This will take you to the main site where there is history, technical information and other information on these cars.
This takes you back to the main page of the forums.
This is the control panel to change your password, information and preferences on this message board.
Click here if your lost your password or need to register on this message board. You must be a registered user to post. Registration is free.
Search this board for information you need.
Click here to buy cool Squarebirds mechandise.
Click here to support Squarebirds.org. For $20 annually receive 20mBytes webspace, a Squarebirds e-mail address and member's icon on the message board.
  #1  
Old 09-22-2017, 12:23 AM
tiltbed tiltbed is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 8 2017
Posts: 4
tiltbed is on a distinguished road
Default 1970 390 & c6 into a 58 bird

ok,i know it`s been done before but my question is what motor mounts must i use on the 1970 390? it seems like the C6 might be hitting the floor hump. would there be enough room to use the oem 59 mounts? if not what year flat mounts would i have to go with?thanks,Sid....oh and i have a 59 t bird removed the 352 and cruise o matic. nothing wrong with them ...but bigger is better? no? lol
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-22-2017, 02:13 AM
simplyconnected's Avatar
simplyconnected simplyconnected is offline
Slow Typist
 
Join Date: May 26 2009
Posts: 7,068
simplyconnected is on a distinguished road
Default

Truthfully, if I had a 3-speed C-O-M that fit your 390, why not use it? You're going from one three-speed to another.

The later 390s added an 'extra' motor mount but they are backward compatible.

A word of caution... Ford put 390s in everything including Mustangs. That means it came in a variety of trans mountings. That's why I say, if your C-O-M fits, hey why not use it because all the hookup will fit as well. - 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
  #3  
Old 09-22-2017, 11:17 AM
tiltbed tiltbed is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 8 2017
Posts: 4
tiltbed is on a distinguished road
Default 390 in a 59 bird

yes the com is good but i have already done extensive work to the C6,plus it and the 390 were free. Just trying to figure out what other members had used in way of motor mounts for this instalation. year, "C" or flat mounts ect. It is better in my mind to buy the right thing first. Plus the C6 is suppose to be an improvement seeing that it came out of a 1970 F250.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-22-2017, 11:32 AM
sidewalkman's Avatar
sidewalkman sidewalkman is offline
Experienced
 
Join Date: Sep 14 2015
Posts: 291
sidewalkman is on a distinguished road
Default

I respect Daves opinions and knowledge, but if youre putting any kind of power in front of a COM transmission you are begging for the tail shaft to blow off. That's the weak link. A C6 is a far beefier trans, so do it!
__________________
Scott
South Delta, BC, Canada
1960 White T-Bird, PS, PB that's it
Red Leather Interior!
www.squarebirds.org/users/sidewalkman
Thunderbird Registry #61266
http://www.squarebirds.org/picture_g...ibrary/trl.htm
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-22-2017, 11:33 AM
jopizz's Avatar
jopizz jopizz is offline
Excellent Auto Mechanic for over 40 years.
 
Join Date: Nov 23 2009
Posts: 4,748
jopizz is on a distinguished road
Default

The 390 and 352 blocks are the same. You should use the stock 1959 motor mount.

John
__________________
John Pizzi - Squarebirds Administrator
1959 Convertible

Thunderbird Registry #36223
jopizz@verizon.net 856-779-9695

http://www.squarebirds.org/picture_gallery/TechnicalResourceLibrary/trl.htm
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-22-2017, 07:26 PM
simplyconnected's Avatar
simplyconnected simplyconnected is offline
Slow Typist
 
Join Date: May 26 2009
Posts: 7,068
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
  #7  
Old 09-23-2017, 12:11 PM
pbf777 pbf777 is offline
Experienced
 
Join Date: Jan 9 2016
Posts: 158
pbf777 is on a distinguished road
Default

Please note that the terminology: "Cruise-O-Matic", describes several different transmission units in the Ford production line.
Although often similar in design, each unit was engineered for it's unique application.

For example, I believe the 352 FE engine of this period generally received the "MX" version or "medium size" units of the C.O.M. transmission; but, the 430 MEL's received the "Lincoln Multi-Drive" or sometimes referred to as "Lincoln" or "Large-Case" units , only titled as the C.O.M. in T-Bird applications as they are Fords not Lincolns.

Generally, I believe the noted failure of these C.O.M.s was/is the development of cracks in the rear bulkhead of the cast iron gear case. This lead(s) to loss of hydraulic pressure and function failure. The practice of abruptly shifting from the drive position to reverse or vis-a-versa, particularly with the wheels in motion (poor driving technique) is generally attributed to the cause of this failure. This failure seems to be less prevalent in the "Large-Case" units. I don't know if this actually results in the tailshaft flying off, but that event does happen for a number of other reasons, and not unique to C.O.M.s.

Scott.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-23-2017, 03:10 PM
tiltbed tiltbed is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 8 2017
Posts: 4
tiltbed is on a distinguished road
Smile 70 390 and c6 into a 59 bird

i thanks all for their replies,but i think it`s getting off topic. my orignal question was:::: do i use the oem "C" mounts or go with the flatter (lowering engine aprox 1 1/2") this would allow the C6 to ride below the tunnel. I believe the ford truck had the flatter mounts. And yes the 390 would have sufficent power to turn the C6. (fresh rebuild,cam,headers,HEI GM ingnition ect.) thanks again to all...need mount year,part# or what ever. hope to be a one time deal.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-23-2017, 04:55 PM
Woobie Woobie is offline
Apprentice
 
Join Date: Apr 1 2016
Posts: 42
Woobie is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiltbed View Post
...but bigger is better? no? lol
If the 390 is an F250 390...your looking at about a 250hp rating and around 8.5 compression

bigger than the 352 though !!

If not mistaken, Mr. Jopizz answered your question on motor mounts

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-25-2017, 11:36 AM
RustyNCa RustyNCa is offline
Super-Experienced
 
Join Date: May 31 2007
Posts: 1,300
RustyNCa is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiltbed View Post
yes the com is good but i have already done extensive work to the C6,plus it and the 390 were free. Just trying to figure out what other members had used in way of motor mounts for this instalation. year, "C" or flat mounts ect. It is better in my mind to buy the right thing first. Plus the C6 is suppose to be an improvement seeing that it came out of a 1970 F250.
I think the issue with the lower mount would be the steering linkage? I was noticing yesterday while under my 58, that now has a 390/C6 combo in it, that the center links are rubbing the oil pan.

I don't remember anymore what motor mounts I used back when I swapped in the 390.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 PM.

Driving, racing or working on cars can be hazardous. The procedures and advice on this website including the message board are opinion only. Squarebirds.org and its webmasters and contributors do not guarantee the correctness of the advice and procedures. The Squarebirds.org and its webmasters assume no liability for any damage, fines, punishment, injury or death resulting from following these procedures or advice. If you do not have the skills or tools to repair your car, please consult a professional. By using this site you agree to hold harmless the Squarebirds.org, its authors and its webmasters from any resulting claim and costs that may occur from using the information found on this site.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Any submissions to this site and any post on this site becomes property of Squarebirds.org . The webmasters reserve the right to edit and modify any submissions to this site. All material on this is site is copyrighted by the Squarebirds.org. Reproduction by any means other than for personal use is strictly prohibited. Permission to use material on this site can be obtained by contacting the webmasters. Copyright 2002-2016 by Squarebirds.org.