Early Intake Manifold Score

Discussion of MEL engine related topics only.
User avatar
srm351
Airman basic
Posts: 17
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

Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by srm351 » Thu 27. Aug 2020, 10:55

I've been casually searching for an early intake to replace the original on the '65 430 in my F100 since hood clearance isn't a concern. I finally made it down to the local pick-a-part in the off chance of finding something was shocked to discover a pretty disheveled '58 with the motor already apart and the intake sitting in the back seat! It needs a good deep cleaning but all the fittings came off easy and the threads and sealing surfaces look to be in good shape.

Two questions: Does anyone know if I'll have any fitment issues on the later motor?
Also, does anyone have any tricks for cleaning out the inside of one of these? I plan on sand blasting it but I'm not sure how well that will reach the inner passages.
Attachments
AAA.jpg

User avatar
srm351
Airman basic
Posts: 17
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: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by srm351 » Thu 27. Aug 2020, 11:03

In case anyone is interested, I plan on doing a comparison with the later manifold to document the differences between the two castings. Already it appears that the carburetor mounting pad is roughly 1.25" higher on the early manifold and the ports at the head mating surface are 1.125" x 2.625". Additionally, the temperature sending port and heater port locations are swapped between the two.

Chris430
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
Gender: male
Location: Waco, Texas

Re: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by Chris430 » Fri 28. Aug 2020, 23:36

I have those height measurements saved somewhere. 58-59 4V, 60-62 2V, 63-65 4V and the 462 4V. Don't know what 4V Thunderbird used in 1960. Even started a post on it but abandon it. I think the interest got lost in life's shuffle. I have molds #1-3 of the EDG. I see you have #4. No difference I could see between the EDG's. I posted a couple of questions in your introduction post. Take a look and let me know.
Thank's

User avatar
srm351
Airman basic
Posts: 17
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: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by srm351 » Sat 29. Aug 2020, 21:07

There's an intake on eBay currently supposedly from a '59 T-Bird, however it has a Mercury part number. It looks almost identical but it appears the top of the #6 runner has a slight bump the Lincoln manifold doesn't. Would be interesting to see your measurements.

User avatar
srm351
Airman basic
Posts: 17
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: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by srm351 » Thu 10. Sep 2020, 16:28

Well I got in a hurry, cut corners, and ended up nicking one of the tubes in the original radiator. I barely touched it so the tubes must be paper thin and when I drained it I found that it's full of junk and almost completely plugged anyway. The amazing part is that it always ran cool unless the temp was getting into the high 90's. The local radiator shop doesn't want to bother recoring it because he'd rather sell me a replacement 3 core copper/brass one for $450. :roll: He said a recore is going to be as much or more so I figured it's not worth the money just to keep an original date-coded radiator when the truck isn't all original anyway. I found a Chinese aluminum 3 core on eBay with stamped tanks that might almost pass as a stocker with some black paint for about half the price. We'll see how it fits once it comes in.

Anyway, I figured there was no time like the present to move forward with swapping my '64 "low-rise" intake with the '58 "high-rise" intake I scored recently. Here it is mid tear-down:
7.jpg
Here are a couple pics showing the differences between the two. The later intake sits much lower in the valley of the motor, ports are the same size, but the heater connection and water temp sensor ports are swapped and the threads are different sizes. The highest ports in the '64 intake are about the same height as the lowest ports in the '58 intake. In the lowest ports of the '64, the mixture from the carb has to travel back UP to the intake valves. Crazy.
0.jpg
1.jpg
2.jpg
3.jpg
Not shown is how the later manifold moves the carburetor towards the firewall about an inch to center the primary venturis on the engine. According to literature of the day this was supposed to make the engine more efficient but I feel like it was probably more of a packaging consideration with the lower hoodline of the later cars. Here's the intake removed and cleanup underway:
4.jpg
Lastly a couple mock-up shots just to see how everything will fit. I'm going to run a 1" open spacer on this manifold (the old setup used a 2" four-hole spacer) because in my experience it should improve low- and mid-range torque vs. no spacer or a four-hole spacer.
5.jpg
6.jpg

Chris430
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
Gender: male
Location: Waco, Texas

Re: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by Chris430 » Fri 11. Sep 2020, 06:59

Look's good. Makes me want to get on mine. I also think it was the hood line. Lincoln dropped the hood line for 61 causing the 61 and up starter movement and the squished intake manifold. Look's like an FE thermostat housing was modified to work.

User avatar
srm351
Airman basic
Posts: 17
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: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by srm351 » Sun 18. Oct 2020, 09:23

Chris430 wrote:
Fri 11. Sep 2020, 06:59
Look's good. Makes me want to get on mine. I also think it was the hood line. Lincoln dropped the hood line for 61 causing the 61 and up starter movement and the squished intake manifold. Look's like an FE thermostat housing was modified to work.
It sure doesn't look like a Lincoln thermostat housing however it's a little different that the one on my '66 352. It's aluminum and I think it might be off a later ('70's?) FE.

After living with this swap for a couple weeks (had unplanned downtime to replace a clogged radiator), I can say it's worth the effort if you have the hood clearance. Torque and throttle response are noticeably improved all through the rpm range. Here are a couple fitment differences I encountered:

- The heater hose connection moves from the back to the front of the manifold which worked to my advantage because that's how the original FE motor was plumbed.

- The water temp sensor moves from the front to the back of the manifold and is 1/4" NPT instead of 1/8" NPT. Not an issue in my case because the stock wire still fits and it takes the same replacement sensor as the FE.

- Not only does the carburetor mounting pad move up about 1.25", it also moves forward roughly 1". This could cause issues with linkages and the fuel line and in my case I ended up having to make a new throttle cable bracket.

- The manifold spreader thingy's that the bolts pass through to clamp it to the cylinder head are different sizes. I didn't get the ones off the '58 and the '64s are shorter. About three fit well enough to torque to spec, the rest I welded a bead on one end to make them longer. See pic below. Not my favorite solution but functional since I may never come across the correct parts.

Now pics!

First here's the new intake with the 2" spacer that was on the original manifold.
IMG_20200923_202615693.jpg
Here it is setup with the 1" open spacer I originally planned on running—still waiting on the new radiator here. The open spacer ended up being all top end power and caused soggy throttle response on the low end. The swanky new air cleaner has a flat base for reference. The crusty old chrome air cleaner was about a 1" drop base.
IMG_20200913_192317419.jpg
IMG_20200909_210202436.jpg
Here it is with the 2" four-hole spacer back on it. This is a tall setup (the air cleaner is about 3" high) so it's getting close to the underside of the hood now. This setup has instantaneous throttle response at any rpm, great power everywhere, and I can loaf it down to about 10 mph in high gear. With the old intake setup, 15-20 mph was about as slow as you could go in high gear before it fell on its face. Not that that's important, but it is indicative of the improved efficiency of this setup in my opinion. It's a blast to drive now, merging is fun but it's very easy to overspeed. I'm sure I've surprised a few people with how quickly this beat up old truck pulls away from them now.
IMG_20200923_205705527.jpg
Here's the modification I had to make to bolt the early manifold on using later hardware.
IMG_20201003_221628943.jpg
Finally, one last pic for posterity.
IMG_20200923_205934253.jpg

Chris430
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
Gender: male
Location: Waco, Texas

Re: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by Chris430 » Sun 18. Oct 2020, 14:25

I see you were still able to use the accelerator cable. Have you had a chance to check fuel mileage?

User avatar
srm351
Airman basic
Posts: 17
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: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by srm351 » Mon 19. Oct 2020, 10:33

Chris430 wrote:
Sun 18. Oct 2020, 14:25
I see you were still able to use the accelerator cable. Have you had a chance to check fuel mileage?
Accelerator and choke cables still fit, albeit a little bit of a stretch, but they work. The odometer runs slow but using a GPS program I think I'm getting 14 mpg at best, the average is probably closer to 12 mpg though, and I use the ethanol free premium with a bottle of Lucas or Seafoam top end lubricant at every fill up. I do a mix of in-town and secondary road driving and of course keeping my foot out of it is the best way to extend the range. ;)

Chris430
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue 20. Oct 2015, 13:23
Gender: male
Location: Waco, Texas

Re: Early Intake Manifold Score

Post by Chris430 » Tue 20. Oct 2020, 05:01

Your driving comparision with the tall and short manifolds is appreciated. Especially the hold down information. I've never had open spacers work well down low either on an FE. There should be some information here about the 390/428 GT/CJ camshaft re-grind on the MEL camshaft. I'll be out of state for a year but you are really tempting me to take the 65 430 with me and tinker with it in my spare time.

Post Reply

Return to “MEL Engine General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests