1960 Mel Rebuild Question

[halloran]

Hello everyone, my name is Nick and I am a new member of the website! I am currently restoring a 1960 Lincoln Premiere that has this very strange, very unique 430 engine and I have a slight issue with it that maybe someone can shed some light on. Currently, I started to press on the harmonic balancer/pulley assembly and noticed that it presses too far onto the crank by about a 1/4". I have changed NOTHING on the engine. Same pulley, same vane style power steering pump (new pressed seals of course). I know that the balancer is going on too far because the rest of the belts line up perfectly on the water pump and generator.

So I guess my main question is whether or not I can just get a little longer crank bolt to bottom out on the inside snout of the crank at the EXACT distance I need the harmonic balancer to travel as I press it in. So basically as the bolt bottoms out on the inside of the crank, the balancer would stop at the same time at the exact distance I need it to keep it in line with the rest of the pulleys. Is this a good idea? Does anyone know the exact crank bolt dimensions I could compare mine against to make sure I even have the correct OEM factory bolt?

Thanks for any input!

[congo]

Hi Nick,

My MPC says that bolt should be 5/8"-18 x 1 7/8" long. There's also a washer but I'm not sure how thick it is (1/16, maybe?). I'd be afraid of the balancer shifting if it isn't snugged up against the PS pump, though.

Did you send your PS pump out to get rebuilt? If you did, is it possible they sent you one back from a different year? I think they changed in 61. Somebody else on this board might know more.

[halloran]

Is the 1 7/8" bolt length the total length including the thickness of the head or is that from under the head and just the length of the thread? I never had the PS rebuilt but I did replace the front and rear seals as well as the main rubber gasket. At first I didn't have the front seal all the way in which was causing the balancer to slightly rub against that metal seal but I got a new seal and was doubly sure to press it all the way in that way that floating shaft would not leave any gaps on either end. You can see from the picture below what happens if you don't press the seal all the way in to the front of the PS pump. Keep in mind this is from just two hand rotations of the crankshaft...

[keithol]

The harmonic balancer must be pulled all the way in against the pump drive or everything will work loose and wear out . Its been several years since I worked on mine , so I don't remember for sure but I think there may be a spacer between. Possibly it was left out at a previous timing chain replacement or something like that. I have seen engines run with pulleys out of line several times without anyone noticing. Or is there a possibility the ring rolled away and you didn't see it ?

[halloran]

Well after much research I need someone to tell me what's wrong here. I was sent a harmonic balancer from the damper doctor and the inside shaft length is almost 3/32" shorter than my original damper which came off the car. The damper I received has an inside shaft length of 1.5660" while my original damper has an inside shaft length of 1.6550". This is what I believe is causing my issue with belt alignment. The new damper has a COME-6316B stamped on it while my original damper has an EDJ/EDG-6316B stamped on it. Attached are some pictures of my damper next to the damper I received. My damper has a slight taper in the front while the original is completely flat. The rear of my damper is flat while the one I received has a slight ridge around it.

This is the new damper on left next to my original damper on right.

This is the front of the new damper.

This is the front of my original damper off the car. As you can see it has a slight taper.

This is the rear of the new damper.

Another shot of the rear of the new damper.

This is the back of my original damper off the car.

Another shot of the rear of the stock damper

[halloran]

Holy moly still no information out there on what the deal is between these two pulleys? Was one maybe off a Mercury and the other from a Lincoln? Can anyone shed light on this at all?

[Partsetal]

EDG-6316-B is the Engineering No. for B9SZ-6312-A which was used before 2-1-60, and C0ME-6316-B is the Engineering No. for C0SZ-6312-A used from 2-1-60.

[halloran]

Thank you so much for this information that helps out a whole bunch! I do know my block is a 1959 engine so that's probably why there are some discrepancies between the crank pulleys. I sent both pulleys back to Lincoln Land to get the issue remedied and this information will help me inform Al as to what and why there is a difference in the damper. Thanks so much again!

[VidyBidneth]

I might have to rebuild several 1960 430 V8s for Continental Mark Vs. Has anyone used rebuilt engines from this company that's often on ebay?

http://barnetthighperformance.com/engin ... 2-lincoln/

If they provide engine rebuilds with pistons that provide decent compression better than 7 or 7.5 to 1, then these might be worth considering.

[Shelby#18]

I don't know about that company. But the photos they show are the flat top pistons.
Check out the thread here; viewtopic.php?f=2&t=67
Lots of great info.