'58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Results

Discussion of MEL engine related topics only.
User avatar
Theo
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1179
Joined: Sun 21. Dec 2008, 14:10
Gender: male
Location: Berlin / Potsdam in Germany
Contact:

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by Theo » Mon 27. Sep 2010, 05:52

KULTULZ wrote: For instance, the TBIRD only received the hydraulic 352. The solid 352 was discontinued very early in the production year.
Didn't they continue to use solids on Police and light truck vehicles? I'm out of memory.
Best regards
Theo
Admin

User avatar
KULTULZ
Technical Sergeant
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed 12. May 2010, 10:35
Gender: male

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by KULTULZ » Mon 27. Sep 2010, 06:04

The 352 was the basic Police Engine (58-60) while the 361 was also a Police Engine (SP ORDER) (any engine could be included in a Police Package, even six cylinders). I am not sure if FORD kept solids in them. The 1961/ POLICE 390 did have solids.

User avatar
Theo
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1179
Joined: Sun 21. Dec 2008, 14:10
Gender: male
Location: Berlin / Potsdam in Germany
Contact:

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by Theo » Mon 27. Sep 2010, 06:07

KULTULZ wrote: The 1961/ POLICE 390 did have solids.
Maybe I'm confusing them. Thanx Gary.
Best regards
Theo
Admin

User avatar
a58pacer
Airman
Airman
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun 26. Sep 2010, 20:17
Gender: male
Music instruments you're playing: Piano

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by a58pacer » Mon 27. Sep 2010, 16:33

Thanks for the very valuable contribution. 1958 T-bird began production on December 20, 1957, so if the hydraulic tappets had any connection to the transition to as-cast combustion chambers, that will put the machined combustion chamber E400's closer to the region of 80 percent of total production, more-or-less, given the weekly production figures we have.

The International Edsel Club has published complete Service Beacons for 1958, and Technical Service Bulletins (TSB's) for all three model years (1958-60), even the secret ones with restricted distribution to district offices only. I've been through all of them top to bottom, and I have yet to find an Edsel TSB dealing with the design change of the FE cylinder head combustion chamber. However, the camshaft was modified with a revised lobe contour which changes valve overlap, resulting in a smoother and quieter running engine. The number identified as the revised E400 camshaft in Restricted bulletin District number 57-51 dated Dec. 19, 1957 is B8A 6250-B. Service substitution can be made without any other changes to the engine. The production changeover date is identified therein as approximately November 18, 1957 at the Cleveland number 1 engine plant (date code 1-7AS, as I figure it).

The camshaft page in the early loose-leaf Edsel Master Parts Catalog (MPC) was revised Jan. 1, 1958 and it specifies the revised contour B8A 6250-B camshaft as a service replacement part for Edsel E400. The Oct. 1, 1957 MPC page shows the part originally being the B8E 6250-A part number, and MPC's revised to the November revision level contain the same page. The June 1961 Ford OSI shows the B8E part replaced by B9A 6250-A. The July 1967 Ford and L-M consolidated OSI, in turn, shows both the B8A-B and the B9A-A camshaft replaced by C0AZ 6250-A (which also replaced the C0AE-A). The January 1973 Ford and L-M OSI also shows a B8AZ-B also replaced by the C0AZ-A part.

The Master Cross Reference between part numbers and engineering numbers lists B8A 6250-A (E.N. ECC 6250-A) and B8A 6250-A1 (E.N. ECC 6250-B) plus B8E 6250-A (E.N. EDD 6250-A) and B8E 6250-A1 (E.N. EDD 6250-B). What were these -A1 changes? A numeric addition to a suffix generally denotes a minor appearance or supplier change, so the -A's and -A1's are probably equivalent, respectively for each part number prefix. The B8A-A and B8A-A1 were made for solid lifters, while the B8A-B were for hydraulic lifters, and the 1949-1959 Ford MPC verifies that. Since E400's were all hydraulic lifters from the start of production, both B8E-A and B8E-A1 were the early-profile camshafts for hydraulic lifters. I wonder if Ford got hydraulic lifters the same time Edsel got the milder cam? The 1959 B9A 6250-A camshaft lists as Engineering Number B9AE 6250-A. Sounds like all camshafts replaced after July 1961 at the dealerships got the perhaps even tamer 1959 version.

But, of course, the compression ratio is not going to be affected by the camshaft. A change to cylinder head design would have to account for the drop from 1958's 10.5:1 down to 9.6:1 in 1959, since the lower engine remained essentially unchanged.

So doing the same routine for the cylinder head, we find the original Edsel MPC January 1, 1958 revision page lists B8A 6049-A, and that's the same number listed in the Nov. 1, 1957 MPD revision page, and both the Sep. 1, 1957 and July 1, 1958 Master Price and Reference lists. Yet the Master cross reference lists a B8E 6049-A (E.N. EDG 6049-A), a B8A 6049-A (E.N. EDC 6049-D) and a B8A 6049-A1 (E.N. EDC 6049-E). I'm nearly certain the B8E-A (EDG-A) number is for the MEL block. The B8A-A number mixes with B9A-B (E.N. 5752403), which was used in 1959 production up to engine date code 96A (June 1, 1959), after which the B9AE 6049-B cylinder head was used, which took slightly shorter valves. Both of these were subsequently replaced by B9AE 6049-C, which could take either short or long valves and which was, in turn, replaced by B9AZ 6049-G. In 1960, the head part number was C0AE 6049-B (E.N. C0AZ 6049-G).

It's likely the B8A-A cylinder head was used on both E400's and early 352cid's with machined combustion chambers. Casting numbers and dates don't help. I've got two July 1957 cylinder heads off an August 12, 1957 Edsel, and they are both EDC 6049-E, one with a date of 77Y (July 24, 1957), the other 77D(inverted) (July 29, 1957). The only later casting number listed in the books for this particular cylinder head is the 5752403 which was used on 1959 production, and which "mixes with" (indicating exactly equivalent to) the earlier EDC's. Evidently, the only way to distinguish these cylinder heads is by pulling them and inspecting the chambers. I'll bet eventually we will find the changeover date by checking enough cylinder head casting dates and which style of combustion chamber they have.

Steve Christ, in his book "How To Rebuild Big Block Ford Engines," lists the changeover as 90 days after start of production. So if the FE engine started production around July 1, 1957, that would put the changeover around October 1, 1957. Given a two-week lead time between engine assembly and scheduled car assembly date, nearly no Fords would have gotten the machined combustion chambers, since their regular production began October 10, 1957. I suspect that's not the right answer.

Research continues.

gauss
Last edited by a58pacer on Wed 29. Feb 2012, 22:39, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
KULTULZ
Technical Sergeant
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed 12. May 2010, 10:35
Gender: male

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by KULTULZ » Mon 27. Sep 2010, 20:46

:shock: IMPRESSIVE RESEARCH!

Being as the 58 EDSEL had an early introduction, I wonder if 361 assembly began before 332/352 assembly?

Also, the E-475 (410 MEL) was meant for 1957 MERC TPC installation but casting troubles held it's release until later (early 1958 EDSEL release). The 1957 TPC received the LINC 368 instead.

EDSEL has some fascinating history but most of it is not readily available.

User avatar
a58pacer
Airman
Airman
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun 26. Sep 2010, 20:17
Gender: male
Music instruments you're playing: Piano

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by a58pacer » Mon 27. Sep 2010, 21:31

1958 Edsel E400 production would have most definitely had to precede Ford 332/352cid production, since job one was July 15, 1957 for the Edsel, and October 10, 1957 for the 1958 Ford. We can surmise that since pre-production junior series 1958 Edsels exist from April 1957 that E400 pre-production might have started as early as March 1957.

Edsel information is available if one knows where to find it. I have a collection of sources that represents half a lifetime of collecting (I've been at it since 1976). I also regularly research Ford archives stored at various libraries, both private and public.

But I still haven't found anything to tell me exactly when the FE block machined combustion chambers were discontinued.

I realize the FE block is off-topic, but if there is anything I can provide in terms of questions answered regarding the MEL block, please feel free to ask. I have a large FoMoCo library at my fingertips, and a modicum of knowledge that I can provide to answer many questions.

gauss
Last edited by a58pacer on Tue 15. Nov 2011, 15:07, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Theo
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1179
Joined: Sun 21. Dec 2008, 14:10
Gender: male
Location: Berlin / Potsdam in Germany
Contact:

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by Theo » Tue 28. Sep 2010, 03:06

a58pacer wrote:...........I have a collection of sources that represents half a lifetime of collecting (I've been at it since 1976). I also regularly research Ford archives stored at various libraries, both private and public....................

I realize the FE block is off-topic, but if there is anything I can provide in terms of questions answered regarding the MEL block, please feel free to ask. I have a large FoMoCo library at my fingertips, and a modicum of knowledge that I can provide to answer many questions.
Welcome to the forum "a58pacer". Your expertise and educative contribution is much appreciated. Nice reading .
Thanks for joining.
Best regards
Theo
Admin

User avatar
a58pacer
Airman
Airman
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun 26. Sep 2010, 20:17
Gender: male
Music instruments you're playing: Piano

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by a58pacer » Thu 30. Sep 2010, 20:33

It appears that the change from solid to hydraulic tappets may have been totally disconnected from the change from machined to as-cast combustion chambers on the FE engine.

I just got word and photos from a 1958 Edsel Roundup owner that he has in his possession a December 16, 1957-cast cylinder head with machined combustion chambers.

The typical lag from head casting to final scheduled assembly was about two weeks. So that cylinder head may have been originally installed on a car built around January 1, 1958.

We need to collect more information of this nature to really be able to zero in on the changeover from machined to as-cast, but it's now appearing it might have been *very* late 1957 or 1958 when that transition took place.

gauss

Oldmics
Airman basic
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon 13. Apr 2009, 21:36
Gender: male
Music instruments you're playing: banjo

Re: '58 Edsel's 361 (303 HP) Factory Claim Vs. Real Dyno Res

Post by Oldmics » Thu 12. Nov 2015, 09:04

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

AND, I still have those December machined heads! Funny as I read this post for the first time referencing those parts.

Oldmics

Chris430
Airman First Class
Airman First Class
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
Gender: male
Location: Waco, Texas

1958 Ford Police 361

Post by Chris430 » Sun 20. Mar 2016, 16:47

Interesting article with car photos and engine specifications. I have a 332 from a 58 Ranch Wagon with machined chambers in the second link. I have sense learned from the FE forum the shim gaskets are 4cc bore volume.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/th ... iew+Thread

http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/thread/1450741454

Post Reply

Return to “MEL Engine General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest