Vintage Mustang Forums banner
  • Hey everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part August's Ride of the Month Challenge!
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi All,

I have a '66 A code coupe that had a November '65 scheduled build date, and just pulled the starter off to replace the oil pan (scope creep - replacing front suspension...), and was a bit surprised to see what I think is a '68 part number on my block (see photo), C80E-6015A. Date stamp shows 7F14 (June 14, 1967?).

I'm not surprised its not original. So the question is, what have a got? Pretty sure its a 289 as I've had the valve covers off and saw "289" cast into them.

I know '68 was a transition year from 289s to 302s. My sense is this was an early '68 production year block that could have been used for either 289s or 302s. My dad retired from the Cleveland engine plant, and bought a 302 powered Montego back then because he liked what he was seeing at the plant. I wonder if this is a Cleveland block? I'm certain the heads are from Windsor.
Paint Motor vehicle Automotive exterior Font Tints and shades


Also, in pulling the starter I see some shavings, but the flywheel and starter gear look fine. Is this a concern? And, should I replace that old, heavy and slow turning starter for something new?

Shoe Automotive tire Crankset Hood Helmet
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I see the tri fecta of problems there. It appears you have washers shimming your starter out apparently because it is engaging improperly. So lets begin... washers shimming starter out, ring gear teeth getting ground on, and probably the starter Bendix the part that moves and engages the flywheel has shredded and left some of itself in the bellhousing. There is a manual and an automatic starter with longer or shorter nose cones this will allow different engagement start there and dont pass go,until you clean that mess up... Good Luck!
Sounds like cleaning out the shavings, and a new starter are advised? The starter I pulled has a '76 part number on it, and a '72 part number where the gears are...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
'67 casting date with a '68 casting number would not be original to your '66, so it's a replacement engine no doubt, wether rebuilt or junkyard Salvage who knows. Could even be a garage rebuild out of another car. I'm guessing originally it was bound for use in an early '68 model vehicle.

There is another stamping on a little flat rectangle part of the engine block on the drivers side on the front of the engine towards the bottom of the cylinder head and the top right side (if your standing in front of it) of the timing cover.
If your coil is in the original '66 location, you may have to remove it to see the little pad, and probably scrape/brush some gunk off unless you keep it real tidy.

It is stamped when the engine is assembled. You correctly deciphered the casting date on the block, have a go at that one and you will know the date the engine was completed.

View attachment 853842
Mine is not as well stamped, but I can tell the first character is a "7".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 ·
Before you go out to find a new starter, you may want to read up on this thread: (or one like it)
Thanks for this. I have the C4 auto, so I must need the /3/4" depth unit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #25 ·
A lot can happen in 50 years, so do not assume what it was is what it is.

A lot of sobbing and tears have followed with that assumption.

The 7F14 says 289, not 302. But someone who, in 1976, cracked their block on their 2 year old 302 could have grabbed this block from the salvage yard, tossed the "old" rotating assembly, and put in the "newer" 302 guts. Heck, it could be a stroked 347.

Do you have a flywheel or a flex plate? Do you have, or had, a starter for a flywheel or a starter for a flex plate.

Do you have a block (also called a spacer plate).

A lot of rabbit holes to run, but washers on the starter and shavings in the bell housing (or torque converter cover) cries pay attention now or pay $$ later.
White Hood Light Motor vehicle Green
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
I think I have an oddball.

Here is the measurement from the upper opening:

Blue Wood Line Font Gas


Here is the lower (used different ruler as this is an awkward spot):

Automotive tire Wood Amber Font Tread


And here is the nose of the starter (looks to be approx 2 3/4"):

Wood Gas Metal Auto part Machine


Block plate depth is supposed to be 3/4" or 3/8" and mine seems to be about 1/2" or 5/8" depending on what your supposed to measure (inside or outside depth). Is this an oddball?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #30 ·
ALL SBF with Automatic transmissions take the same starter (Lester 3205/3168).
I get that - just wondering why I don't have either of the two standard depth dimensions. Autos are supposed to be 3/4" depth ring gear with a 4.084 starter registry hole in the block plate (per Powermaster's starter tech bulletin). My hole diameter is 4.084, but the depth is much shallower at about 5/8" (see photos above). When I pulled the starter, there were washers used as shims (about 1/16") in place... I must have an oddball...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
You have another problem it looks like. Is that the bronze bushing that has walked out the end of the starter housing that supports the bendix/armature? If so, then the bendix (aka Starter Drive, thing with the teeth) is wobbling around in there and probably cause a lot of problems. It might have allowed the bendix to walk forward into the ring gear, so someone shimmed it with a washer.

Look at the pics W427 posted. You need a long nose it looks like.

That core (or at least the nose) is probably trash. There is probably more experienced people here than me, but I have rebuilt several starters on a bench (when I wanted to keep the original) and had very good results replacing bearings, bushings, brushes, etc. You just have to do it before the starter has a major failure and destroys something.

View attachment 854121
Thanks for pointing out what should have been obvious to me! I've tapped it back into place. Gear turns ok and on the bench I can't detect any wobble. Probably prudent to get a replacement at the parts store. Ttucky thing is will I have to shim it as well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #43 ·
A 68 casting block should have been made in Brookpark. A C with an F over it would be on the block somewhere.. June 14 67 makes sense for a 68 Engine, it had to be cast, machined, assembled and then shipped to an assembly plant for August… the heads should have a date code in them along with 2V or 4V…
Makes sense. Haven't dug too deeply into it, but the exhaust and I believe Intake have Cleveland foundry marks.

This engine is clearly a mix-master job. Pulling the rocker covers a year or so ago revealed the heads are definitely Windsor foundry - and not even made in the same ; one made June 9 of '66 (date code 6E9), the other made in late '67 (date code 7L16). Fasteners are a similar, and more sad story...

Going to search locally for a starter today, though it seems the engine will not be the long term mill in the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #45 ·
What are your plans for the long term engine? Finding something more correct, building something for performance or crate engine, modern swap or just an engine that's not so mix-match? Just curious.


The casting mark on the block is generally in the lifter valley.
I'd like something more correct, late '65 build. and well running. This thing has been a pain to tune, and I think may have an imbalanced rotating assembly. Check out what a previous owner used for a connecting rod bolt (photo).
Automotive tire Motor vehicle Automotive fuel system Automotive exhaust Automotive exterior

Or, just button this thing up and sell it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #49 ·
So you're saying this block is a late '67 production 289 with a '68 302 casting number for use in a '67 vehicle correct? With that information that seems to make sense to me. I guess either way we were correct in it being a '67 289, not a '68 302.
My sense from post #5 was that this was a Cleveland block.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter · #55 ·
Yep. Cleveland foundry started casting new C8 blocks early.... during the '67 MY production run, and used 1M cranks and C3 rods to produce 289's. Really the only major difference between the 289 and 302 block is the inside cylinder wall extends downward about 1/16" to account for the longer stroke (but shorter rod) of the 302.
So, in therory, if I got together a crank, rods, heads and pistons and such, I could build this into a 302?
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top