Side Oiler, Little Disapointing Dyno Numbers ?

[moore_rb]

Originally Posted by FUNFER2

Can you (and others) explain the side oilers differences and and why ? (not the other FE's listed)

FE's come in 2 flavors- side oilers, and top oilers.

At a glance, I think that all the casting numbers you listed are top oilers.

Side oilers pump oil first to the bottom end of the engine, and then push it up to the top end. Top oiler FE's push the oil up into the top part of the engine first. that's the essential difference.

Side oilers were designed for racing, where long periods of high-RPM operation required fresh oil in the main and rod bearings, in order to keep them well lubricated.

One of the other benefits of the first/earliest side-oilers were the beefier main bearing caps, with the extra bolts that came in from the side of the engine. (some guys see these side bolts on an FE engine, and immediately assume it's a side oiler, but you can find top-oilers that also have the cross-bolted mains).

In other words, all side-oilers use cross bolted mains, but not all cross-bolted FE's are side-oilers

Original, Ford-supplied side oiler blocks are much more rare than top-oilers, and they are getting rarer by the year (this is why they are usually much more expensive than top-oiler blocks)

for a street engine, the side oiler design would still be considered superior (from a lubrication standpoint) for building a long-lasting, and reliable engine (if money was no object, and if you happened to luck out and find a side oiler block that had never been over-bored).

But 99% of street-driven, original casting FE's out there (even heavily hot-rodded ones) are top-oilers.

Visually, Blykins already clued you in above on how to tell the difference: side oilers have a bulge/rib that runs along the driver's side of the block (where the oil flows from the oil pump, to the main bearings), and there is a screw-in plug on the timing cover, at about 5 o'clock.

All the other talk in this thread about "ribs versus no ribs" is about blocks that were originally installed in cars at the factory (no ribs), or "service blocks", which were cast to be used as replacements for damaged engines -

Early service FE blocks (pre-1970) had no ribs, while later service FE blocks (about mid 71-onward) did have ribs. (The ribs are purely visual, and would really only be important to guys who are restoring a car and want it to look "factory correct" )

For some average Joe who who just wants a strong, well built engine, a ribbed service block might be a great start, because the later ribbed blocks should have all the benefits of better foundry techniques, and tighter process control...

That's the VERY "high level" overview.... The conversation will go in 50 different directions when guys start talking about all the merits and demerits of specific casting number series... (at which point my ADD sets in, and I just wander off, looking for guys who want to argue about Ford versus Chevy, versus Mopar...)

[FUNFER2]

I'll get back to you Robert, but this first.

I emailed the guy about the side oiler, and this is my email to him.

"Date: Thu, Jun 8, 2017 2:30 PM

To: tdfrq-6106154240@sale.craigslist.org;

Subject:Ford Fe 427 Side-oiler


Ford never put a side oiler in a 69' Mustang. It's up to you if you want that in your ad, but it's steering people away, as either being naive or trying to sell something that it's not.*


Regards,

Kevin

http://prescott.craigslist.org/pts/6106154240.html "

His reply-

First of all it is a true side-oiler. I can send you pictures to prove it. Second when I bought the motor it came out of the mustang. That's why there are cobra jet heads on it so he could still use his exhaust. Third any ford person would know that they didn't come from factory in a 69 mustang. Use some common sense before sending a stupid email. Thank you.*

My reply-

I did not,.....say that it's not a side oiler, just that they did not come in the 69' Mustang.*


The way you wrote your ad, you make sound like it came fromthe factory in this Mustang !


*If a person does not know the history of these engines, they may beleive you.


So, re-write your ad without,.....saying it came out of a 69' Mustang !

If you don't, then you're a crook.*


Call me what you want, at least I'm honest.*


Good luck.*

Then a final reply after checking his ad-

Ok, this is exactly, what you wrote.

"This originally,.... came out of a 1969 mustang mach 1"*

I would say,.....you're BUSTED !

Anyway, what a jerk.....

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by FUNFER2

I would say,.....you're BUSTED !

Anyway, what a jerk.....

But since you have no intention whatsoever of buying it anyway, you probably should just let him do what he wants. I don't think he appreciates your kindly advice.

[moore_rb]

Originally Posted by FUNFER2

I emailed the guy about the side oiler....

Anyway, what a jerk.....

I told you that guy was shady... You didn't believe me???

No biggie- Someday he'll figure out that the only people out there who would be interested in his engine are going to want to see/hear it run before they make him an honest offer...

Or, he'll sell it to some schmuck who has more money than brains...

[undy]

Was the block sonic checked? Sometimes a 0.030" overbore is too much. IMO, I wouldn't pay 1/2 of what the guy's asking.

[FUNFER2]

There's a lot of replys to get to, but I'm busy for a while and will get to you all as time permits.

Is there anything bad with a service block ?
What are the differences ?
Which is preferd and why ?

[FUNFER2]

I'll mention again, I'm not buying, just looking and learning.

Bench top discussion guys.

[olddog]

I don't remember correctly a great many things. That said, I think I recall that the service blocks from the 70's were drilled for hydraulic lifters. Most of the original factory cars with side oilers were mechanical lifters only and relied on oil splashing up from the crank. Now that might should be "all" or "many" instead of "most." I am certain that the older high performance FE engines had no juice holes for hydraulic lifters and at least some of the newer service blocks did.

Hopefully someone can set this record straight, for me.

I do know that my personal preference would be hydraulic roller lifters regardless what engine I was building. Plenty of people would disagree. Patrick would. He has a love of solid lifter old school cams. I have to admit I too love the sound. I just never loved adjusting them, and when a hydraulic roller gives better power for my rpm range, there is no point, from my perspective. I never liked reving a big inch engine that I had a ton of money in.

[olddog]

I don't see anything wrong with the add. There were some 390 blocks that were cast thick enough to bore that far, and I have read that Ford did overbore 390 blocks to the 428 bore. This fact was disclosed. It is a 428.

I would want to know how thick the walls were. He should have the results of a sonic test done before boring.

[FUNFER2]

I don't think so, as he stated,...."This engine block started life as a 390"

[moore_rb]

Originally Posted by FUNFER2

I don't think so, as he stated,...."This engine block started life as a 390"

That doesn't mean anything. As Olddog stated, a LOT of 428's out there started life using blocks that came from disassembled 390's. If the casting numbers match, and if the block was well tested to ensure it can handle the final bore, then no harm, no foul in my mind...

I'm not sure I would call the final engine a "CobraJet" if the only Cobrajet parts in it are the connecting rods, but hey - What does "CobraJet" mean, anyway...???

"CobraJet" was just a meaningless brand name/trademark that Ford put on stickers, in order to make the Mustang sound sportier (and in order to keep cashing in on the "Cobra" mystique that Ford appropriated from its business relationship with Shelby...)

[olddog]

So what is the criteria to judge by? So if I bore and stroke a 390 block to 428 CID and I disclose that fact, what more can I do. It is the standard 428 bore and stroke. Do you expect it to be advertised as a 390?

If so then I can take a 390 block and drop a 352 crank in it. I believe that is the 360. So I can then advertise this as a 390, since it started life as a 390. Now I would call that dishonest.

To me the only question is how much meat is left in the thinnest part of the thinnest cylinder. There are many 390 blocks that were not cast thick enough to bore that far. Then of the ones that were cast thick enough there can be core shifts that leave one side too thin on one cylinder. My concern would be how well was this tested and verified.

[MKS427]

Not enough details about the engine. That said, 520 hp would be about the best you could get out of that engine set up for pump gas and street duty. That set up would sacrifice low end torque/driveability.
Now if the motor is set up for low end torque, look for a dual plane manifold, top end horsepower would fall. Then torque is the number you would want to look at. Horsepower is a simple calculation: tq x rpm / 5252. 5252 is where every horsepower and torque curve cross each other. Therefore, 480 hp at 5000 rpm is substantially better than 480 hp at 6000 rpm (on identical engines).
FE heads do not flow as well as most modern heads especially aftermarket ( my assumption is that they do not have the physical space internally), so comparing hp per cu in from one engine design to another, is not apples to apples.
Good luck,
Mark

[FUNFER2]

That all just makes it too confusing, both from the factory and the seller.

[FUNFER2]

Side Oiler. 560 HP $18,000

Doesn't matter it's on ebay, won't buy anyway.

I may have to build/buy a 385 series, as the FE's have gotten too expensive.

FORD FE 427 SIDE OILER GALAXIE COBRA FAIRLANE RESTORATION OR CUSTOM BUILD | eBay

[FUNFER2]

Bump.....

[FUNFER2]

Originally Posted by MKS427

Not enough details about the engine. That said, 520 hp would be about the best you could get out of that engine set up for pump gas and street duty. That set up would sacrifice low end torque/driveability.
Now if the motor is set up for low end torque, look for a dual plane manifold, top end horsepower would fall. Then torque is the number you would want to look at. Horsepower is a simple calculation: tq x rpm / 5252. 5252 is where every horsepower and torque curve cross each other. Therefore, 480 hp at 5000 rpm is substantially better than 480 hp at 6000 rpm (on identical engines).
FE heads do not flow as well as most modern heads especially aftermarket ( my assumption is that they do not have the physical space internally), so comparing hp per cu in from one engine design to another, is not apples to apples.
Good luck,
Mark

Thanks Mark, you've outlined several good answers to my questions. It's great that you're willing to discuss them. I agree that torque is what gets the car going.

What engine do you have ?

[cycleguy55]

Over the course of my 60+ years and over 40 years working / in business I have had many people come to me seeking advice, recommendations or answers - which I have readily given - it is my inherent nature to do so. I get great satisfaction from helping others and improving their ability to succeed - personally and professionally.

There have been a handful of people over those years who have come seeking advice or counsel - then completely ignored it. While I don't expect everyone to blindly accept my advice or follow everything I say, there comes a point when I realize they're not interested in getting better or improving, they're only wasting my time. It is at that point where my door is no longer open to them. YMMV

[patrickt]

For some reason, I'm remembering back to when I was a teenager and wanted to buy a reasonably nice stereo system. I was up in New York for some reason and took the opportunity to visit 47th Street Photo. They had, without a doubt, the best prices I'd ever seen. You had to wait in line, of which there were five or six, before you could get up to the front where the owners sat behind a tall counter. I patiently waited in line, made it to the counter, the guy asked how he could help me, and I said "I have a question about the Pioneer Model blah, blah, blah." He immediately replied "if you've got questions, go somewhere else, if you're ready to buy, come back here. NEXT!" I think that's exactly what I ended up doing, too.

[DanEC]

I've always been amazed at how available Brent is on this forum to provide responses, items of interest, build logs, etc - and manage to run a business and have time for a family. I don't see any others able to make themselves that available. Anyone seen or heard from David Kee in the last few years (decade)? Not sure if he is on a milk carton or not.