The casting ID on a 69 Boss 302 is C8FE.
Is this the same block that is run in the '40s running the Boss 302?
Are they the same castings?
Is there a difference between it and the C7FE block?
the C8's XE predecessor which I've see were similar save for the freeze plugs-see attached.
Boss powered GT-40s, in period?
Quote from: camp upshur on August 08, 2021, 02:27:33 AM
the C8's XE predecessor which I've see were similar save for the freeze plugs-see attached.
Boss powered GT-40s, in period?
Yes. After the 67 racing season, the rules were changed to eliminate the 7 liter engine and reduce the maximum displacement allowed to 5 liters.
In '68, the GT40's were run with 5 liter Boss 302's and renamed "Gulf's" and run with the Gulf colors and "spoked" wheels.
While the 4 bolt 289 blocks previously were last cast as C7FE blocks and sourced from the racing program, the Boss blocks (in 68) were C8FE blocks.
I presume that these were also "trans-am racing blocks", like the '67s, but what I am asking is since the C8FE blocks were production blocks for the '69 Boss 302, is there a difference or are they still racing blocks?
The C8FE blocks were originally designed and cast as production 1968 tunnel port 302 blocks. When the tunnel port 302 production was cancelled lots of them were already cast. They ended up being used in early 1969 Boss 302 production.
Quote from: shelbydoug on August 08, 2021, 06:31:57 AM
Quote from: camp upshur on August 08, 2021, 02:27:33 AM
the C8's XE predecessor which I've see were similar save for the freeze plugs-see attached.
Boss powered GT-40s, in period?
Yes. After the 67 racing season, the rules were changed to eliminate the 7 liter engine and reduce the maximum displacement allowed to 5 liters.
In '68, the GT40's were run with 5 liter Boss 302's and renamed "Gulf's" and run with the Gulf colors and "spoked" wheels.
While the 4 bolt 289 blocks previously were last cast as C7FE blocks and sourced from the racing program, the Boss blocks (in 68) were C8FE blocks.
I presume that these were also "trans-am racing blocks", like the '67s, but what I am asking is since the C8FE blocks were production blocks for the '69 Boss 302, is there a difference or are they still racing blocks?
The gulf cars ran inline valves on Gurney-Weslake heads. Never seen a period GT-40 w canted-valve Boss 302-yet.
Quote from: camp upshur on August 08, 2021, 12:02:13 PM
The gulf cars ran inline valves on Gurney-Weslake heads. Never seen a period GT-40 w canted-valve Boss 302-yet.
I'm not the expert on GT40's. I'm going by what the press reported.
I am not disagreeing but I'd be surprised if the G-W heads could be homolagated as production heads?
Yes Gurney Heads are what they ran. Great SB Ford history there if you're ever killing time. Only car to will LeMans twice was GT40P-1075 - both wins Gurney Heads.
It's a much longer answer than I have time for right now, however the street C8FE vs. T/A C8FE vs. the Tunnelport C8FE differences are numerous and include metallurgy as well as physical differences. I have had all three.
John
Quote from: shelbydoug on August 08, 2021, 12:49:20 PM
Quote from: camp upshur on August 08, 2021, 12:02:13 PM
The gulf cars ran inline valves on Gurney-Weslake heads. Never seen a period GT-40 w canted-valve Boss 302-yet.
I'm not the expert on GT40's. I'm going by what the press reported.
I am not disagreeing but I'd be surprised if the G-W heads could be homolagated as production heads?
Gurney has stated in interviews that he wanted to run his heads on the BME TA Cougars. He did some testing and they made more power but Ford nixed it. It was one more nail in the coffin of his relationship with Ford.
- Phillip
Agree. No GT-40's with Boss 302 heads ever won anything or ran at LeMans.
Quote from: camp upshur on August 08, 2021, 12:02:13 PM
The gulf cars ran inline valves on Gurney-Weslake heads. Never seen a period GT-40 w canted-valve Boss 302-yet.
Doug ,
"Technically" there is no such thing as a C7FE block ,period. here is the GT40 block "lineage".
Early cars ( after the attempt at using the pushrod Indy engine) used conventional Hi Po 289 blocks. Durability issues led to the improved C6FE casting number , two bolt , "steel main cap" block. Continued durability issues led to a four bolt main ( steel caps) block built with SK or XE numbers ( both were built). These blocks all had conventional press in freeze plugs and were also used in '67 T/A engines with C6FE heads. The block was revised for an additional oil passage and given the C8FE casting number. This "general" casting number block saw MANY spur of the moment changes and with different machining programs was used for Tunnel Ports , '68 Indy use with Gurney heads in "dry sump" configuration . The block was carried over to '69 Boss 302 use in both T/A and "street" configuration with the "steel" main caps and "dry deck" or "wet deck" being the major difference. The C8FE block was also a favorite of the Formula 5000 race group. MANY C8FE blocks have additional SK numbers scratched into the bell housing areas. These indicate the various revisions for specific applications.
There you have it.
Randy
Quote from: gt350hr on August 09, 2021, 11:06:39 AM
Doug ,
"Technically" there is no such thing as a C7FE block ,period. here is the GT40 block "lineage".
Early cars ( after the attempt at using the pushrod Indy engine) used conventional Hi Po 289 blocks. Durability issues led to the improved C6FE casting number , two bolt , "steel main cap" block. Continued durability issues led to a four bolt main ( steel caps) block built with SK or XE numbers ( both were built). These blocks all had conventional press in freeze plugs and were also used in '67 T/A engines with C6FE heads. The block was revised for an additional oil passage and given the C8FE casting number. This "general" casting number block saw MANY spur of the moment changes and with different machining programs was used for Tunnel Ports , '68 Indy use with Gurney heads in "dry sump" configuration . The block was carried over to '69 Boss 302 use in both T/A and "street" configuration with the "steel" main caps and "dry deck" or "wet deck" being the major difference. The C8FE block was also a favorite of the Formula 5000 race group. MANY C8FE blocks have additional SK numbers scratched into the bell housing areas. These indicate the various revisions for specific applications.
There you have it.
Randy
Well, I like having "it" BUT is the production '69 Boss 302 C8FE block a racing block or a non-racing block? Do the 69 B2 T/A cars use that block or another that you had to get out the back door but only if you knew the pass word?
There was also mention here of a metallurgy difference such as a higher nickle cast iron (I would presume higher nickel).
I've seen reference in writing to a C7FE block but have never seen one, just as I've seen reference to 68 and 69 GT40 Gulfs running Boss 302's.
Now I'm not claiming anything and in doing my research I'm aware that one can not always feel comfortable about the accuracy of eye witnesses seeing the flying monkeys.
The C8FE Boss 302 blocks have screw in "water plugs" as well, correct?
Quote from: gt350hr on August 09, 2021, 11:06:39 AM
Doug ,
"Technically" there is no such thing as a C7FE block ,period. here is the GT40 block "lineage".
Early cars ( after the attempt at using the pushrod Indy engine) used conventional Hi Po 289 blocks. Durability issues led to the improved C6FE casting number , two bolt , "steel main cap" block. Continued durability issues led to a four bolt main ( steel caps) block built with SK or XE numbers ( both were built). These blocks all had conventional press in freeze plugs and were also used in '67 T/A engines with C6FE heads. The block was revised for an additional oil passage and given the C8FE casting number. This "general" casting number block saw MANY spur of the moment changes and with different machining programs was used for Tunnel Ports , '68 Indy use with Gurney heads in "dry sump" configuration . The block was carried over to '69 Boss 302 use in both T/A and "street" configuration with the "steel" main caps and "dry deck" or "wet deck" being the major difference. The C8FE block was also a favorite of the Formula 5000 race group. MANY C8FE blocks have additional SK numbers scratched into the bell housing areas. These indicate the various revisions for specific applications.
There you have it.
Randy
Randy,
The updated GT-40 FIA form dated 68? listed the 4,942 displacement addendum, including the 5.0L crank set (C8FE ??) and G-W heads shown in the supporting photos.
I thought that was to homologate the JWA-Gulf G-W engine for 68 / 69 seasons??
Were the JWA-Gulf G-W all dry-deck using the Cooper ring sealing system?
Did they use both 2 & 4 bolt mains block configuration?
Thanks for the details
jim p
Years ago (more than twenty) I spoke to a retired metallurgist engineer who was supervisor at the Cleveland Ford foundry when he retired in the late 1990's. His response when I asked him about "High Nickel" Ford blocks was to say that anyone making such a claim didn't understand engine blocks or iron casting. Nickel is (he said) inevitable in iron ore. The amount varies. Too much and cutting tools start breaking. So part of his job was to test iron pours every hour, maintaining certain levels of nickel, phosphorous, and a host of other trace elements to a standard that met the design criteria for what was being made.
He did note that when high performance engine blocks were being cast the mix would often call for a higher level of chromium than was normally present in iron ore. To meet the design criteria would often require adding more bags of chromium to the iron heat.
We were specifically discussing 427 blocks but I suspect the Le Mans 302 engines would have received similar treatment.
Your question is also uninformed but deserves an answer so that you can become informed. The presence of a certain casting number would not tell everything or necessarily anything about the intended purpose. A C8FE block made for production would not be the same as a C8FE block intended for a LeMans or other race program. Production tooling was costly and the iron pour for production blocks would differ from what was used to make special race only engines that would likely be machined offsite. Simply looking at the casting number won't get you to any form of identification.
Quote from: shelbydoug on August 09, 2021, 01:18:32 PM
Quote from: gt350hr on August 09, 2021, 11:06:39 AM
Doug ,
"Technically" there is no such thing as a C7FE block ,period. here is the GT40 block "lineage".
Early cars ( after the attempt at using the pushrod Indy engine) used conventional Hi Po 289 blocks. Durability issues led to the improved C6FE casting number , two bolt , "steel main cap" block. Continued durability issues led to a four bolt main ( steel caps) block built with SK or XE numbers ( both were built). These blocks all had conventional press in freeze plugs and were also used in '67 T/A engines with C6FE heads. The block was revised for an additional oil passage and given the C8FE casting number. This "general" casting number block saw MANY spur of the moment changes and with different machining programs was used for Tunnel Ports , '68 Indy use with Gurney heads in "dry sump" configuration . The block was carried over to '69 Boss 302 use in both T/A and "street" configuration with the "steel" main caps and "dry deck" or "wet deck" being the major difference. The C8FE block was also a favorite of the Formula 5000 race group. MANY C8FE blocks have additional SK numbers scratched into the bell housing areas. These indicate the various revisions for specific applications.
There you have it.
Randy
Well, I like having "it" BUT is the production '69 Boss 302 C8FE block a racing block or a non-racing block? Do the 69 B2 T/A cars use that block or another that you had to get out the back door but only if you knew the pass word?
There was also mention here of a metallurgy difference such as a higher nickle cast iron (I would presume higher nickel).
I've seen reference in writing to a C7FE block but have never seen one, just as I've seen reference to 68 and 69 GT40 Gulfs running Boss 302's.
Now I'm not claiming anything and in doing my research I'm aware that one can not always feel comfortable about the accuracy of eye witnesses seeing the flying monkeys.
The C8FE Boss 302 blocks have screw in "water plugs" as well, correct?
QuoteRandy,
The updated GT-40 FIA form dated 68? listed the 4,942 displacement addendum, including the 5.0L crank set (C8FE ??) and G-W heads shown in the supporting photos.
I thought that was to homologate the JWA-Gulf G-W engine for 68 / 69 seasons??
Were the JWA-Gulf G-W all dry-deck using the Cooper ring sealing system?
Did they use both 2 & 4 bolt mains block configuration?
Thanks for the details
According to JWAE chief engineer John Horsman, writing in his book Racing in the Rain, Coopers Mechanical Joints developed a head sealing system. It consisted of a seperate compressible ring inconjunction with an Aero Permanite backing gasket sealing the water passages. Horsman also comments that combustion gasses entering the coolant was an Achilles' heel of the 289 when it was raced at Reims in 1964. As a side note, Horsman adds that in the 1965 season 289 engines continued failing. Ford's tear down report noted that the failures were a complete surprise. Head sealing issues were traced to head bolts stretching.
The ring was designed to fit in a 0.060-0.062-in deep groove machined in the deck face.
During the 1968 season, Ford engine department was working on head gasket failures. Engineer Don Sullivan, along with Don Coleman were involved. Water passenges were sealed off and external pipes carried coolant to the heads. This configuration was used on the Trans-Am cars.
According to Horsman, they put the arm on Wyer to use this system. For Watkins Glen, two engines were built. One had Cooper rings (number 67/18) and the other was dry-deck (number 67/11).
Horsman wasn't keen on the dry deck sealing noting that he had no gasket failures with the Gurney-Weslake heads with Cooper rings. Ironically a dry deck configuration was used in the 1968 Le Mans winning car. It was trouble free partly, he explains, because the race was run in September when it was cooler. Finally at the 1969 Daytona 24 Hours, both dry deck engine blocks cracked.
As for the main cap question, when Ford sold their interest in Ford Advanced Vehicles (which became JWAE) they included 50 Windsor blocks with four bolts on the 2-3-4 mains.
Royce, I'm not arguing but casting numbers are a way of identifying parts.
Often that number will identify the intended application and purpose.
If there are at least three different C8FE blocks, then how does the poor guy in shipping identify them if they all have the same identification number?
I personally haven't had the privilege of having many Ford "racing program" parts. What I can say that my reaction to any prefix ending in an FE such as C8FE sets off a flashing light in my head telling me that it is not a regular production part.
My aluminum medium riser 427 heads with the C6FE-6049-A casting numbers were another example that I can think of.
I can't swear to it but they likely came off of a "lightweight 427" and that likely was not intended for Taxi Cab or Pickup truck application.
Your point however is somewhat made. I went through this somewhat also with my Pantera. I'm aware that there are at least two "Nascar" 351-c blocks. Both I am told are XE identified.
Then you have this thing with "the Australian block". That one usually is identified with the Gelong casting id.
Well here's MY story on my block. I bought a D2 4 bolt block from Carter Gette. It had come out of a wrecked Pantera race car. It did not have a Gelong logo.
I took it to a friend's friend who was starting his own machine shop not far from here to go 30 over with.
When I went to pick it up, the guy told me that I had swindled him and never to come back. He said it was a special block and he had to resharpen his cutters three times. But he told me $180 to bore it and he would stick to that, just never come back.
It had no other special markings and as far as I know, was a production CJ block. The engine shop claimed otherwise.
Of course it might have been his first Ford block and he might have been just used to the soft iron GM uses?
I'm not always uninformed. Questions by their nature are an attempt at being informed or searching for clarification. My questions have a point and if I can arrive at the information that I was looking for, then it doesn't matter what you think of me. However, thank you for your interest and kind specifically pointed replies. They often help.
You can't label the C8FE block in any certain way. They were simply a high performance block that came in several different forms. I know of at least 5 different ways they came:
1. Machined with 2 bolt caps if I remember correctly it was for a class of boat racing
2. Machined for tunnelport 302s
3 Machined for Indy with big dry sump mounting ears and the front one was 5 bolt (I will post a picture)
4. Machined for Trans AM
5. Machined for 69 BOSS 302s and there may be others.
Roy
A front picture of the block plus a few of the Gt40 Mirage aluminum engine I had which I sold to Jay Cushman along with the Indy block and a few other things. The aluminum heads were not the correct ones though.
Roy
What is the difference between the Boss 302 block and the T/A block? What aluminum heads are those?
If I have a C8FE bare block sitting here, 4 bolt, wet sump, how do I tell what it is for? I should just presume that it is a Boss 302 block and leave it at that?
Casting numbers might mean something if you are a Generic Motors fan or a Mopar guy. With Ford cylinder blocks from the 1960's they are a way of fooling the tech official into believing he knows something when in fact he doesn't. Race parts were never shipped or stocked like normal parts. I am not the guy who knows how to tell a GT40 block from a '69 Boss 2 block but I suspect they were handled much in the same way 427 Ford blocks were. Parts might show up at a racer's shop at midnight on a Saturday in the trunk of a pool car driven by a Ford engineer named Bruce for example. Maybe a paper tag.
Quote from: shelbydoug on August 09, 2021, 04:25:03 PM
Royce, I'm not arguing but casting numbers are a way of identifying parts.
Often that number will identify the intended application and purpose.
If there are at least three different C8FE blocks, then how does the poor guy in shipping identify them if they all have the same identification number?
Quote from: Royce Peterson on August 10, 2021, 09:02:49 AM
Casting numbers might mean something if you are a Generic Motors fan or a Mopar guy. With Ford cylinder blocks from the 1960's they are a way of fooling the tech official into believing he knows something when in fact he doesn't. Race parts were never shipped or stocked like normal parts. I am not the guy who knows how to tell a GT40 block from a '69 Boss 2 block but I suspect they were handled much in the same way 427 Ford blocks were. Parts might show up at a racer's shop at midnight on a Saturday in the trunk of a pool car driven by a Ford engineer named Bruce for example. Maybe a paper tag.
Quote from: shelbydoug on August 09, 2021, 04:25:03 PM
Royce, I'm not arguing but casting numbers are a way of identifying parts.
Often that number will identify the intended application and purpose.
If there are at least three different C8FE blocks, then how does the poor guy in shipping identify them if they all have the same identification number?
I shouldn't have called the Police on that guy then? I thought he was a drug dealer? :o
Roy: everytime you sign your name I think that you are officer John McClain and you have just dumped Hanz out of the window. Did you find shoes that fit yet?
...am I glad that I didn't pay that guy $5,000 for that C8FE block. He claimed the dirt was from the last T/A race.
I have a copy of the Ford Engineering "SK" log book. In the book there are at least five revisions to the C8FE block for specific racing purposes. Some include "rubbed cores" to allow a 4.110 bore size , others are for machining changes. "Racing blocks" typically have hand stamped reference numbers stamped on the small pad on the front , passenger side. "Some" others have an SK number scratched into the casting in the bell housing area. A "production" non racing block would have the ductile iron main caps which are similar to the look of a HiPo 289 cap.
By '68-69 , the C8FE casting was being used in GT40's. Of note is there IS a difference in a Cooper ring block and a "dry deck" block. A Cooper ring block was cut for the sealing rings BUT still used a composite gasket to seal the water passages. A "dry deck" block had "O" rings to seal every water and oil passage, leaving a small gap between the block and head. Tunnel Port and T/A Boss engines were done this way.
Bruce Sizemore was only responsible for the "Canadian" 428 CJ heads , nothing Boss 302 related. Yes he took a station wagon load of them to the US Nationals in '69. I got the whole story first hand during the three days I spent with him at the CJ reunion a few years back.
Randy
He also took a pair to Barrie Poole's shop the next night after Barrie won that event with the production heads. It wasn't a station wagon, Barrie said they came out of the trunk.
Ford had myriad racing activities in 1968 that used various versions of the C8FE block. For example the NASCAR Baby Grand series which Tiny Lund won in 1968 driving a 302 powered Cougar. I sure don't know the details but suspect Bud Moore got some special stuff that made it possible. Of course the C8FE block - probably quite different from NASCAR or LeMans C8FE blocks - was also used in the SCCA Trans Am series, with the season opener won by Jerry Titus running a tunnel port 302 in his Shelby Racing Co. Mustang notch back.
(http://assets.mustangandfords.com/f/97796399.jpg)
Quote from: gt350hr on August 10, 2021, 10:42:15 AM
I have a copy of the Ford Engineering "SK" log book. In the book there are at least five revisions to the C8FE block for specific racing purposes. Some include "rubbed cores" to allow a 4.110 bore size , others are for machining changes. "Racing blocks" typically have hand stamped reference numbers stamped on the small pad on the front , passenger side. "Some" others have an SK number scratched into the casting in the bell housing area. A "production" non racing block would have the ductile iron main caps which are similar to the look of a HiPo 289 cap.
By '68-69 , the C8FE casting was being used in GT40's. Of note is there IS a difference in a Cooper ring block and a "dry deck" block. A Cooper ring block was cut for the sealing rings BUT still used a composite gasket to seal the water passages. A "dry deck" block had "O" rings to seal every water and oil passage, leaving a small gap between the block and head. Tunnel Port and T/A Boss engines were done this way.
Bruce Sizemore was only responsible for the "Canadian" 428 CJ heads , nothing Boss 302 related. Yes he took a station wagon load of them to the US Nationals in '69. I got the whole story first hand during the three days I spent with him at the CJ reunion a few years back.
Randy
Bruce drove them to Barrie in Canada in a Boss 302 and yes they were in the trunk. Bruce didn't declare them and was lucky the border inspector was a "Ford guy" and didn't ask to look in the trunk or Bruce would have had to do some fast talking! I got that story too and about thirty others.
Randy
Is there a decipherable code stamped into the race parts?
My aluminum heads were full of $ signs hand stamped and lots of hand stampings x'd over or out.
So if a production block had it's iron main caps replaced with billet steel ones it would be difficult to tell the differences?
Doug ,
PM me the numbers and I'll sort it out for you. I have spent decades looking at this stuff.
Randy
I don't have them anymore and if I took pics I don't know what I did with them? That's before digital and on slides...somewhere!
Doug, the heads on the aluminum motor were basically stock 72 or 73 heads I got from Holbrook Racing in Livonia Michigan in the late 70's.
Roy
An all aluminum small block is pretty neat.
Here's a picture of an all aluminum Cleveland that Jeff Burgy assembled a while back.
Take special note of the block.
It had a 68 casting date and a casting number that did not pretend to be a production block
One of the issues that my Chevy "friends" always had with racing Ford's was that you could not just walk into a Ford Parts Dealer and buy a competitive racing part like you could with Chevy.
This business of the effin' CIA delivering them too you in the back of a camouflaged vehicle unfortunately is par for the course and just too typical.
I'm doing this over 50 years. This business of a guy on the street not being able to get the good stuff and the stereo typical Ford Parts Managers snickering at me, just even to this day, do not bode well with me. The arrogance still just turns my stomach.
Sure, part of this is just the Corporate's that are having "their turn at a 3 year run, to burn, loot and rape", but it continues at Ford and now is simply illustrated with their now too exclusive for anyone Ford GT's. Some things will just never change?
I gotta' give Shelby A LOT of credit for putting up with it. I suppose being pictured in big overalls holding a chicken is sorta' his revenge?
Thank you for everyone's efforts here to make me informed on the C8FE blocks. It's kinda' what I expected everyone to say.
The 351C aluminum block ( SK42617/8) was the product of one Henry "Smokey" Yunick . It was intended to be used at the '69 Indy race. Some had small mains and dry sump caps and others had "normal " Cleveland mains. Gus Tarrab has one with the small mains and mine is 351C mains. The block was to be used with SK42624 aluminum heads which "looked" like a production 351C 4V head but were improved flow wise. I have three sets of those currently. None of these parts were meant to be "over the counter" parts. Jay Cushman ( not surprisingly) has some of the blocks and heads too.
Randy
I do believe that pictured block has a C8 or C9 casting ID in it? Even so, same blocks, just a different tag dropped in the mold at casting time.
I think I saw an aluminum D2AE-CA block but can't be sure since it was painted but the paint was peeling. It had big mamma steel caps on it.
This block was only available because it had a repair done to it in the lifter gallery.
I can't remember the name of the team in Michigan it came from but they were drag racers.
Never saw the SK heads for it nor were they ever mentioned as being available. Dyno Don had some and I think that you were the one that bought them from him?
The heads on it there are Motorsport B351 castings and the intake is a Hall "high port" intake.
I never liked those heads. I think the A3's run better.
Quote from: 6R07mi on August 09, 2021, 01:49:54 PM
Quote from: gt350hr on August 09, 2021, 11:06:39 AM
Doug ,
"Technically" there is no such thing as a C7FE block ,period. here is the GT40 block "lineage".
Early cars ( after the attempt at using the pushrod Indy engine) used conventional Hi Po 289 blocks. Durability issues led to the improved C6FE casting number , two bolt , "steel main cap" block. Continued durability issues led to a four bolt main ( steel caps) block built with SK or XE numbers ( both were built). These blocks all had conventional press in freeze plugs and were also used in '67 T/A engines with C6FE heads. The block was revised for an additional oil passage and given the C8FE casting number. This "general" casting number block saw MANY spur of the moment changes and with different machining programs was used for Tunnel Ports , '68 Indy use with Gurney heads in "dry sump" configuration . The block was carried over to '69 Boss 302 use in both T/A and "street" configuration with the "steel" main caps and "dry deck" or "wet deck" being the major difference. The C8FE block was also a favorite of the Formula 5000 race group. MANY C8FE blocks have additional SK numbers scratched into the bell housing areas. These indicate the various revisions for specific applications.
There you have it.
Randy
Randy,
The updated GT-40 FIA form dated 68? listed the 4,942 displacement addendum, including the 5.0L crank set (C8FE ??) and G-W heads shown in the supporting photos.
I thought that was to homologate the JWA-Gulf G-W engine for 68 / 69 seasons??
Were the JWA-Gulf G-W all dry-deck using the Cooper ring sealing system?
Did they use both 2 & 4 bolt mains block configuration?
Thanks for the details
jim p
I found the FIA homologation form #224 for GT40, Group 4,
the "68" addition for G-W 4,942 cc variant.
regards,
jim p
Doug,
My aluminum block did come from Dyno Don as a complete engine. The block casting number and casting date is in the valley. It is dated 10-xx-68 like all of the others. The block casting is VERY different than an iron block. It has provisions for eight additional head bolts as do the heads. FYI "iron" core patterns can not be used for aluminum blocks OR heads as there is a different "shrinkage rate" in the two metals. Also there were NO aluminum Cleveland blocks cast after this ill fated Indy project , so a D2AE casting number is not possible. Cleveland main size blocks us a two bolt rear main cap. Oil pan to carbs , the engine weighed 385lbs according to the delta Airlines shipping information I got when I picked it up at LAX.
Randy
6R07mi;
Thank you for posting/linking FIA #224. A wonderful reference document.
Quote from: gt350hr on August 11, 2021, 03:17:43 PM
Doug,
My aluminum block did come from Dyno Don as a complete engine. The block casting number and casting date is in the valley. It is dated 10-xx-68 like all of the others. The block casting is VERY different than an iron block. It has provisions for eight additional head bolts as do the heads. FYI "iron" core patterns can not be used for aluminum blocks OR heads as there is a different "shrinkage rate" in the two metals. Also there were NO aluminum Cleveland blocks cast after this ill fated Indy project , so a D2AE casting number is not possible. Cleveland main size blocks us a two bolt rear main cap. Oil pan to carbs , the engine weighed 385lbs according to the delta Airlines shipping information I got when I picked it up at LAX.
Randy
I had a discussion with John Vermersch basically about how many A331 Cleveland (Torker type) intakes he ordered. He said, one basic order of 100.
Now personally I've had three of them and Joe Lapine said 100 just isn't possible, he sold a lot.
Now while in discussion with Vermersch (and I discussed this with you as well if you remember) I asked about the "small port" A331 I had. The outside of it was from the same mold as the "regular A331's) but the port exists were the size of production 302 iron heads.
He said he didn't do it but said he thought he knew who did. He mentioned the "foundry" that was casting racing blocks for Ford Motorsport (at the time), now Ford Racing.
Now I don't need to mention the Pond 427 aluminum blocks being cast with C5 numbers do I? Lots of unsuspecting folks get fooled by them too.
First off, I think it WAS an aluminum D2AE-CA block and who says it was made by Ford? Not me. Someone playing in a NC sandbox perhaps? Amazing what comes outa' dem' hills sometimes?
The current aftermarket C blocks, both iron and aluminum are both cast with D2 id's. Ford has nothing to do with it. It's made by Todd Buttmore.
On the extra head bolt bosses, the picture that I posted clearly shows them. I'd ask you for a picture of the matching heads but I know you and cameras don't get along. ;)
Here's the pictures of the aluminum D2AE-CA block. I would have gone with the thicker XE/NASCAR bulkheads, especially in aluminum, but whata' I know? Not much. I'm so "uninformed". :o
Yes the Tod Buttermore block used the D2AE casting number . I was talking about Ford manufactured blocks not aftermarket. The Buttermore block is now revised (many times) and being made by Tim Meyer ( Track Boss) . They are vastly improved over my SK block and cost FAR more too. Tim is also doing a compacted graphite material block.
Again "Ford" only made one run of blocks.
Randy
Quote from: gt350hr on August 12, 2021, 10:17:33 AM
Yes the Tod Buttermore block used the D2AE casting number . I was talking about Ford manufactured blocks not aftermarket. The Buttermore block is now revised (many times) and being made by Tim Meyer ( Track Boss) . They are vastly improved over my SK block and cost FAR more too. Tim is also doing a compacted graphite material block.
Again "Ford" only made one run of blocks.
Randy
They were $2300 when Buttmore had them. Meyer doubled that.
I don't recall seeing the Meyer version. I'm not sure that he ever posted any updated ones? I would hope that he thickened the bulkheads?
I'm not arguing Randy but considering how many foundry changes and suppliers were involved all along, I'm not sure that Ford did the castings on all of these engines or just sub'ed that out?
Certainly it appears that the machining was done by subs on many of them like the 427 blocks?
So to me, it becomes semantics.
I remember Shelby making a comment about the Daytona Coupes being done in Italy.
He was being criticized that they weren't really Cobras because of that. He said something like Ferrari's being built somewhere else then Ferrari and they were still Ferrari's.
Exactly how a C8FE block was completed was not exactly what my question was although it is pertinent to the discussion. They all APPEAR to have the same basic origins in the same molten cauldron.
Not that I have ever come across one, but I would have been interested in a 4.110 aluminum version for sure.
Thank you for your input though. I can't think of a more knowledgeable helpful person on these subjects.
Thanks Doug,
The Ford SK aluminum block was cast at Ford's prototype foundry in Detroit. Not an outside vendor like the later Ford Motorsport offerings. They were machined by Ford as well. Ford did sub out "some" work to Paramount Bore and these parts usually have a steel stamped PB in an oval on the part. Boss 302T/A heads were done there and have the stamp. The infamous Canadian CJ heads were done by Paramount Bore as well.
The Buttermore block had refined bulk heads and T Meyer's block has been further refined and strengthened. It is IMHO the ultimate C block. Mark McKeown sis a run of aluminum blocks but his facility burned down and production has not resumed yet. It is a nice aluminum block as well.
I have spent a ridiculous amount of time researching all this old SK stuff because of my own curiosity. Finding some of the original engineers still around put everything into perspective. MANY things were tried that have never seen the light of day.
It is a disease for me.
Randy
That is my definition of dedication and enthusiasm
I walk in your shadow Peter , thank you for the compliment.
Quote from Doug
"Now while in discussion with Vermersch (and I discussed this with you as well if you remember) I asked about the "small port" A331 I had. The outside of it was from the same mold as the "regular A331's) but the port exists were the size of production 302 iron heads"
Maybe the small port intake was designed to be used with a set of heads like the one in this picture with the Windsor style port. I have a set of them on my small block in my Mustang with a 2x4 TA intake.
Since we were discussing main caps I thought I would throw in a picture of an unmachined one also.
Roy
Roy ,
It's interesting to see the "Brinell hardness test mark" in the 1st picture of the main cap. While present in the ''raw casting" it is removed when the cap is rough machined. It shows the caps were all tested for nodularity.
I will as we discussed at Sonoma , send you the intra company information on your "proposed - low cost" , '70 Boss heads. I have only heard of ONE other pair. That head would have REALLY been a hit "if" Ford had released it.
Randy
Randy, I was going to point out the brinell dot but I thought I'd see if anyone would catch it, should have known you would.
I talked to Vic a few times trying to convince him to make them with no luck. Different pistons and exhaust and you would have had a great combination back in the day 😀
It was great seeing you and Carol at SAAC. I got to thinking later that you, Richard,Jack and I have known each other for about 45 years. Some of the longest relationships I've had.
Take care and be safe Roy
Quote from: TA Coupe on August 12, 2021, 04:33:19 PM
Quote from Doug
"Now while in discussion with Vermersch (and I discussed this with you as well if you remember) I asked about the "small port" A331 I had. The outside of it was from the same mold as the "regular A331's) but the port exists were the size of production 302 iron heads"
Maybe the small port intake was designed to be used with a set of heads like the one in this picture with the Windsor style port. I have a set of them on my small block in my Mustang with a 2x4 TA intake.
Since we were discussing main caps I thought I would throw in a picture of an unmachined one also.
Roy
Yes they look like Windsor size ports but the only point would be to make a 9.2 Windsor/Cleveland hybrid. What's the point.
I think it more practical for someone who wanted to port match B302 Motorsport heads on a Cleveland? Actually I traded it away and that was the intention of the recipient as I was told.
I found these photos online,
I don't know if the block has any crossover with JWA Gulf engine ??
#1 ID'd as 1968 AAR Gurney Eagle
#2 & 3 1968 Sebring JWA Gulf
#4 302 TP
regards
jim p
The 1st picture is of an Indy dry sump block like I posted up above. They had an internal dry sump setup.
Roy
Great pics! Thanks for posting!
Quote from: shelbydoug on August 12, 2021, 07:37:53 PM
Quote from: TA Coupe on August 12, 2021, 04:33:19 PM
Quote from Doug
"Now while in discussion with Vermersch (and I discussed this with you as well if you remember) I asked about the "small port" A331 I had. The outside of it was from the same mold as the "regular A331's) but the port exists were the size of production 302 iron heads"
Maybe the small port intake was designed to be used with a set of heads like the one in this picture with the Windsor style port. I have a set of them on my small block in my Mustang with a 2x4 TA intake.
Since we were discussing main caps I thought I would throw in a picture of an unmachined one also.
Roy
Yes they look like Windsor size ports but the only point would be to make a 9.2 Windsor/Cleveland hybrid. What's the point.
I think it more practical for someone who wanted to port match B302 Motorsport heads on a Cleveland? Actually I traded it away and that was the intention of the recipient as I was told.
Not really , you would have to see the head. It really improved the bottom end torque , something Boss owners complained about "in the day".
Well I don't remember them doing any Cleveland stuff but those guys over at Valley Head Service were epoxying up B2 intake ports way back when the B2 was new to T/A., so other then casting up B2 Heads with intake ports to match 302W's intake ports, I would think that my small port manifold was made with thoughts of cans and cans of Devcon Plastic Aluminum getting put to use? At least experimentlly to try on the flow bench?
I will point out that my intake did come from So Cal. Maybe someone just grabbed it out of the scrap pile? It only cost me $100.
The C8FE block continued to the D1ZE block which I believe was its final Ford produced iteration.
Any comments on the C8FE's further engineering changes which resulted in the D1ZE?
Did the D1ZE have a thicker deck?
You needed to check but a lot of the D1 blocks could be bored .125 over.
Roy
These pictures show my BOSS 302 Dry Deck block
The first picture shows that originally the block was an SK45693 block, However it was later changed to the XE149282 block.
These designations on the pad on the front of the engine would give you the details of what the block was IF you had the SK log book
The second picture is the C8FE part number and date code November 29, 1967 Dated BOSS 302 block? No it probably sat unmachined in a pool of blocks waiting for a decision to be made on it's eventual configuration.
The third picture is an overall deck view.
John
John, it's hard to tell on my phone but isn't the last picture one of a Tunnelport block?
Roy
Quote from: TA Coupe on August 31, 2021, 05:51:30 PM
John, it's hard to tell on my phone but isn't the last picture one of a Tunnelport block?
Roy
No, there is not a passage for head oiling to the deck, There is material there to drill the hole but no hole.
John
+1 Casting is the same so the passage is there but not drilled.
Quote from: gt350hr on September 01, 2021, 10:25:52 AM
+1 Casting is the same so the passage is there but not drilled.
Are you saying that all the C8FE block castings are the same?
Visually , YES , except for machining variations for the specific applications.
Quote from: gt350hr on October 01, 2021, 05:47:41 PM
Visually , YES , except for machining variations for the specific applications.
Refresh my memory please? Didn't I get slammed for suggesting that?
I don't know. The blocks ( externally) look the same. There was "some" experimentation done on the internal core patterns to produce "square bores". Those had hand scratched SK numbers in the bell housing area. Some were machined for the internal dry sump Roy showed and others were "dry deck" for Tunnel Port heads or Boss 302 heads and others for regular head gaskets,
Randy
So isn't the bare casting, in 1968 terms, a racing block casting?
Yes. The block was the natural progression from the "289 four bolt main" block made with an XE number. It was considered a "race only" block when it was made. Nothing in the Ford "production car" lineup made enough power to need it. You could not buy one "over the counter" at you local Ford dealer until '69 when it was used for the Boss 302.