Newb w/ '66 F100
- srm351
- Airman
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu 2. Jul 2020, 11:28
- Gender: male
- Music instruments you're playing: 4-string bass, bass ukulele, baritone ukulele, concert ukulele
- Location: Medical Lake, WA USA
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
I'm not an engineer but I feel like you'd be destroying motor/trans mounts or u-joints long before you'd have to worry about cracking the bell housing. With 5 bell housing bolts, each bolt carries 20% of the load and with 4, 25%. That's inconsequential in my opinion as long as you're using quality bolts. If they're torqued correctly, the load should still be spread evenly across the mating surfaces for the most part.
This reminds me of when I first got into the fox Mustang ('79-'93) scene and "experts" were warning that the OEM 4-lug wheels/hubs weren't adequate for elevated performance levels and a 5 lug conversion was the only way to go. They were eventually proved wrong because the cars just aren't that heavy. My point is that I don't think a loaded F-250 is going to create the kind of stress loads that would cause problems with one less bolt holding the engine and trans together. An F-800? Yeah, that might be concerning.
This reminds me of when I first got into the fox Mustang ('79-'93) scene and "experts" were warning that the OEM 4-lug wheels/hubs weren't adequate for elevated performance levels and a 5 lug conversion was the only way to go. They were eventually proved wrong because the cars just aren't that heavy. My point is that I don't think a loaded F-250 is going to create the kind of stress loads that would cause problems with one less bolt holding the engine and trans together. An F-800? Yeah, that might be concerning.
-
- Technical Sergeant
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
- Gender: male
- Location: Waco, Texas
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
I am ok with 5 bolts. I was talking about only running 4 like yours has. Yours has the dowl about 4" outside the nearest bolt. Lincoln might have seen an issue with the 5 bolt automatic transmissions. In 1966 the 462 received a sixth bolt below the starter. This was done by casting a bolt on ear that housed the sixth bolt below the starter.
Inline with the Mustang analogy a man told me he ran a four speed Ford Toploader behind a 4 bolt MEL for 15 years without issue.
Inline with the Mustang analogy a man told me he ran a four speed Ford Toploader behind a 4 bolt MEL for 15 years without issue.
- srm351
- Airman
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu 2. Jul 2020, 11:28
- Gender: male
- Music instruments you're playing: 4-string bass, bass ukulele, baritone ukulele, concert ukulele
- Location: Medical Lake, WA USA
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
I have run both actually. I was using a 70's Motorcraft starter but found a good deal on a Powermaster unit and switched to that. Unfortunately, the Powermaster doesn't have any better clearance in this application than the OEM starter did. It just created it's own set of clearance issues and I'm still running the passenger side exhaust manifold spacers to clear the starter mounting position on the FE bellhousing.
The only way I see the mini-starter having a possible advantage is by using a center dump Mercury ramhorn style manifold and those are hard to come by in my experience. Going out on a limb, I think the FT bellhousing may have the starter in the same position as the MEL bellhousings since I've read about people swapping MELs into super duty trucks, but I could be mistaken.
The only way I see the mini-starter having a possible advantage is by using a center dump Mercury ramhorn style manifold and those are hard to come by in my experience. Going out on a limb, I think the FT bellhousing may have the starter in the same position as the MEL bellhousings since I've read about people swapping MELs into super duty trucks, but I could be mistaken.
-
- Technical Sergeant
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
- Gender: male
- Location: Waco, Texas
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
FT is the same pattern but bulges out to fit the 15" flywheel. That moves the starter out an inch.
I don't have my MEL stuff in front of me. I was wondering why the manifold and starter didn't work like in 59. I bet the 65 manifolds dump at more of an angle than the 59.
I don't have my MEL stuff in front of me. I was wondering why the manifold and starter didn't work like in 59. I bet the 65 manifolds dump at more of an angle than the 59.
-
- Technical Sergeant
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
- Gender: male
- Location: Waco, Texas
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
Stewart,
I've been looking at exhaust manifolds trying to find your issue to see if I can avoid it. My 59 575XXXX manifolds are scrap. The 65 likely has the C2VE casting. If found an Ebay ad advertising new C6VE castings that APPEAR to be the same. as the C2. What castings do you have?
I've been looking at exhaust manifolds trying to find your issue to see if I can avoid it. My 59 575XXXX manifolds are scrap. The 65 likely has the C2VE casting. If found an Ebay ad advertising new C6VE castings that APPEAR to be the same. as the C2. What castings do you have?
- srm351
- Airman
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu 2. Jul 2020, 11:28
- Gender: male
- Music instruments you're playing: 4-string bass, bass ukulele, baritone ukulele, concert ukulele
- Location: Medical Lake, WA USA
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
I have the C2 castings as well but the passenger side has spacers between the manifold and head to clear the starter.
I can't imagine how it would work with the FE bellhousing otherwise.
I can't imagine how it would work with the FE bellhousing otherwise.
-
- Technical Sergeant
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
- Gender: male
- Location: Waco, Texas
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
Two people have told me they ground off the ear and ran it with 4 bellhousing bolts. I'll bet using an early right hand MEL Lincoln manifold was one detail they left out. Or they ran the Edsel E475 exhaust.
Thank's, for getting the casting number.
By chance do you have the larger diameter FT bellhousing? I can see that starter position being in the way of everything but center dump exhaust.
Thank's, for getting the casting number.
By chance do you have the larger diameter FT bellhousing? I can see that starter position being in the way of everything but center dump exhaust.
-
- Technical Sergeant
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
- Gender: male
- Location: Waco, Texas
Re: Newb w/ '66 F100
I dug out some old parts and figured out why your starter side exhaust has a spacer. The B9 exhaust manifold I had dumped exactly like the C2 manifold. The difference is the 58-60 used the old style starter without the abendex. The old starter continued until 63 or so till the abendex hump appeard. With the starter already tucked closer to the block the newer style starter clears the 61-68 MEL engines. The motors are the same diameter.srm351 wrote: ↑Tue 30. Nov 2021, 12:50I have run both actually. I was using a 70's Motorcraft starter but found a good deal on a Powermaster unit and switched to that. Unfortunately, the Powermaster doesn't have any better clearance in this application than the OEM starter did. It just created it's own set of clearance issues and I'm still running the passenger side exhaust manifold spacers to clear the starter mounting position on the FE bellhousing.
The only way I see the mini-starter having a possible advantage is by using a center dump Mercury ramhorn style manifold and those are hard to come by in my experience. Going out on a limb, I think the FT bellhousing may have the starter in the same position as the MEL bellhousings since I've read about people swapping MELs into super duty trucks, but I could be mistaken.
EDIT: I have 4 more photos that are too big to attach. When I figure out how to cut them down I'll post.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests