression test result like this then it usally a valve seal (top end) problem. Though it's possible it can be a ring it isn't too likely if the engine was rebuilt and the compression numbers on all the other cylinders seem to verify a recent rebuild. Good luck on your repairs. :nod: Edited
A bad day Drag Racing is still better than a good day at work!

I am still hunting for a project car to build but with my current low budget it's not looking so good. My Ex- Fleet of Sixes these are all long gone! :bang: 1954 Customline 223 3 speed with O/D, 1963 Fairlane project drag car with BB6, 1977 Maverick 250 with C4, 1994 F-150 a 300 with 5 speed.

ob1murry
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:16 am
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #27 by ob1murry » Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:26 pm

chad wrote:may depend on the "sickness"?
Also
ur interest in application (end goal)?


Agreed. As I said though, in the problem winds up being the bottom end, I'll almost assuredly just go for a V8 swap. It just makes better sense.

As for goals, it's hard to say. I've built cars in the past that I always just wanted to be "fast enough" and it never ends there. My first DSM was supposed to "just run good", but is now a low 12 second car even with a junk trans and slipping clutch, and is being replaced by the Galant VR4 currently next to the Mustang in the garage, with a built stroker that I'm hoping to hit 500-600hp on.

Just making the point that plans change, so it's tough to say. Ultimately, I can say that I want the Mustang to be a cruiser with enough power to have fun, but not so much that it's a handful to drive.

Econoline wrote:Is there an adjustable rocker set on this engine? It could be the original owner either set the timing 'by ear' and burnt something or he over adjusted some rockers and has one hanging open or even bent. I take proclamations of "rebuilt" with a grain of salt. Who knows what was done, by who and how. Could be a "Tijuana tune up" for all we know.


It's possible, but again, I would expect an engine with a bent/open valve to produce much less than 70 psi. Perhaps I will pull out my leakdown tester and see.

As for "rebuilt", based on what the guy I bought it from relayed to me, it was a reuse of rods and pistons, new bearings and rings, and a rehone. No idea what the tolerances were or anything like that. If this was a motor someone had just "didn't run", I'd be much more inclined to believe it wasn't anything requiring a shortblock rebuilt. However, my experiences with parts that someone else "rebuilt" are not very good.

Econoline wrote:You know, it's possible the rings haven't fully seated as well if it truly is just rebuilt...

Those compression #'s won't keep it from starting and running. Get it started and drive it like you stole it


I Agree, that compression isn't so low that it would cause a no start, it's just clearly an issue, and one I'm not comfortable just forgetting about. I mean, I guess if it winds up needing torn out anyway, for a rebuild or a swap or whatever else, then there isn't any harm in beating on it for some fun for a while though.

bubba22349 wrote:The compression numbers you have are more indicative of a valve seal problem (top end) than the rings! If you have adjustable rockers it maybe as simple as a rocker arm or two on # 6 that needs readjustment, or with non adjustable rockers it might be that a push Rod is too long. Pulling the valve cover and rocker arms (keep the push rods in order and check the lenght of them against each other) also put a straight edge across the tops of the valves to check for any differance in the valve heights especially on those of # 6's valves compared to the rest. With non adjustable rockers it is important that valve stem tops all match closely in height sadly many machine shops don't take the time to check that this is done correctly. All of these above checks are fast to do and very low cost at only the price of a valve cover gasket and maybe a couple different lenght push rods.


You think so? Like I said before, I would have thought that a valve that wont close would produce compression numbers alot lower than 70.

I assume there is a specified range for clearance between the pushrod and rocker arm? Can anyone provide it for verification?

bubba22349 wrote:Lastly it could also be a valve or valves in #6 chamber that haven't sealed due to a poor valve job you could hand lap those two to get a good seal. This would be fairly easy & fast too check or repair, cost wise would also only be a little more (for a valve grind gasket set or just the head gasket) to pull the head yet it would still be quite reasonable to be able to fix your engine right. It would also allow you to see the condistion of the cylinder walls on #6 Ie to be able to verify if there is any damage from a ring problem. In my experience and in my OPIN when I see a compression test result like this then it usally a valve seal (top end) problem. Though it's possible it can be a ring it isn't too likely if the engine was rebuilt and the compression numbers on all the other cylinders seem to verify a recent rebuild. Good luck on your repairs. :nod: Edited


I suppose that if nothing else fixes it, I have nothing to lose by popping the head off and having a look.

User avatar
Econoline
Registered User
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:37 pm
Location: Anacortes, WA

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #28 by Econoline » Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:59 pm

Bubba's advice is spot on as usual. For sure check the valve clearance if it has adjustable rockers before you beat on it.

Yeah, I mean to run it hard to break it in. You know you won't kill it unless you really try or in fact the ring lands are blown or a lobe is wiped and eating the bearings, that's the beauty of these engines. And then who cares anyway? But no sense in hammering a valve that just needs a tweek right. You could be sitting on a nice build that will run for decades, I'm sure you're aware. If it wasn't over bored it was shade tree, but who's to say what you've got.

It'll be interesting to see what you find on a wet compression test or a leak down. Or after you pull the valve cover and check the rockers.

ob1murry wrote:As for "rebuilt", based on what the guy I bought it from relayed to me, it was a reuse of rods and pistons, new bearings and rings, and a rehone. No idea what the tolerances were or anything like that. If this was a motor someone had just "didn't run", I'd be much more inclined to believe it wasn't anything requiring a shortblock rebuilt. However, my experiences with parts that someone else "rebuilt" are not very good.


I hear that

ob1murry wrote:
Econoline wrote:Is there an adjustable rocker set on this engine? It could be the original owner either set the timing 'by ear' and burnt something or he over adjusted some rockers and has one hanging open or even bent.


It's possible, but again, I would expect an engine with a bent/open valve to produce much less than 70 psi. Perhaps I will pull out my leakdown tester and see.



I'd expect the same with blown rings on 1 cylinder, esp on a rebuild.
Last edited by Econoline on Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:40 pm, edited 6 times in total.
It ain't gonna fix itself

User avatar
bubba22349
Global Moderator
Posts: 9087
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: Flagstaff, Az. 86005 near the old Route 66

Re: 200 65 Mustang

Post #29 by bubba22349 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:10 pm

ob1murry wrote:
chad wrote:may depend on the "sickness"?
Also
ur interest in application (end goal)?


Agreed. As I said though, in the problem winds up being the bottom end, I'll almost assuredly just go for a V8 swap. It just makes better sense.

As for goals, it's hard to say. I've built cars in the past that I always just wanted to be "fast enough" and it never ends there. My first DSM was supposed to "just run good", but is now a low 12 second car even with a junk trans and slipping clutch, and is being replaced by the Galant VR4 currently next to the Mustang in the garage, with a built stroker that I'm hoping to hit 500-600hp on.

Just making the point that plans change, so it's tough to say. Ultimately, I can say that I want the Mustang to be a cruiser with enough power to have fun, but not so much that it's a handful to drive.

Econoline wrote:Is there an adjustable rocker set on this engine? It could be the original owner either set the timing 'by ear' and burnt something or he over adjusted some rockers and has one hanging open or even bent. I take proclamations of "rebuilt" with a grain of salt. Who knows what was done, by who and how. Could be a "Tijuana tune up" for all we know.


It's possible, but again, I would expect an engine with a bent/open valve to produce much less than 70 psi. Perhaps I will pull out my leakdown tester and see.

As for "rebuilt", based on what the guy I bought it from relayed to me, it was a reuse of rods and pistons, new bearings and rings, and a rehone. No idea what the tolerances were or anything like that. If this was a motor someone had just "didn't run", I'd be much more inclined to believe it wasn't anything requiring a shortblock rebuilt. However, my experiences with parts that someone else "rebuilt" are not very good.

Econoline wrote:You know, it's possible the rings haven't fully seated as well if it truly is just rebuilt...

Those compression #'s won't keep it from starting and running. Get it started and drive it like you stole it


I Agree, that compression isn't so low that it would cause a no start, it's just clearly an issue, and one I'm not comfortable just forgetting about. I mean, I guess if it winds up needing torn out anyway, for a rebuild or a swap or whatever else, then there isn't any harm in beating on it for some fun for a while though.

bubba22349 wrote:The compression numbers you have are more indicative of a valve seal problem (top end) than the rings! If you have adjustable rockers it maybe as simple as a rocker arm or two on # 6 that needs readjustment, or with non adjustable rockers it might be that a push Rod is too long. Pulling the valve cover and rocker arms (keep the push rods in order and check the lenght of them against each other) also put a straight edge across the tops of the valves to check for any differance in the valve heights especially on those of # 6's valves compared to the rest. With non adjustable rockers it is important that valve stem tops all match closely in height sadly many machine shops don't take the time to check that this is done correctly. All of these above checks are fast to do and very low cost at only the price of a valve cover gasket and maybe a couple different lenght push rods.


You think so? Like I said before, I would have thought that a valve that wont close would produce compression numbers alot lower than 70.

I assume there is a specified range for clearance between the pushrod and rocker arm? Can anyone provide it for verification?


"Yes I do think so and I have seen it often. :hmmm: Yes and no the compression numbers it produces all depends on the amount it is open. The specified range of clearance between the pushrod and rocker arm is "Zero" for all Ford 200 six'es (as they all were originally built with hydraulic lifter cams) so unless someone installed a solid lifter cam in the past and then they would also need to have had the early adjustable set of rocker arms installed too pulling the valve will clue you in on that real fast. Hydraulic lifters have a working range of about .120 to .150 of an inch so therefore if some valve stem tips are sticking up significantly higher than the rest of them then with the non adjustable rocker arms it's easy for valve not be fully seated yet still have a partial seal. When set up and installed properly the lifter is compressed half that lifter working distance or about .060. The valve is also suppose to have about 80 pounds of valve spring seat presure to provide a good seal too."

bubba22349 wrote:Lastly it could also be a valve or valves in #6 chamber that haven't sealed due to a poor valve job you could hand lap those two to get a good seal. This would be fairly easy & fast too check or repair, cost wise would also only be a little more (for a valve grind gasket set or just the head gasket) to pull the head yet it would still be quite reasonable to be able to fix your engine right. It would also allow you to see the condistion of the cylinder walls on #6 Ie to be able to verify if there is any damage from a ring problem. In my experience and in my OPIN when I see a compression test result like this then it usally a valve seal (top end) problem. Though it's possible it can be a ring it isn't too likely if the engine was rebuilt and the compression numbers on all the other cylinders seem to verify a recent rebuild. Good luck on your repairs. :nod: Edited


"
Ob1murry wrote: I suppose that if nothing else fixes it, I have nothing to lose by popping the head off and having a look.


Yes that for sure and it wouldn't take you very much time to find out. However after pulling the valve cover and checking out some of easy top end items first before you think about pulling the head and its disassembly. X3 then you might just as well try starting it even with that low of compression on # 6 it should be able to run fairly well. And with it running :thumbup: that could also shed some more light on the engines over all condistion as well as giving the rings a chance to seal even better with some run time.

One other thing I have found on pulling apart numerous engines is that in measuring the cylinder wall / ring wear is usally somewhat higher on the front cylinders. Your compression numbers look real good on number 1. Good luck and I hope you don't give up on the little six just yet. :nod:
A bad day Drag Racing is still better than a good day at work!

I am still hunting for a project car to build but with my current low budget it's not looking so good. My Ex- Fleet of Sixes these are all long gone! :bang: 1954 Customline 223 3 speed with O/D, 1963 Fairlane project drag car with BB6, 1977 Maverick 250 with C4, 1994 F-150 a 300 with 5 speed.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests