gregaust

I like the FMX's , they are a good trans . Back in 2004 I put one in a mates car more as an experiment , with a 502 stroker, 550 HP , 580 ftlb.. It's still there to this day  

Ok after putting up with power steer fluid on my driveway (and on the parking spot at work) for too long, I finally ripped the box out and decided to put a seal kit through it. I haven't done one before, so this will be a tutorial on the fly (I will be learning as we go).
 
V8s are a right pain to do, you have to pull out the starter then either jack up the engine (what I did) or pull the RH extractors off to physically remove the box.
 
The Pitman Arm was buggered (sloppy ball joint), so I needed heat and a puller to remove it. Initially, I wanted to save the arm and try and gently heat it with a heat gun to get it to pop.
 
Put some force on it with a hydraulic puller and that launched itself into the wall behind my bench. So I leant down to pick it up, and didn't watch where my hand was going. It landed straight on the tip of the heat gun I was just using. This is the result:
 

 
This is 3 days later.
 
So first casualty and all i've done is strip the one box plus a spare.
 
Sent from my CPH1903 using Tapatalk
 
 

Was a long time ago but I seem to remember they are a different pattern on the block

No the factory bells are only for Pan fill cases . If you were to go an aftermarket bell like a JW they fit up to the pump bolts so fit either case 

No , not at all .. With aluminium heads weight is basically same as an all iron clevo.. 400HP lol , not hard to make 6-700.
Really all you need is a block , by time you get a good set of rods , might as well get a crank as well , Hello 500+ cubes   
 
I use the factory bells and C4's   The factory bells are for Pan fill type cases 

No , not at all .. With aluminium heads weight is basically same as an all iron clevo.. 400HP lol , not hard to make 6-700.
Really all you need is a block , by time you get a good set of rods , might as well get a crank as well , Hello 500+ cubes   
 
I use the factory bells and C4's   The factory bells are for Pan fill type cases 

Start looking at wrecked older Ford trucks Chestnut. Quite a few rocked 460 big blocks.
The first thing you do with a 460 is throw the heads in the bin, cause they are s*** and need so much work to get them to flow properly it's cheaper to buy Ali heads that flow heaps better. So you only need a short motor, then whack on a set of after market heads.
I saw a completely rebuilt 460 on eBay a couple weeks ago for 8 grand, that's a drop in complete motor.

400 is a waste of time. Stroker 51 or 460 if you want cubes.

Sent from my S21 using Tapatalk

i cant find a cheap one greg,but extractors and mounts are readily available for the 460 or a 429  .

Just replied your PM . I did a 400 in a Bronco years ago. It had the Bigblock trans pattern, the block had been drilled and used normal 351 mounts .
 
All this trouble for a 400 , look towards a 460  

Just replied your PM . I did a 400 in a Bronco years ago. It had the Bigblock trans pattern, the block had been drilled and used normal 351 mounts .
 
All this trouble for a 400 , look towards a 460  

Just replied your PM . I did a 400 in a Bronco years ago. It had the Bigblock trans pattern, the block had been drilled and used normal 351 mounts .
 
All this trouble for a 400 , look towards a 460  

Each way works fine. Personally, I always use them.  But, when I do an engine build, the very last thing I do at night is run RTV on the "wall" and stick the gasket on there, then leave the manifold sitting on there overnight. Next day, pull the manifold off, make sure you put a dob of goo on the ends/corners where the gasket meets the head, smear along the entire length, and bolt intake on. Never had a leak. 
The RTV just replaces the gasket, so make sure the bead you run is higher than the original cork would be. As Gregaust has said, and Clevo king has demonstrated.

Thanks heaps👍

Just use the RTV , Sit manifold on the block with gaskets first . Measure the gap . Ensure bead is a little bigger than the gap . Make sure block is spotless clean , then put a light wipe on the block . Then lay your bead .
Then a light wipe on intake . The light wipes ensures the bead takes to itself better .

Just use the RTV , Sit manifold on the block with gaskets first . Measure the gap . Ensure bead is a little bigger than the gap . Make sure block is spotless clean , then put a light wipe on the block . Then lay your bead .
Then a light wipe on intake . The light wipes ensures the bead takes to itself better .

Just use the RTV , Sit manifold on the block with gaskets first . Measure the gap . Ensure bead is a little bigger than the gap . Make sure block is spotless clean , then put a light wipe on the block . Then lay your bead .
Then a light wipe on intake . The light wipes ensures the bead takes to itself better .

My 850hp rated C4 uses BW clutches x5 and the bands from memory.

You're running an FMX aren't you? I can't remember if the kickdown linkage springs in a particular direction (all the way on or all the way off) but I know on a BW auto, if you get the kickdown adjustment wrong, you can either get slippage and early upchange (not enough kickdown) or clunking/thumping into gear and hanging on to gears (too much kickdown) as well as generally goofy shift points.

I know you mentioned manually shifting but the modulation pressure, determined by amount of kickdown (which also affects clutch engagement) is still not going to be right for the amount of throttle input.

Anyone else who's owned a box like yours please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm really a manual guy and I only really played with Mercedes bus/truck autos back in the day. The throttle/kickdown adjustment was critical on them, even ball joint wear on the throttle linkages would affect the shift quality heaps.

Ok edit... After writing all that, I just researched and found that Ford boxes (C4, C6, FMX) have vacuum modulators to control mod pressure. So yes, you can drive it without a kickdown. Some cars/trucks came without one at all. So disregard what I said in your case, but there are boxes out there that rely on precise adjustment of the kickdown cable/linkage to achieve correct modulation (the lever is dual purpose in this case).

Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

The guy i mentioned did a bit of a write up on Ford Forums . I'll find the link and put it here .
 
Edit :- scroll down the page here 
 
ZG Fairlane (PCOTQ WINNER - 3rd QUARTER OF 2020) - Page 9 - Australian Ford Forums

The guy i mentioned did a bit of a write up on Ford Forums . I'll find the link and put it here .
 
Edit :- scroll down the page here 
 
ZG Fairlane (PCOTQ WINNER - 3rd QUARTER OF 2020) - Page 9 - Australian Ford Forums

You bring up a good point there Bear... I just realised that the inside wheel on the XY has gone negative, whereas the XR inside wheel is slightly positive, which is what happens with the Shelby drop. So that tells us that maybe the XY doesn't have that mod, and is relying purely on a severe camber setting.

I think the XY wheel looks flatter because of the aforementioned swaybar issue. I reckon that swaybar is softer than on the XR's. As a result, that wheel has gone so far into compression (starting from a very low ride height already) that the top arm is swinging inwards and tipping the wheel into neg camber, also starting from an extreme 3 degrees neg at static ride height would contribute. Same effect as the Shelby drop, just happening much later in the suspension travel.

I think OP could benefit from slightly lower ride height, stiffer springs, smaller diameter wheels/tyres and softer swaybar.

Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

G'day mate, sweet machine you have there.

For starters, it looks like you've got bigger diameter wheels, so lower profile rubber will need less neg camber than the traditional wheel/tyre combo needs (less sidewall deflection).

So your mate's suggestion of 3 degrees might be good for his setup, but your low profile rubber plus the Shelby drop will actually increase neg camber as more compression comes on, so less static camber is needed. This is the whole point of the mod... So you don't need to dial in so much camber at static height to compensate for poor factory geometry.

Falcon/Mustang/Fairlane geometry is designed to provide a POSITIVE camber curve from factory, inducing "safe" understeer for your average mum and dad driver. The Shelby drop inverts this to a negative camber curve. Has your mate's car had the Shelby drop done?

The bigger wheel diameter will also make the car sit higher than your mate's. Going to a smaller rolling diameter will have it all sitting lower before you even touch the suspension.

I also did the Shelby drop, and it has transformed the car. Mine definitely isn't a track car though (XE wagon V8). A 1" drop is as far as you'd go on the street, but 1.5" or even 2" is not unheard of on race cars. This much of a drop requires wedged spacers under the ball joint mount face, to stop the joint from reaching its limits of articulation and binding/breaking off.

In the photo, despite his car being lower, it actually looks like he's got a similar amount of body roll to yours, despite stiffer springs. Maybe he runs less bar? 28mm on yours is pretty damn stiff. That's easily 4 times as stiff as a factory 6-cyl.

If you're running more swaybar than you have spring, it will turn in nice but will induce more understeer the more lock you wind on. It's really important to match rollbar stiffness with spring rate, and as a guide, you could start from factory settings and increase each as a percentage.

Just keep in mind, as you increase roll bar diameter, the stiffness increases to the power of 4 to that. I just found an online calculator and going from 22 to 28mm tripled the stiffness! Maybe you could go back to a stock one and see how it goes? You might be getting some mid-corner plough-steer with too much bar on there.

King lows aren't really that low. They're probably 1.5" lower than stock (dunno what the rates are). 1" Shelby drop gives 0.5" body drop, so altogether you have 2" based on my assumption about the King lows. If you have a bigger rolling diameter, then you've gone back up a bit from there.

Some guys on here have cut and shut their front bump stop plates to raise the bump stop mounting point, increasing the effective suspension travel. If you go lower, you might have to resort to this. There's one bloke on here who is doing this right now (search recent posts to see).

If it's a track car, you could try cutting a coil or two off to easily and cheaply lower it and increase the spring rate. The rate will increase by the amount, percentage-wise, of how much free length you end up chopping off.

The rear sounds pretty sorted, are you running a swaybar there too? That will make it more tailey especially when putting power on. Whether or not you have one depends on your driving style. I have one and would like to put it on mine.

Never underestimate a sorted leaf setup... They have the right kind of lateral deflection that provides a very controlled and predictable rear-steer effect, which can be very handy at getting the big girl through the tight turns. Just ask Dicky Johnson... He always talked of his XD as being a fabulously balanced racecar. Never go to a Watts link setup... It's a step backwards.

Sent from my CPH1920 using Tapatalk

And just to back up what gregaust said.......listen to the turbo yoda's explanation. 
 
 

For what its worth my father's 351C stroker (383?) has a pair of AFD's on it.
 
The thing is a monster. With a very streetable 230@50 camshaft and 10:1 compression it has 720Nm of torque with a housebrick shaped curve, and peaks out at 502hp around 5000rpm. It's undercarbed, too, with only a modest Holley 750 on top. The dyno bloke reckoned a 900cfm carb and 650hp would be where the combo was at if it he ever wanted the max out of it.
 
It powers a '78 F350 with 4 speed manual and 'vendors overdrive. The whole thing is massive, about 2.5t static weight. He's had 4t on the back of it, too, and the thing just doesn't care.
 
Huge recommendation for the AFD's.
 
 - boingk

Have a look at AFD, CHI, and Scott Cook (SCM) just to compare prices etc......