I'd spend the winter tearing down my engine and having fun installing all that stuff, and probably bump up the value of my y-block besides.

Did anyone know this kit even existed...?

There is documentation on these kits, even a bulletin from Ford which included the instructions for installing the kit and a flat rate time from which to figure the dealer's mechanic's pay.  I read a long time ago that the kits sold for about $400 in '56.  I have a copy of a letter from Ford to the dealers offering leftover kits for $100.  This may well be one of those $100 kits.

"There was also a 225hp engine option introduced in the later part of the year. In addition, a dealer installed M260 engine kit was released in January 1956. it consisted of a new camshaft, cylinder heads and an intake manifold with two four-barrel Holley carburetors. This was used primarily for stock car racing."

Now come on... Don't tell me you have never heard that...

What is really strange is that the Merc 260 kit did not use the same intake manifold as the Ford 260.  May also have used Carter carbs instead of Holleys.

Regards,

Dennis

One of the reasons why I posted earlier why Ford would offer a kit with new cylinder heads, springs, and keepers, then tell you to use your old valves.  The only reason why would be the valves and retainers are stock components, and the heads, springs, and keepers are special.  Maybe the use of "seasoned" valves are a speed secret, since perhaps they are stabilized from the cyclic mechanical and thermal action.  LOL!!!    

More than likely, one would buy new valves and retainers to install,than re-use the old.

The installation instructions doesn't say anything about the Push Rod Cover being funished either. 

Anyone care to comment?  I'll have to remember to watch the closing minutes of this auction.  I'd imagine the bidding is far from over.

Regards,

Dennis

I read the bulletin again last evening, and it does say to install the included tappet cover and vent (draft tube?), and put the included block off plate on the block after removing the side vent.  I noticed no cover or gasket in the pics, I just didn't want to bring it up and possibly alter the sale in which I have no connection.

John, the sentence is a bit ambiguous and unclear.  In the same sentence it also states "Distributor", however no new distributor is furnished, only components to rework your present distributor.  If "furnished" applies to all the components in the sentence, then why is the word used twice in the same sentence for the "Breather Assembly" and "Plate and Gasket" (but not for Cylinder Heads)? 

Perhaps somewhere a Bill of Material exists.

Since the 8V intake manifold requires one to properly install, I assume one should of been supplied by Ford in the kit.  Perhaps when the next kit surfaces, this can be verified. 

Regards,

Dennis

Oldmics

Back in the '60s I traded for my 2-4 setup, which turned out to be a '56 setup.  I didn't get the whole kit, but got the manifold, carbs, linkage, fuel lines, a '57 air cleaner, and a tappet cover.  At the time I thought it was home made, it is made of about .093 flat plate with the baffles underneath spot welded on, and the fill tube brazed in.  I later found out it was indeed the factory cover, probably an interim piece until tooling could be made to stamp the recessed one.  The setup resides on my '56 Bird now.

Oldmics

The kit was acquired to prove to the Concours T Bird crowd that this kit WAS INDEED SLATED FOR INSTALLATION ONTO THUNDERBIRDS.

For many years there has been contention within certain T Bird groups that the kit was intended for passenger car installation only. 

The mechanics,instructions and parts in the kit prove beyond a doubt that it was also meant for installation on Thunderbirds.   

This kit will never be installed into a car or engine (as long as I own it). 

I became aware of the existance of this kit thru this Forum and saved for a year and a half for this auction.

The plans are to document all of the kits parts,figure out all of the unusual "race" items not before seen and understand their role within the kit for historical information purposes.

The kits camshaft has already been reverse engineered.It was obtained and "Cam Doctored" over the past summer from the original owner for analysis.

I have since had a "clone" camshaft ground from Dema Elgin that is now installed into my most recent 312 short block.Thanks to Dennis K for all of his help to create the "clone".

While not a hi lift device,you might be pretty surprised at the specs and timing issues intended on this cam.

Still waiting for my Mummert heads (John-you out there ? ) to compleat my engines assembly and installation into my T Bird.

Once the T Bird folks allow the dual quad 56 T Bird as a legal Concours vehicle-my job is done and I will probably sell the kit.

In my collection,I have multiple parts contained within the kit that I have adquired over the years.

There were some interesting bidders including the prominent "Museum of American Speed" attempting to acquire the kit.

Now all that I need is a N.O.S. 56 Mercury M 260 kit !

O.K.-words out,flame suit on

Oldmics

Congratulations!  Never in my wildest dreams would I have thought of your reason for buying it.  My thoughts were in the direction of someone buying the kit, building a clone '56 NASCAR car, and selling it for about $120,000 with a brand new, unfired, 260 in it.

Oldmics.  Congratulations on your acquisition.  In looking at the bidding detail for the last 22 seconds, the kit went up in value by almost $2000.  That’s some serious bidding going on.  One things for sure, once you document the kit and get the information you require, the kit in its unmolested form is still resalable to the same persons that were interested in it this time.  And with a little bit more publicity and more interest being generated, could possibly even bring a profit.

I’ll be interested in whether the intake will work with a standard valley cover or not.  Gut feel says it will work with the standard cover though.  Also interested in what the head casting numbers are on the cylinder heads that are included in this kit.

Congratulations on your purchase Oldmics!

On the other hand, I beleive the original post said it supplied ECZ-C heads (if my seniliism isnt kicking in) which means it was the medium sized valve heads which would be correct for a 56 application.

Ha.Ha, billy, not this time!!!! Regardless of peoples interest in it, from a bolt it all on and use it view, was a lot of money, but as a "kit" probably worth it. The only parts i would like, would be the 2 carbs, i,m happy one of our guys got it!.

WISHING YOU ALL A MERRY XMAS AND Y BLOCK NEW YEAR!!

Congratulations on this purchase! Definately a super rare score.

Rono

John, i agree with your observations and also add i noticed the 2 screw in core plugs beneath the intake were not obvious also, why would they not be there. But as we agree its a parts time capsule and great to see. regards bill.

Excellent observations.

There are some mysterys about the parts in the kit.

Exactly one of the things to probe is the use of the 55 style diaphragm.I already know that in the "kit" there is a special distributor advance spring retainer pin that creates the particular distributor advance rate.

Once I have it in hand and analysed I will post on my findings.

Oldmics

We're waiting with baited breath for your observations.  I am interested in the camshaft specs, have you posted them anywhere here or in YBM?  I'm interested to see if it is the same as the one I have in my '57 Bird, bought from a Ford dealer as a B7A-C, but it isn't a 290 degree cam.  It has B7A-C hand stamped on the back of the rear journal.  Gordon Payne told me the hand stamped ones were service cams.  I have a theory that when I bought this cam, all the leftover performance cams got sold as "C" cams, figuring most customers (me included) would never know the difference. 

Dennis K has made me aware of two different cams that BOTH bear the same Service Part #

 of B7A-6250-C

You are already aware of the 290 version.That is engineering part # EDB 6250-D.That is the Phase 1 blower cam.The other is engineering part # EDB-6250-E which is the Phase 2 blower cam.

Sounds to me like you have the Phase 2 blower cam which is 302 duration with .295 lift.

The "kits" cam is a B6A-6250-E sporting engineering part# EDB-6250-B.

I do have the cam info on it and will send it to you.

Oldmics

My cam is 270 degrees at running clearance, is neither of the cams you mention.  Also, running it at  .020 and .025 clearance, per the B7A-C spec, is noisy.  It sounds and runs best at .014 and .016.  That's why I felt that Ford was putting all their performance Y cams in one basket and calling them all B7A-C.

    John, Interesting on the clearance numbers. I found EXACTLY the same thing on the Engle reproduction, and can't believe the clearance ramps are that close between Ford and Engle 50 years later. Appearantly the motors want even more duration than those cams!

John,

"270 deg at running clearance", please clarify what the running clearances are that you measured 270 deg., .020/.025, .014/.016, or ??? 

Also what are the lobe lifts?

Thanks.

Regards,

Dennis

I believe the readings were at .014-.016.  Timing 16-74, 73-17.  Valve lift with 1.54 rockers, In .426, Ex .405.  Duration @ .050 is 230.  It doesn't resemble any Y cam that I'm aware of.  The 33 degrees of overlap seems rather small compared to the factory specs for blower cams with over 75 degrees. 

Is the cam installed straight up or did you use any advance/retard ?

Oldmics

I didn't degree the cam in, but from the specs it indicates it is in the "split overlap" position, which means I probably used a 2 degree advance key originally, and chain wear has returned it to it's straight up position.

Take a look at ECZ-A  and tell me if you think that could be Hoosiers cam?

I have one on my desk this moment and at .050 it measures 231 duration.

Pretty close on all numbers for a coincidence ???

I"m beginning to think Hoosiers correct in his assumption that there are a bunch of B7A preformance cams grouped together and sold over the counter.

Oldmics

I think this thread is diverging into the 285 hp and S/C camshaft thread on the Racing page.

LOL!!!

The ECZ-A cam converts into a B6A-6250-C service part number.  This part number also shows up in the 1949-1957 Police Interceptor Parts List as a 1956 312 Fordomatic application.  It is also mentioned in the Eickman Y-Block Book.

The specs are 20-70-72-18 checked at .014/.017 .013/.016.  This figures into 270 deg with 38 deg overlap.  I assume the lobe lift is .264".

The numbers do appear to be quite close.

Perhaps when they packaged the cam, the wrong one was packaged?

John, when did you purchase this cam and do you recall what part number was on the package or on the camshaft itself?

Regards,

Dennis

We've discussed this off-line, but if you look at PSL #426, it somewhat states just that.  Note the description used is "High Performance Engines", not "Supercharger" engines.  It appears in these PSL's when it applied specifically to the 300 hp S/C engine, it stated "Supercharger".  If it applied to 312 8V (and sometimes including Supercharger) the description used was "High Performance Engines". 

It's a bit strange that Ford waited until May 1959 to tell the dealers the 290 deg EDB-D S/C cam was superceeded with the 302 deg EDB-E S/C cam.  

It is my opinion that PSL#426 may be the directive that superceeded the "mystery" 285 hp cam with the EDB-E/B7A-C S/C cam.  This may explain why many believe the 285 hp cam and blower cam are one and the same, according to PSL #426 they are.  Of course it states the P&A (service part) number remains the same.  However, I don't recall anyone ever coming up with an actual Ford part number for the original 285 hp camshaft.

Unfortunately, the superceeded cam information or engineering part number was not included in this PSL, and to confuse matters the same Service Part number (B7A-6250-C) was retained. 

Regards,

Dennis

I would have purchased this cam in the mid-'60s sometime.  I do remember that on the tube was printed (stamped) EDB-6250-?, don't remember the suffix letter.  That was crossed out and B7A-C hand printed on the tube.  The back of the cam is stamped by hand, probably with individual stamps, B7A-C.  I looks like the specs for the B6A-C closely match mine.  My cam has over 20,000 miles on it, and my checking proceedure could be flawed, so the specs could be slightly distorted.  I would expect some lobe nose wear, so lift on mine may be slightly lower.  Oldmics, do the cam doctor specs for the kit cam come close to what mine are?

The cam in the kit (kinda like Cat in the Hat ) is speced at

I/O=22*@.015

I/C=58*@.015                 ACTUAL MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FROM CAMSHAFT ARE THE SAME

E/O=66*@.015

E/C=14*@.015   --------------  EXCEPT FOR E/C WHICH ACTUALLY MEASURES  9*@.015

SPECED DURATION IS 260

Measured duration is 212@.050 and 261 @.015

I dont believe this is Hoosiers cam in his 56 T Bird.

Oldmics

Here is a scan from my 1961 edition Canadian parts book. It uses the word high performance customer demand

marv

It is my opinion that PSL#426 may be the directive that superceeded the "mystery" 285 hp cam with the EDB-E/B7A-C S/C cam.  This may explain why many believe the 285 hp cam and blower cam are one and the same, according to PSL #426 they are.  Of course it states the P&A (service part) number remains the same.  However, I don't recall anyone ever coming up with an actual Ford part number for the original 285 hp camshaft.

Dennis, Perhaps this was issued when a second (or Third) run of cams was ordered or manufactured. The Canadian letter indicates customer demand. That makes me wonder why the customers didn't simply turn to the aftermarket for performance Cams.

One could around and around on this.  The one thing I noticed in PSL-426 was use of the term "High Performance Engines" and not "Supercharged Engines". 

The awareness of a high lift cam is indicated in the 1957 Ford Supercharger Shop Manual, in PSL-348 dated 12 Jun 57, PSL-358 dated 10 Oct 57, and TSB-253 dated 4 Mar 57.  From the info in these documents, they appear to all refer to the 290 deg EDB-D, not the 302 deg EDB-E cam.      

Perhaps feedback was being received from customers and dealerships questioning the different B7A-C cam specs and part number suffix change from D to E, and PSL-426 was issued to clarify this change.  It's also possible earlier dated information was released, just no one in this circle has discovered it yet.   

It's interesting the Canadian Parts Catalogue indicates "customer demand".  The US parts book that I have does not state this for the B7A-C cam, but does include all the other description.

Perhaps the aftermarket wasn't used because there wasn't a comparable cam available, or perhaps it had to do with being legal in a particular class.  In 1961 or earlier, what aftermarket cam supplier catalogued a cam with 290 deg and .450" lift?  I wonder what the definition of "customer demand" is?  I wonder how many B7A-6250-C EDB-D and EDB-E cams were actually sold by Ford?  Was this the hot rodders cam of choice or did most back then run Isky, Clay Smith, Engle, or even stock regrinds in their Y-block.     

It is interesting how additional bits of information surfaces on this subject of the Ford high performance and supercharged camshafts. 

Regards,

Dennis

Strange that they would close the exhaust that early.  That cuts the running duration down to 255*.  The lobe separation is 113, which is good, and with only 31* overlap, it would idle pretty smoothly.

Dennis:

My take on PSL#426 being issued late in game (1959) is that new camshaft was required for the new B8C-6500-C lifters being released for replacement to reduce camshaft lobe wear PSL 424 April 23, 1959. These are hardenable iron whereas the previous EAA6500D were steel. There are other PSL's dealing with premature camshaft failures in the "high performance engine"

PSL 426 requires the B8C lifters. My guess is the previous cams EDB-E/B7A-C were mfg for the steel EAA6500D lifters. The camshafts likely were the same specs, just had a different metallurgy from the previous camshaft.

This particular parts catalogue is the only one I have that states "customer demand "  it is not in my 55/56/57 Canadian Catalogue or my US 55/56/57 catalogue. This catalogue is the large three volume  Master Parts Catalogue and the latest issue I have (1961) were the others are 1957 issue. To me customer demand means not a regularly advertised sale item. It does not say special order so stock likely was available at a Canadain depot. Some of our parts books listed special order which would be from a depot in the USA

Re hardenable iron tappets, did you notice the two different part numbers betweens PSL's 424 (B8C-6500-C) and 426 (B8C-6500-A)?  I was not able to find any other info on the B8C-6500-C tappet and wonder if it was a typo? 

Yes, the EAA-D tappet is 5120 steel and the lobe contact surface is carburized and quenched to Rc 58 min. Incidently, the B8C-A tappet is furnace hardened cast iron and the lobe contact surface is hardened to Rc 55 min.  So in theory, the hardenable cast iron tappet is a bit softer.   

The 1957 Ford Police Interceptor parts list, dated Feb 1957,  calls for the B6A-6500-D tappet for the S/C cam and states the EAA-6500-D (steel) tappet is not used with 312 engine with supercharger.  I have no idea what the B6A-D tappet is.  Maybe this part number shows up in an earlier catalogue, or someone may be familiar with it. 

Re camshaft lobe hardness, the EDB-D and EDB-E camshafts were both manufactured from the same material, EAC (M1A11) iron and have the same hardness specification, 40 Scleroscope min., which converts to around 30-31 Rc. There appears to be no design changes to the camshaft lobes, relative to the tappet design change.

The later B7AE-6250 -C (290 deg) and -D (302 deg) camshafts were induction hardened cast iron (EAC then changed to M1A-117-B) and had a lobe hardness of Rc 60-50.  However these camshafts was not released until early 1963, and would be only for service. 

The later induction hardened camshafts appear to also use the B8C-6500-A tappets.      

Regards,

Dennis

BTW, the Lincoln teapot was used on the 312 S/C engine because a variant of a pressurized Lincoln carb had already been developed for a Lincoln turbocharger program that never went into production.  At least that was what was explained to me from a colleague of mine at Ford that worked on the supercharger program in Car Product Engrg back in 1956 - 57. 

Has anyone ever come across Lincoln teapots with the design features used on the 8V carbs, i.e. secondary balance tube, calibration, etc ... .

The issue with the B7A-C (EDB-D) S/C cam being used in the 285 hp engine was the cam wasn't released until Dec 1956.  However the 285 hp engine was allegedly available at the introduction of the 1957 models and discontinued upon the release of the S/C engine which was very late Dec 1956.  It's possible the same or similar cam grind was used, but it would of had an XE part number.   The other thing were the dual valve springs for the 285 hp cam.  I wonder why they weren't offered with the high lift S/C cam?  Perhaps the production heat treated cast iron cam lobe couldn't handle the pressures and the 285 hp cam had a hard face overlay?  Just a guess.       

Regards,

Dennis

      Dennis,   I've heard this also, I beleive from Gordon Payne and/or Hoosier. the F code project was a pretty Rush, rush deal to combat the injected Scrubs and possibly Pontiacs and Chrysler 300's. Industrial espionage was a major deal, Pretty much everbody knew what the other guy was up to. 

Most likely the race shops and a few select dealers had these cars/cams prior to the official release through the parts system.

First, does anyone have a copy of Hot Rod magazine (it may of been another magazine from that period) of an article that may of been written by Don Francisco on a Y-block build up and dyno test doen by Edelbrock from around 1956, or there abouts?  I seem to recall others, particularily Jerry Christenson, referencing it in his YBM column.  If so, I would like to obtain a copy or scan of it to read.

Second, Oldmics and I have been collaborating our research regarding the 1956/57 factory 312 High Performance engines, particularily camshafts, trying to verify the stories about the Isky E2, S/C cams, and the various high performance kits released by Ford and Mercury.  Oldmics recently interviewed Ed Iskenderian, and the info he shared is quite a revelation.  Not to steal Oldmics "find", I'll wait a while to allow him to post his info.  However, Oldmics wasn't concerned how the info got out, as opposed to finding all of the answers.  So hopefully he will chime in.

And yes, Isky also told the inner valve spring story to Oldmics.

Regards,

Dennis

That was probably the article about getting 300 HP from a Y.  Dec.1956 Hot Rod.

I don't know how to scan and email stuff, but I will make a photocopy of the article and mail it to you.  You should have it the first of the week.

Please go ahead and tell the story.I am on the road traveling for a few days and wont have the time to put into a post.

So,if you dont mind doing the legwork please share the story

Hoosier

I have the reprint of that Hot Rod Magazine article.The reprint says the article was written by Racer Brown.

The original HRM article also restricted certain content by editorial policys.The identifying of the camshaft manufactor or their products by name was not allowed.

The reprint tells the whole story in which Isky cams and componets were used thruout the tests.

Oldmics

Did you get the copy of the article?

An interesting counterpoint is the (Car Craft, I think) article done a little earlier where they took a 265 scrub and gave it the same treatment. They started out at about 127hp and got up to 210hp, making excuses all the way. They worked with a scrub 6 builder, Frank somebody, can't remember the last name. McGurk? They give all his info including what he charged to re-grind a scrub cam. They later claimed to magically find another 19hp bringing the scrub up to the same hp/cu in level as a 312 making 271hp

Is the October 24th date suppost to be 1956, not 1955? 

Regards,

Dennis

John,

Yes, thank you for sending it.

Regards,

Dennis

Sorry for the delay, been dealing with snow, computer, etc ... .  More importantly, I first reviewed my complete collection of YBM and documented any reference to Isky E2, M-260, 285 hp, and S/C camshafts or engines, and this could be a whole story in itself.

Re the Ed Iskenderian conversation, here are the key points:

(my comments in parenthesis)

Mercury wanted their own engine and apparently funished an engine to Edelbrock. (Perhaps the one in the HRM article.)

Edelbrock made the intake (I assume this is the M-260 intake),

Hard face cam was necessary, to prevent wiping the lobes because of the amount of lift ground. (Due to the existing case depth) 

500 - 1,000 kits, intake, springs, cam were manufactured.

Isky billed Edelbrock, Edelbrock billed Mercury Div.

5-8 cams per day were ground then delivered to Fran Hernandez and he would ship them east (assume Dearborn)

Based on development, Fran told Isky we don't need the inner spring, just outer spring with flat damper

Later on Gus Davis from H-M said they were breaking tappets from over-reving and had to add an inner spring, used a Pontiac part and had Ford assign a part number to it.  Isky told Gus, I had an inner spring but was told to take it out of the kit.

The E4 is actually a milder cam than the E2, like a 3/4 cam.

The "E" = tested on Edelbrock's dyno.

Heard from the Ford guys that we have a better cam than your E2, from Ionic (Eonic), a fancy cam place in Detroit.  Chuck Daigh went back to Eonic, we don't want your "E2 improved" with your special grind, we want it exactly the same.

The Eonic had longer ramps for higher RPM, but lacked mid range.  Isky never got a hold of one of these cams, I imagine a "softer cam action" for higher RPM.

Did Isky use Ford blanks?  No, I think we bought the stock cam, don't remember where we got the cores from.

Were Ford cams shipped in Isky tubes?  Doesn't remember.  

The Ford kit, think (Don) Sullivan designed it.  Isky heard the intake leaked. (This may of had to do with the valley pan cover clearance issue.  I assume there was the same issue with the M-260 intake?  What about the Edelbrock 8V intake?)  

(Isky) Didn't make any more cams for Ford after the Mercury ones.

Eonic later on made the 427 SOHC cams.

Never talked to Ford or Mercury directly, worked with Edelbrock.

---------------

Questions/Comments:

It appears Ford and Mercury had separate development programs for their race engine kits. In 1956 Ford and Merc did have their own 8V manifolds and camshafts.

Does the M-260 intake have any casting vendor marks?  The M-260 intake visually does appear to look like an Edelbrock.

Does the 56 Ford 260 hp 8V intake have any casting or vendor marks? 

500 - 1,000 kits seems like a large quantity for a race program.  Does anyone know if NASCAR or USAC had minimum build quantities in 1956 or 1957 to be declared "stock"? I think, but not certain, in the 60's 500 units was the number for NASCAR.  However, in 1957 Ford initially built only 100 Supercharged cars (65- 2 Dr., 20-Conv, and 15 T-Birds) to qualify for Daytona.

Does anyone have an original M-260 cam?  If so, are there any identification marks cast or stamped on the cam?  The M-260 does have a Ford part number assigned to it, and the engineering b/p data apparently matches the Isky E2 cam.   

Is it possible Ford or Mercury had a lot of these Isky M-260 cams left over and they were knowingly or unknowningly sold by the Ford dealers as a high-performance or S/C cam and that is where the confusion lies that the 285 hp or S/C cam was an Isky E2? 

I'm assuming the 285 hp cam in reality was designed by Don Sullivan and manufactured for Ford by Eonic.  I am familiar with Eonic, unfortunately they were bought and sold a number of times, and have been out of business for quite some time.  I recall from work many years ago we were able to call them, give them a Ford SK or XE part number and they would look up the grind specs for it.

Perhaps someday a 285 hp cam or at least a part number will show up.  Has anyone ever seen or heard of a bulletin issued for the 285 hp engine kit? 

Regards,

Dennis

Re the 57 Custom 300 and S/C engine.  "Yestertech" asked the very same question when I spoke to him a couple weeks ago.  The motor has been done for quite some time, maybe I should install it in the car, not so much to race it, as the car isn't prepared, but to at least bring it down and "putt around in the pits".  How many years has it it been?  LOL

Regards,

Dennis

Re; the F code.........last time I checked we are not getting younger.

However, to clarify Isky was involved as a tier 2 with Mercury Div and the M260 program, not directly with the Ford Div. 285 hp and S/C programs.  The issue is most of these players are not with us anymore.  Fran Hernandez just passed away last month. However his health was not good for quite a few years.

Regards,

Dennis