PDA

View Full Version : fuel pump woes


65cobra03
01-26-2009, 11:49 AM
Hi
When i bought my 60 conv / 430 it had an electric fuel pump installed
& would not run on the mech pump I put a brand new mech pump on & it ran on it for a very short while. I then pulled the pump rod & found it was not an original rod I installed an original (new) rod which was a little over 1/8 longer than the homemade one i took out The car ran fine on it for about 300 mi & then puked I am assuming the centric on the cam has worn beyond it's spec's I thought about adding a spot of weld either to the rod or the pump arm. Has anyone with a 430 run into this scenario It runs fine with the electric but i would like to have both
BEN

KULTULZ
01-27-2009, 10:38 AM
When i bought my 60 conv / 430 it had an electric fuel pump installed & would not run on the mech pump. I put a brand new mech pump on & it ran on it for a very short while. I then pulled the pump rod & found it was not an original rod I installed an original (new) rod which was a little over 1/8 longer than the homemade one i took out. The car ran fine on it for about 300 mi & then puked I am assuming the centric on the cam has worn beyond it's spec's.

I thought about adding a spot of weld either to the rod or the pump arm. Has anyone with a 430 run into this scenario. It runs fine with the electric but i would like to have both

BEN

The overall length of the pushrod is critical-

Jason Bare

Frequent Contributor
Member # 2384

posted August 19, 2004 07:38 AM
________________________________________
Yesterday I found a company that professionally rebuilds old componets (fuel pumps, relays etc) and asked them if they could supply me with the proper length of the fuel pump push rods. So here are the results for all.

1958-1963 430CID up to 01 Jan 1963 4.875 inches

1963-1965 430CID after 01 Jan 1963 4.812 inches

1966-1967 462CID 4.812 inches

Hope this info can help anybody else out in the future

You are first going to have to ascertain you have the correct rod and then that the one you found did no damage to the eccentric (most likely homemade).

Then you can perform a fuel pump pressure and delivery test to make sure the pump is working correctly. There is a quality rebuilder of these pumps on the LCOC and I will get you his name if needed. Did you keep the origional pump?

bcomo
01-27-2009, 01:57 PM
The measurement of 4.875 is correct for the 59-60 430.
The diameter is 3/8" A photo of a NOS pushrod is below.

Notice that the bottom of the pushrod has a brass tip. This was meant to keep the eccentric from wearing, since it was easier to change the rod rather than the eccentric. I don't know whether that was changed in later production

Hope that helps in addition.

http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z93/christina_timee/pushrod-1.jpg

65cobra03
01-27-2009, 05:44 PM
Hi
The fuel pump is brand new & came from Larry's thunderbirds part's
The push rod came from classique cars unlimited. It has the bronze tip & supposedly was n.o.s I did not check the length I am assuming these vendors shipped the correct parts Today i pulled the fuel inlet line & ran the car to check for pump suction It is barely pulling any vacuum I am assuming the cam is worn enough as not to actuate the pump The new bronze end probaly seated in a wear groove just enough to disable the pump (it did run for about 300 mi) Hassle to benefit ratio tell's me to just use the electric pump This car has air cond an aux coooling fan power steering A lot of taking apart involved to replace the cam IF I COULD FIND ONE Thanks for the quick responses
BEN

tbird430
01-28-2009, 04:13 PM
It is a lot of work to pull off the front accy's on the 430cid motor, the waterpump, timing cover, etc. I'm trying to remember, but didn't the 430's have the fuel pump ecentric BOLT ON to the front of the camshaft?? I don't remember it being actually machined into the end of the camshaft itself? Someone correct me if my mind is slipping here... :rolleyes:

bcomo
01-28-2009, 04:29 PM
It's bolted on to the end of the cam.

Your suction problem may be very simple. Remove the two screws from the top of the fuel pump. Look inside and see if the two flat circular valves are still in their seats. I had a new NOS pump that blew out the top valve. To fix it, just push the valve into the seat and stake it in 3 places with a flat blade screw driver.

KULTULZ
01-29-2009, 06:06 AM
The Service PN for this period MEL fuel pump eccentric is C0SZ 6287-A if anyone is lucky enough to come across one a parts swap.

65cobra03
01-29-2009, 08:23 AM
Hi
Thanks bcomo for the tip on the check valves I checked them out earlier & they are intact I am sure my problem is a worn eccentric
I do get a slight amount of vacuum so the (new) push rod is coming up somewhat I have another new (carter) fuel pump on the shelf I thought of either elongating the mount holes & shoving it down a tad or welding a raised spot on the fuel pump arm. I am kind of a purist & hate to cob stuff I probably will just stick with the electric as it run's fine with it i just hate the whirring noise when not under way If i decide to try the above mod's i will post the result's
BEN

Colo66
01-30-2009, 01:02 PM
I have the same problem with my 60 430 bird. What I have learned is the following;

Fuel Pump Eccentric
59/60 C0SZ-6287-A

Fuel Pump
59/60 B8S-9350-A
60 C0LE-9350-A replaced by B8S-9350-A

Fuel Pump Arm Assy
59/60 B8S-9376-A for B8S-9350-A pump
60 C0SZ-9376-A for C0LE-9350-A pump

Fuel Pump Rod
59/60 "Id by 2 groves opposite end from bronze tip
use with B9LE-6009-A" (service block?)
C1VE-9400-A
59/60 "Use with B9SZ-6009-A only"
Unable to find listing for this block.
C3VY-9400-B
The two listed pump rods are different length; the C1VE-A is shorter (I think) than the C3VY-B. Judging by the fuel pump arm P/N the C1VE-A rod is for the B8S-A pump. I have both rods NOS and can measure them if any one is interested. I am not sure why they list or what the significant difference is in the two listed cylinder blocks other than the B9LE-A is service replacement and the B9SZ-A is factory installed.
If I'm way out in left field with this, please let me know!

tbirds8
01-30-2009, 06:07 PM
I'd say you are in center field. Great advice.

65cobra03
01-30-2009, 11:39 PM
Hi colo66
The rod i bought & installed is marked C1VY9400A on the pkg. I can kick myself for not measuring it b4 installation I am assuming i have the shorter of the 2 could you measure your's & let all of us know the difference in demensions
Thanks BEN

KULTULZ
01-31-2009, 07:05 AM
I have the same problem with my 60 430 bird. What I have learned is the following;

Fuel Pump Eccentric

59/60 C0SZ-6287-A

Fuel Pump

59/60 B8S-9350-A
60 C0LE-9350-A replaced by B8S-9350-A

Fuel Pump Arm Assy

59/60 B8S-9376-A for B8S-9350-A pump
60 C0SZ-9376-A for C0LE-9350-A pump

Fuel Pump Rod

59/60 "Id by 2 groves opposite end from bronze tip
use with B9LE-6009-A" (service block?)
C1VE-9400-A

59/60 "Use with B9SZ-6009-A only"
Unable to find listing for this block.
C3VY-9400-B

(NOTE: B9SZ was most likely replaced by C0SZ 6009-A)

The two listed pump rods are different length; the C1VE-A is shorter (I think) than the C3VY-B. Judging by the fuel pump arm P/N the C1VE-A rod is for the B8S-A pump. I have both rods NOS and can measure them if any one is interested.

I am not sure why they list or what the significant difference is in the two listed cylinder blocks other than the B9LE-A is service replacement and the B9SZ-A is factory installed.

Interesting. Where did you come across this information?

6009 is the Basic PN (Service) for a short block asm. Judging by what you have come across, there was a LINC SHORT (B9LE) and a FORD (BIRD) (B9SZ) short. One would need both the FORD and the LINC-MERC MPC's for this period to find the reason(s) for the differences.

The 58/63 rod length should be the same (1963 saw the 430 re-engineered) (after a major re-design in 1961)

The rods also under went changes, brass tip-oil-lite tip, all stainelss steel.

http://www.hotrodders.com/gallery/data/500/medium/9400_TSB.GIF

Colo66
01-31-2009, 11:07 AM
Hi Ben!
I will measure both rods and post here and I will try and get a pic as well.
Thanks to Kultulz for sharing his information, it is very interesting! It would be interesting to know if the C1VE-A rod superceeded any of the rod(s) listed in TSB-17.
I have an original 1960 Tbird shop manual, a 49-59 Ford MPC and also a 60-64 Ford MPC. I wish I had an obsolete/supercede/interchange parts catalog. By comparing both MPC, this forum, 58-60 OFS, Alan Tast book on Thunderbirds, and actual NOS parts, I arrived at my earlier post. The next step is to measure the the eccentric travel, the fuel pump arm travel along with the rod length to prove my theory. The block P/N reference came from the fuel pump rod listing, 9400, 49-59 Ford MPC. The B9SZ-6009-A block assy is not listed in either the 49-59 MPC or the 60-64 MPC. Just the B9LE-6009-A for 59 and C0SZ-6009-A for 60. There is the possibility that there was a mistype in the B9LE part number and should read B9SZ, but I would think that would be remote. I don't think the differences in the blocks has much to do with the different rods but rather a change in fuel pumps as the fuel pump rocker arm are different between the two years. Again, its curious to note that the C0LE-A arm was replaced by earlier B8S-A without a reference to the fuel pump rod. As a foot note, the timing chain cover P/N is the same for both years, B9SZ-6019-A and the long block for 59 (in the 49-59 MPC)has a C0ME-6010-A P/N but for 60 as not replaced.

Colo66
02-01-2009, 01:19 AM
Ok.......I measured my fuel pump rods...The C1VE-A (C1VY-A) rod is 4.881 inches long and the C3VY-C is 4.810. Both are .373 in diameter. The difference is around .070 inch which don't sound like much until you factor in the fuel pump arm ratio. I have the B8S-A pump and, just a rough measurement, came up with a 1.6 ratio (maybe a little more) which would make about 1/8 inch difference in the diaphragm movement between the two rods. I'm not sure what the travel of the pump diaphragm is but it can't be much. That makes sense that the C0LE-A pump was replaced by B8S-A pump (although a little less fuel output) without a recommendation to change fuel pump rods. So, installing a C0LE-A pump on the longer rod may not allow the diaphragm to fully fill the chamber in the fuel pump or may even damage the diaphragm by over stretching. It would be interesting to know what the Lincoln MEL pump rods measure.
Please let me know if I figured something wrong!

KULTULZ
02-01-2009, 02:22 AM
The block P/N reference came from the fuel pump rod listing, 9400, 49-59 Ford MPC. The B9SZ-6009-A block assy is not listed in either the 49-59 MPC or the 60-64 MPC. Just the B9LE-6009-A for 59 and C0SZ-6009-A for 60. There is the possibility that there was a mistype in the B9LE part number and should read B9SZ, but I would think that would be remote. I don't think the differences in the blocks has much to do with the different rods but rather a change in fuel pumps as the fuel pump rocker arm are different between the two years.

Again, its curious to note that the C0LE-A arm was replaced by earlier B8S-A without a reference to the fuel pump rod. As a foot note, the timing chain cover P/N is the same for both years, B9SZ-6019-A and the long block for 59 (in the 49-59 MPC)has a C0ME-6010-A P/N but for 60 as not replaced.

B9LE and B9SZ (C0SZ) 6009 are correct. C0SZ 6009-A would be a 4V short, specific to the 60 BIRD as the 60 LINC/MERC 430 was 2V.

The B9LE is the short used in the LINC (also maybe MERC). B9SZ is BIRD specific so something(s) in the short assembly is different between the two.

The C0LE pump would have been for the 60 LINC 430 2V. It may be FORD had to use the previous 4V pump on the BIRD for proper fuel delivery. This is the only logical explanation I can gather.

Interesting discussion.

GTE427
02-02-2009, 07:12 AM
Dexter,

I have the OSI for the period, list the info you're looking for and I'll look it up for you.

GTE427
02-02-2009, 11:19 AM
I believe the C0LE pump was used on the 60 TBird 430 and this was the Carter fuel pump. The B8S was a AC pump. The TBird pumps all had the inlet line at 9 o'clock, the discharge at 6 o'clock. Lincolns varied the locations of their inlet and discharge locations, Ive seen 9 o'clock inlet, 7 o'clock disch & 11 o'clock inlet, 6 o'clock disch, maybe more variations exist. I can't add anything about the pushrod lenghts or arm assemblies.

I didn't think there were any differences between the TBird Carter and AC fuel pumps, maybe someone can add more as to why the C0LE pump was replaced by the B8S pump.

KULTULZ
02-03-2009, 11:04 AM
Be advised that these pumps under discussion (58/60) are TWO PORT PUMPS. The pump used on the LINC SPECIFIC 430 (61/65) and 462 (66/68) are THREE-PORT. CARTER was the vendor on the THREE PORTS.

Interesting observation on the AC and CARTER though...

The reason(s) for the two vendors is most likely hidden in a 60 TSB.

GTE427
02-03-2009, 11:45 AM
I have seen the Carter Two Port Fuel Pumps, --ports indexed correctly for the TBird-- and both pumps, AC and Carter, are Illustrated in the 1960 Parts and Accessory Catalog dated Nov59. If I can get an image, I'll submit later.

In looking at the 1960 Parts catalog, both pumps --B8S & C0LE-- are listed with the C0LE already being listed as replaced by the B8S pump in the Nov 59 printing. Though this didn't show in the OSI till much later.

Below is a summary of the data from OSI catalogs. All catalogs are the final in their Volume besides the July72 which was an interim issue. I've attached the same info in a text document that's easier read, wouldn't keep the spacing when pasted into this thread.

OSI Catalog Listings FD-7632

Eccentric
B8S-6287-A RB C0SZ-6287-A OSI V3 July 67
B8S-6287-A RB C0SZ-6287-A LM OSI July 66
C0SZ-6287-A NR - OSI V4 Jan 80

Fuel Pump
B8S-9350-A - - Not Mentioned OSI V3 July 67
B8S-9350-A NR - OSI V4 Jan 80
B8SZ-9350-A NR - OSI V4 Jan 80
C0LE-9350-A - - Not Mentioned OSI V3 July 67
C0LE-9350-A RB B8SZ-9350-A OSI V4 July 72
C0LE-9350-A RB B8SZ-9350-A OSI V4 Jan 80

Pump Arm
B8S-9376-A - - Not Mentioned OSI V3 July 67
B8S-9376-A NR - OSI V4 July 72
B8S-9376-A NR - OSI V4 Jan 80
C0SZ-9376-A - - Not Mentioned OSI V3 July 67
C0SZ-9376-A NR - OSI V4 Jan 80

Push Rod
B8S-9400-A RB C1VE-9400-A OSI V2 June 61
B8S-9400-A RB C1VE-9400-A OSI V3 July 67
B8S-9400-A RB C1VE-9400-A LM OSI July 66
C1VE-9400-A RB C1VY-9400-A OSI V4 July 72
C1VE-9400-A RB C1VY-9400-A OSI V4 Jan 80
C3VY-9400-B RB C3VY-9400-C OSI V4 July 72
C3VY-9400-B RB C3VY-9400-C OSI V4 Jan 80

RB=Replaced By
NR=Not Replaced

Year Specific Parts Books FD-7752

Part No Year Engine Source
B8S-6287-A 1959 430 Parts Book 1959
B8S-6287-A 1960 430 Parts Book 1960
B8S-9350-A 1959 430 Parts Book 1959
B8S-9350-A 1960 430 Parts Book 1960
C0LE-9350-A 1960 430 Parts Book 1960 (Replaced by B8S-9350-A)
B8S-9400-A 1959 430 Parts Book 1959 (.375"OD x 4.875"Lg)
B8S-9400-A 1960 430 Parts Book 1960 (.375"OD x 4.875"Lg)

KULTULZ
02-04-2009, 03:06 AM
GREAT RESEARCH AND INFO!

GTE427
02-07-2009, 05:51 PM
See attached pdf from the 1960 Ford Parts and Accessory Catalog for the illustration of pump C0LE-9350-A

Colo66
02-07-2009, 06:25 PM
Thanks GTE427 for the pic!
I have a 49-59 MPC on CD but I can not download the illustration due to copyright. The B8S pump looks like it has a 2 piece arm assy while the C0LE is one piece. I would love to know if there is any difference in length/ratio. I think that would shed light on the different rod length. Does anyone have a C0LE-A pump that we could gently dissect?

KULTULZ
02-09-2009, 07:06 AM
Fuel Pump Diagram From 1958 MERC Shop Manual-

Two Piece Actuating Arm

http://www.hotrodders.com/gallery/data/500/medium/MEL_58_9350.jpg

KULTULZ
02-09-2009, 07:13 AM
Thanks to Kultulz for sharing his information, it is very interesting! It would be interesting to know if the C1VE-A rod superceeded any of the rod(s) listed in TSB-17.

The block P/N reference came from the fuel pump rod listing, 9400, 49-59 Ford MPC. The B9SZ-6009-A block assy is not listed in either the 49-59 MPC or the 60-64 MPC. Just the B9LE-6009-A for 59 and C0SZ-6009-A for 60. There is the possibility that there was a mistype in the B9LE part number and should read B9SZ.

B9LE is LINC specific as C0SZ is FORD (BIRD in this instance) specific. The 59 LINC 430 and 59 BIRD 430 had diffent HP ratings. The 60 LINC went to 2V while the 60 BIRD retained the 4V. This would explain the 6009 part number differences (most likely piston and cam differences).