View Single Post
  #6  
Old 09-22-2017, 08:26 PM
simplyconnected's Avatar
simplyconnected simplyconnected is offline
Slow Typist
 
Join Date: May 26 2009
Posts: 7,160
simplyconnected is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sidewalkman View Post
...if youre putting any kind of power in front of a COM transmission you are begging for the tail shaft to blow off...
I wonder if all the owners of Bulldozers that came with C-O-M transmissions are aware of this.

I am not trying to dissuade anyone from using a C-6 because it IS a beefier trans BUT ...as with most things in life, this improvement comes with an added cost and this isn't a racing application. The C-6 requires more HP to run than the C-O-M, making it less efficient. Efficiency isn't talked about very much but it is important.

430 MEL Bulldozers came out in '58 for the T-Bird, producing the highest torque of any Ford engine of the time. They were married with C-O-M transmissions over many car lines very successfully. I don't hear complaints about their tail shafts. (Just say'n.)

Unless you're pulling stumps or racing, many 'factory' transmissions worked just fine before 1966 came along.

If this 390 is a truck engine (TE, not FE), I would get rid of the heads that came with small, truck, intake valves. This is where Edelbrock offers a very attractive aluminum alternative that is 'gasohol ready'. - Dave
__________________
My latest project:
CLICK HERE to see my custom hydraulic roller 390 FE build.

"We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
--Lee Iacocca
Reply With Quote