SCORE! Or as our southern friends say, "GGGGGGGOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAALLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!"

Heber City, UT (15 mins outside of Park City- basically it's in the mountains)

55 Effie

Actually their were 2 cars I believe were 54 or 55 Vics(rusty) a pile of about 6 intake manifolds of which at least 2 were 4 bbls a pile of scrap metal that at least 1 partial engine could be seen. Someone had removed the pan and timing cover and taken the crank out of it somehow misplacing the main caps. It had been rebuilt at some point in its life because I lifted up a valve cover, and it had new springs and was very clean inside.

I actually went there because the guy had also had some guns that they found in the back of a Caddy. Somewhere around 70 or 80 of them.

I just lucked into the crankshaft, and I bought a 4bbl intake from the guy that bought the scrap pile, and the pile of intakes. I paid $25 to the guy for the 4bbl intake, which I really need one from a 256 instead. The crankshaft you won't believe that I paid $20 for it with the bearings plus tax and 13% buyers premium. It's out getting the mains and rear seal/oil slinger ground right now.

You're probably right Charlie. I just thought I'd ask...

Heber City, UT (15 mins outside of Park City- basically it's in the mountains)

55 Effie

That means there were three engines and some spare parts.


Lawrenceville, GA

You need to be careful what you mention on a Y Block forum.... Anything you want to share?

Heber City, UT (15 mins outside of Park City- basically it's in the mountains)

55 Effie

I'm actually doing the build for a customer. I could have tried to talk him into going with a larger engine to begin with, but he really wanted to utilize the parts he had from the truck.

The heads have been ported amd slightly larger valves are being utilized. It's been a while since I've worked on it, but I'm thinking it was 351W valves and boss 351 or boss 302 exhaust valves being used. I was more worried about the overall length so I don't have to mess with the geometry so much.

The stroker was the easiest way I saw of utilizing what he had and getting at least a few more cubes and more compression out of it.

I had been searching for a crank for quite a while, and everyone I found wanted a lot of money for a stock crank, so now that I've found the crank I can continue on.

As a side note the auction I went to, the guy had a literal ton of stock Y block parts.

Maybe you want to rethink the 2.78 rear?  It would go a long ways in nullifying the torque characteristics of your engine.

Mike, located in the Siskiyou mountains, Southern, OR 292 powered 1946 Ford 1/2 ton, '62 Mercury Meteor, '55 Country Squire (parting out), '64 Falcon, '54 Ford 600 tractor.

the 144 is kind of an orphan also, since most people go straight to the 200 swap. The only place that I could find 144 pistons a couple years ago was Kanter. They had all sizes up to 060 over, I think from Egge.



My machinist looked a little puzzled as to why I wanted rebuild the 144, but I just wanted to keep it original. Its great around town but not really a highway cruiser. A good Y-block stroker with a 2.78 rear end would be though!

I know you can't save them all, but I'm tryin anyway!

While I haven’t done a small bore Y stroker, the prospects of one are interesting.  Valve sizes and/or valve lift would be a limitation but beyond that, it does help to use up a small bore block.  And as Mike brings up, the torque values would be much higher as a result in the increase in air/fuel velocity.  I’ve a stack of 272 blocks sitting here and the thought has crossed my mind more than once to simply add stroker cranks to these to use up the blocks.  Rough math for a +060 over 272 using an offset ground 272/292 crankshaft would be 297 cubic inches.

 

So for 13bravo, I’d say go for it and keep us posted.  Sounds like a reasonably straight forward engine build.  Compression ratio also improves by lieu of the increase in cubic inches which helps both the torque and the fuel economy department.  I’ve a +020 over 272 in my ’55 and while it runs good, I suspect your 270” combination would be slightly better in the fuel economy department as well as having an improved throttle response in the lower rpm band simply due to the increase in stroke.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

That could be a torquey little engine.  Sounds like a fun project .  Better than the 239.

Mike, located in the Siskiyou mountains, Southern, OR 292 powered 1946 Ford 1/2 ton, '62 Mercury Meteor, '55 Country Squire (parting out), '64 Falcon, '54 Ford 600 tractor.