![]() I think people see something that they can't explain and conjure up loosely-run assembly line practices where they just did whatever they wanted to. I have my doubts about that as Ford had to meet emissions compliance and powertrain combinations or configurations had to be certified for that model year. Not that they didn't exist, but it's not the sort of minutia I follow.Īlso, there are a lot of people who write about this practice of Ford using leftover parts from previous -and sometimes upcomming- model years. I don't know anything about a police interceptor version of the Mercury 410. The CJ head, even the earliest version, had a lowriser port. There is no such thing as a MR/CJ head of any vintage. There's not some huge difference between the 428 cranks other than balancing to account for the weight differences in the rotating and reciprocating weights. There were 1UA (CJ) and 1UB(SCJ) cranks but not before 1968 production. It would be the "go to" crank for all 410s and the passenger car 428s. This list can help you sort out block #s:Ī 1U crank is just a garden variety 428 crank. ![]() This thread shows a good picture of a non cross bolt and a cross bolt block: There were some 406s produced with the cross bolts, or the undrilled bosses on the block rails all have the same basic block part number with various engineering revisions C3AE so at time of production shortages other blocks could be substitutedĪnother odd Ford production anomaly is that there were apparently some 427 service/marine/truck engines made without the cross bolts: I had to repost this it showed up in the wrong window. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |