Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I bought a used engine that allegedly came from a '94 pick-up. Block is F4TE 6015 A4-9. I'm in the process of dismantling it and have been amazed at how clean it is inside. Before pulling the pistons and crank I checked the deck clearance. I believe a stock 1994 Ford 351W deck height is 9.503”, compression height is 1.774”, rod is 5.956” and stroke is 3.500” which gives a deck height clearance of .023” in stock form. I'm measuring zero on this engine with some pistons actually .002" above the deck.

My first thought was that this engine is so clean because it was rebuilt not long ago and the block was decked. However, it's bone stock and why would anyone cut it .023" if it just needed to be cleaned up for a rebuild? Bores are beautiful and measuring within spec at 4.002"-4.004". I only measured one rod journal and it measures 2.309". So, the bores and rod journals appear original. So, a rebuild is questionable.

Were there any '94 351W engines built that had a zero deck clearance? I'm confused as hell right now and would appreciate any information that will help clear up this mystery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,141 Posts
Do the pistons appear to be OEM? I ran through the numbers you put up and came up with the same .023 that you did. The F4TE is a roller lifter block, is your block? C9a and D0s were the only short deck blocks I'm aware of. I know that's no help, sorry, I just curious what you have going there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,414 Posts
You'll need precise tools to get a good measurement of deck height. You can get a good approximation using a GOOD 12" dial caliper. Use it to measure the distance from the main bore to the deck... then add half the main bore diameter. This will give you the deck height... or the distance from the crank centerline to the deck.

That being said, it is what it is. If you've got a nice, crack free, standard bore roller block, you're doing well. If the deck turns out to be shorter than you hoped, it's no big deal. People make things work, even when the pistons are sticking 0.020" out of the bore by using extra thick MLS head gaskets.

Good Luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Yes, my block is a roller. Also, I'm trying go figure out how to measure the deck height, compression height and rod length with the tools I have. Pretty basic stuff.
Your deck height would be measured from crankshaft/journal center line to surface deck of where the heads mount? Thoughts? :nerd:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,414 Posts
Yes, but what I'm trying to figure out is how can I measure that in my garage with basic machinist measurement tools.
I just told you how.
You'll need something that will measure down to 0.001"... while reaching out close to 10 inches. You will also need to measure the block's main bore to the same precision. The tool you need is a decent quality 12" dial caliper. It's a pretty basic tool. I have a nice Mitutoyo unit, and use it all the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
I was answering the reply from Diamondback. Didn't see your post until after I answered him. Thanks for your feedback. I've ordered a 12" caliper.
Sure you didn't see his post!! Lol Joke. Keep us posted and let us know what it specs out at. Also, what are your plans for the engine?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I measured everything and it all appears stock - deck height is 9.503" and rods are 5.956”. It seems the pistons are the oddball with a compression height of 1.797". They have the oval dish like originals. Bores and crank have never been touched. So far, I haven’t been able to find any mention of a piston with this compression height but it’s academic as I’ll be changing the pistons anyway.

I’m planning to use Promaxx 9175 heads with 60 cc chambers and 185 runners, a Typhoon intake with a Holley 750, long tube headers. Not sure of compression ratio but shooting for around 9.5. I’m not locked in on the cam yet but I’ve been advised a Howards CL221275 with 270°/278° advertised and 217°/225° @ .050” and 110° LSA would be a good choice. That gives .528”/.533” lift with 1.6 roller rockers.

It’s going into a ’67 Fairlane coupe with a T-5 and an 8” Trac Loc. I had to repair a lot of rust including the driver’s torque box and all new floor pans. I’ve restored English sports cars before but this is my first effort at a muscle car since my ’55 Chevy back in the late ‘60’s. It’ll just be a cruiser with an occasional run up through the gears but no track time.

I tried to post to the SBFTech site but I think that site may be inactive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
My 408 is similar . '94 roller block , 9.7 cr , Ford X cam , X GT40 alum heads, Eddy air gap , long tubes , '67 Ranchero , auto , 9" 3.5 ratio. It made 480 ( engine dyno) on 87 so you should make 400-440 with ease. 10.7 with premium and more cam could go nearer to 500.
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
That’s actually more HP than I’m looking for. I’d be concerned about the T-5 and 8” surviving. I think I’d best keep it around 350 HP. I’m old school and love the sound of a rough idle. I realize that’s harder to achieve with a roller but that’s more important to me than making extreme HP. Typically an engine with a rough idle lacks low end torque and makes its’ HP at high rpm’s where I don’t expect to spend much time. Since this is a cruiser I’m going to want that low end torque. I may have to re-think my game plan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,414 Posts
That’s actually more HP than I’m looking for. I’d be concerned about the T-5 and 8” surviving. I think I’d best keep it around 350 HP. I’m old school and love the sound of a rough idle. I realize that’s harder to achieve with a roller but that’s more important to me than making extreme HP. Typically an engine with a rough idle lacks low end torque and makes its’ HP at high rpm’s where I don’t expect to spend much time. Since this is a cruiser I’m going to want that low end torque. I may have to re-think my game plan.
Look at Comp Cams 'Thumper' series. These have tighter lobe separations, and produce a rougher idle for a given rpm range. You can get a nice, thumpy idle... and still not have to rev it to the moon. They actually make really good midrange power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
Molon Labe ,
If you want more torque , run a small cam and cylinder head. If you want to keep your T5 and 8" alive drive it with respect for their weakness. No dumping the clutch ar "banging" shifts. Shock loading kills parts unless they are up to the power level. 350hp is simply a mild cam and aluminum intake with headers on a 351W.
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,414 Posts
Molon Labe ,
If you want more torque , run a small cam and cylinder head. If you want to keep your T5 and 8" alive drive it with respect for their weakness. No dumping the clutch ar "banging" shifts. Shock loading kills parts unless they are up to the power level. 350hp is simply a mild cam and aluminum intake with headers on a 351W.
Randy
Don't need small heads. Just don't use heads that are WAY oversized. You want plenty of head, just not toooo much. Too small of a head only restricts things. Stock heads on any SBF only serve to kill power... everywhere.

And, yes... Shock loads, slicks and wheel hop are what kill parts. As long as you use standard radials and resist the urge to side step the clutch, you should be fine.

Good Luck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
Yes it would have to be an aftermarket head for sure. The cost of porting a stock 351W head is MORE than the cost of the lowest flowing aluminum head ! The ONLY reason I would use a ported 351W head is when a racing class required it.
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I may have solved the mystery. I believe it's a "Lightning" engine from a '94 F-150. I discovered the "NHRA Technical Specs" and looked up ’94 Ford 351W Truck Engines. This is reported to be the “Bible” for factory specs and it lists two 351W engines for '94 trucks; one at 195 hp and one at 240 hp (the Lightning) and the 240 hp version is zero deck clearance. Both engines had the same pistons with a volume of 18.7 cc but different cams and heads.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top