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 04-02-2013, 11:01 AM
Ian M Greer's Avatar
Ian M Greer Ian M Greer is offline
Experienced
 
Join Date: Jul 29 2010
Posts: 143
Ian M Greer is on a distinguished road
Default Timing Marks, which is correct?

In looking at building up a replacement correct 390 engine for my M , here is my delema . The original M - engine is long gone and it did not suprize me when I pulled the engine in my car that the engine was a 1964 block . Now looking in the shop manual (62 ) it shows timing marks on the pointer (not on the homonica balancer) . My parts car built seven days before my M uses a pointer system with the actual timing marks on the homonica balancer.The stampings on the block ,bore , stroke etc. all point to it being the correct engine to the car . With the engine being so close in production dates to the M , I wanted to use it to make it period correct (going full concourse ) I also have a friend with a 62 bird using the same pointer with timing marks on the homonica balancer . Would I be correct to use the parts car engine with it's timing mark system system . Was both styles of timing markings used on all 390's in the 62 , 63 era or was one style used on the galaxie , fairlane engines and another used on the bird engines . Confused? , regards Ian M Greer (REMEMBER NOT ALL BIRDS FLY SOUTH)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-02-2013, 02:45 PM
KULTULZ
 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs up

You Sir are more anal than I am...

My hat is off to you and I will search this info.

Now I understand your expertise with the BIRD TRI-POWER setup.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-02-2013, 03:37 PM
KULTULZ
 
Posts: n/a
Post

It seems the production date break (before-after) was 4/1/1963 (1960/1964 FORD MPC).

This also coincides with the FEAD (Front End Accessory Drive) change(s) regarding the water pump style (ALT or GEN).

Does this help?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-02-2013, 04:30 PM
Ian M Greer's Avatar
Ian M Greer Ian M Greer is offline
Experienced
 
Join Date: Jul 29 2010
Posts: 143
Ian M Greer is on a distinguished road
Default

Gray , my production dates on my cars are : parts car 63 ht -Oct 23/62 and the M landau is Oct 30/62 . I lean towards the markings on the homonica balancer being correct to the 4/1/63 dating you have found. I know right now on E-Bay under 1963 galaxie there is a homonica balancer listed C3AZ 6312 E stating it's for a galaxie , but looking it up in the Ford Bible it also applies to the m - 6 pack bird. The only problem with the pictures and write up is it doesn't show the Ford part# on the box . It has timing marks on the homonica balancer . I have previuosly bought a homonica balancer with timing marks on it but still question if I was correct or not . But with the date you show ,I think I am correct . (p/s thanks for the quick responce , Ian M Greer ) I do lean to concours , basically in respect I can not justify modifiying a limited production car ( any model) knowing the highest value for your car is stock . But I look at all the efforts put into these cars modified or not with the greatest of respect.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-25-2013, 05:44 AM
KULTULZ
 
Posts: n/a
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian M Greer View Post

I do lean to concours , basically in respect I can not justify modifiying a limited production car ( any model) knowing the highest value for your car is stock . But I look at all the efforts put into these cars modified or not with the greatest of respect.
And I respect and agree with your opinion. Mine is that it is OK to modify if the modification(s) do not prevent the car from being returned to OEM fairly easily. And I have boxes of take-off parts to back my position...
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 01:04 AM.

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.