FE revs?

[StuartB]

Guys, just an `off the cuff` question.
What would it take to see around 6500-7000 (safe) rpm out of a low buck 410 FE?
I've had a bunch of bits knocking around the garage for a couple of years from a (mint condition) old 360 FE (C6ME truck block, C1AE heads, etc) and have just picked up a 1UB (428 CJ/cop) crank and a set of 427 (C3AE-C) rods to build it up to a 410.
Torque's not an issue with this motor but it would be nice to get it to rev a little (if possible) without eating itself, so does anyone know a cheap trick?
I'm still in that limbo land of having too many motors for my own good. The head say use the 302, the heart say stick the 410 FE in and then there's always the Cleveland......
The FE is a kind of low buck, home blue print build, just because I love building engines (odd for somemone that works with transmissions all day I know?).
I don't want to get into the buying Blue Thunder roller kit type stuff as the rest of the motor just isn't worth the outlay but there's something about this motor that I like and would like to do the best I can with it, without spending out more than it's worth, if that makes sense.
So, if I can get a safe 6000rpm (+) from the FE then maybe it'll go in the '40, if not I'd rather put the cash into the 302 or the Cleveland and put the FE by for another project later down the line.
Any ideas from the other sad FE junkies here?

 

[chuck smith]

your best bet on higher revs is not to stroke it,upgrade the rods,good springs ,good pushrods,roller rockers

 

[Jac Mac]

Are you sure its not a 361 steel crank motor. If so keep the stroke at 3.500" and bore to 4.080. Oil both ends of the main gallery, spend your money on high quality valve train .

Jac Mac

 

[Hammer]

well hydraulic cam and lifters are really only good up to 6,500 RPM, on any motor, so you culd put a solid cam and lifters in, and that woiuld help, and balance it all should be a little better, stiffer valve springs will give you a few hundred more RPM anyways......there's a few ideas

the 361's had steel cranks too?...I always thought it was just the 391's that had the steel crank..?

 

[Jac Mac]

P/N C7TE-6303-A (361 T Steel truck crank--- large snout ) 3.500" stroke

C7TE-6303-B (391 T Steel truck crank--- large snout ) 3.780" stroke

Jac Mac

 

[Hammer]

Cool, learn something new everyday!

 

[fostereast]

Check out the FE Forum if you have not. Very good FE guys. The truck crank can end up costing a lot to get it snout machined down to fit with Car parts. (Dampers,etc... There may be additional machining also) 6500 RPM's may be fine wit ha cast crank, 7,000 is pushing it on a low-dollar build. FE's get expensive really fast.

332-428 Ford FE Engine Forum

Good Luck!

 

[Eric A.]

I talked to the guys at Dove Manufacturing about this several years ago and they highly recommended their rockers and rocker shaft supports. They said that the valve train is the part that limits the RPMs on an FE. They will bend the rocker shafts and you also need the stiffest pushrods you can get. I would also go with the recommendation to not stroke it. The longer stroke will get you more torque but it make for more stress at the higher RPMs. If you balance everything and build a good valve train you should be OK.

 

[John Ross]

I would give Keith Craft a call. As far as FEs go he is a guru and should be able to walk you thru what you need to do.

Other than that I will point out a couple of other things. There are alot of high RPM / HP FEs running around near me and the choice for rockers seem to be Erson or T&D. I am running the T&D set up and have had no problems in 3 years. I have the rev limiter set at 6600 on my 427 and it has been run as high as 7000 on the dyno.

The other comment would be to strengthen the bottom end to handle the high revs. Cross bolt the block like the 427s and/or Keith Craft makes a steel main girdle for the fe. You can get more info about the main girdle on his website.

Good luck on your FE build

 

[wpeter]

Stuart,
Getting back to your original question. Personally I would not run those parts to 6000 rpms. Even if it is the big snout truck crank and not a 410 mercury motor it still does not have enough durability to run for any appreciable amount of time at that speed. The builders that mess with this stuff are mostly drag and street engine builders and their idea of durability and mine are quite different. If all you want to do is a hole shot at a stop light every now and then you are probably OK. If you want to use it for road racing you will have to do all the things the other guys have listed and then some. I have and I still only run the engine to 6500.
Bill
BTW, Keith Kraft is the outfit that told me that if you plan on stroking a crank and it is cut 10 under you only lose .005 of stroke. Straight from Keith's mouth!!

 

[StuartB]

I'm pretty certain it's not a 361 steel crank, not with 1.99" of throw and the 1UB stamp, it has to be a 428. One book says '68-'69 Police Interceptor (the 1UB stamped on the no:7 counterweight) and as it seems these had heavier rods than the 427 rods I've got (and the 428 pistons would have been a fraction heavier than the 410 ones as well) it'll need balancing anyway, so it would be nice to combine this with putting it on a diet, every little helps.
I'll try and check with the experts on the FE forums to find out if it does need some weight knocking off the counterweights and how much (before then sitting down and doing the maths myself as I'm a sod for not believing what I'm told), that alone should help.
It would be nice to see if the crank can then be balanced internaly but from what I've read about it I've an idea that this can get costly, but then I've never had to get it done before so don't know for sure, anyone got any recomendations for this service, someone good around the north London area would be ideal?
So that just leaves a quality valve train and a main girdle as the way to go, so that's where the money gets spent, the rest of it all looks sweet so it's off to Ebay 'a bargin hunting we go!

 

[Jac Mac]

Sorry Stuart, I meant did you also have the crank that came out of the 360/361 block,

Jac Mac

 

[Jac Mac]

Stuart,

As the 428 is the only FE that has external balance and the 410 which uses the same stroke does not, it stands to reason that by using lighter pistons & rods you should have no problems with internal balance.

As you seem to be OK with the prep work involved with shot peen etc I suggest that you look at the 400m/351m rod [ 6.58" c to c , 2.311"/0.975" pin dia's weighs about 850g in stock form{ same as 428 scj} ]. With this rod you could use a piston with 1.600" pin height and acheive a 1.65 rod ratio at 3.98" stroke. The rods are pretty tough, I had them in a 4" stroke Windsor that saw 8k on occasions. When it finally broke the rods were still in one piece in spite of being asked to operate at some weird angles. With this 4" stroke you really need to keep the rpm down for any decent engine life.

Jac Mac

 

[StuartB]

Jac, I'm not sure how close it'll work out but it's got to be there or there abouts, maybe It'll work out that it all has to go on a diet to try and help it along as much as possible, I'll see how it goes.
The 400M rod at a 2.3107" bearing is a possible but it's quite a cut on the FEs 2.4384", it works out as a bigger cut to the crank than going 40 thou (at 2.397") so there's no gain to be had.
I think if I were looking to go for that length of rod just to get that kind of rod ratio it would be just as well to use the FE 'long rod' as at 6.54" there's nothing in it (as far as piston deck height) to the 400M rod and as all of these rods are steel and the beam is about the same, the FE 'long rod' would get the vote for me.
The FE long rods I've got here average around 730 grams so would then allow a weight shave at the counterweights, now there's a thought......
I wonder what the weight saving on a set of the lower deck height (around 1.6" to the 410s 1.687") pistons would gain me?
This is good stuff, keep it comming mate!

 

[Doug S.]

Ford's 400M still lives!?!?

As you seem to be OK with the prep work involved with shot peen etc I suggest that you look at the 400m/351m rod [ 6.58" c to c , 2.311"/0.975" pin dia's weighs about 850g in stock form{ same as 428 scj} ].Jac Mac

Jac, I thought it ironic you should mention that red-headed stepchild of Ford's 335 series, the 400M. For most Fordophiles the 351M/400M are useless for much other than a boat anchor, but Team 33 competed in this year's Engine Masters competition on Tuesday with a 400M with CHI heads. It seems that it didn't score very high, but a combined score of 999 was more than I ever expected a 400M to achieve--peak HP was 618 and peak TQ was 585. It literally beat the pants off the only SBC I saw in the 5 days of competition, which scored a combined number of 825 (there was a mention of some oil intrusion, though). I drove a full size Ford with a 351M for years and thought it quite competent, so when I saw the SBC's poor performance I thought "Aah--sweet revenge!!"

It seems that the 400M wasn't dead after all, just "hibernating".

Doug

 

[Kevin M]

Stuart,

The big problem with high RPMs on a center oiler FE is the oil system. With the right mods, 6,000 RPM on a 410 should be OK.

Mods would be as follows:

Drill oil passage from pump to filter to 7/16” and chamfer. Chamfer and enlarge passage to main gallery. Remove plug at rear center of block above cam boss and drill out the obstruction in the main gallery. Install .090” screw-in restrictors in the passages to the rockers. (These can be ordered from Ford Racing USA).

Run a High-Volume oil pump with that, and you should be in good shape.

Hope this helps,

Kevin

 

[Hammer]

I also think the 410 will work fine!, do the oiling mods. I wouldn't use the long rods from the 360, they aren't as beefy as the shorter 6.488 rods.....the 360 rods are strong, but not for high RPM. AND, your 360 WILL not be steel, ALL 360 cranks are the same as the rest. It's the 361 that was Steel, and those ONLY came in big trucks and such. if your 360 has a cast iron timing cover, than it is the 361, but I'm sure it has an alum. cover right?

I've heard alot of sucess w/ the Erson roller rockers, but make sure they have the end stands.

BTW a Holley #90 jet also forks for the oil restriction to the rockers

 

[StuartB]

Well, it turns out that the 410 shares exactly the same balance as the early (pre 10Nov'`68) 428s.
I've managed to get a copy of the original Ford blueprint for the 428 flexplate so it will be in balance anyway if used with the standard 427 (not Le Man) rods and factory 410 pistons.
Even the factory 410 and 428 pistons are the same weight, so that just leaves me to add the 428s counter weight into possition on my flywheel/flexplate and jobs a good 'en!
Oil mods are on the list and a set of roller rockers and stands are on the're way.
Happy days!