Why not MEL instead of FE for FT Purposes?
Posted: Wed 29. Sep 2010, 12:54
Note: Complete or part of old conversation copied from the archives and brought back to you by admin. The line below shows the original date of the post. New replies can be added if desired.
April 21 2005 at 7:14 AM
No score for this post gary477 (Login gary477)
from IP address 216.47.188.33
_____________________________________________________
Why did Ford choose the FE over the MEL for medium truck and industrial engines? Compared to the FE, the MEL has more of everything you want in such an engine - more water jacketing, thicker crank, more bearing area. They would have " plankheads " in their medium and heavy trucks if they used the MEL. Consider the history of using Lincoln engines in Ford trucks - the 337 E series flathead and the Lincoln Y-block. Maybe they didnt want to call the engine series MELT.
April 21 2005 at 7:14 AM
No score for this post gary477 (Login gary477)
from IP address 216.47.188.33
_____________________________________________________
Why did Ford choose the FE over the MEL for medium truck and industrial engines? Compared to the FE, the MEL has more of everything you want in such an engine - more water jacketing, thicker crank, more bearing area. They would have " plankheads " in their medium and heavy trucks if they used the MEL. Consider the history of using Lincoln engines in Ford trucks - the 337 E series flathead and the Lincoln Y-block. Maybe they didnt want to call the engine series MELT.