Gary Lewis

I do have M-block and a 460 starter. And the 460 one came off Huck with an E4OD. But, is there a 460 auto and a 460 manual starter? I don't see that in the MPC, but maybe I'm missing something? Do you think the block plate is stiff enough to hold the starter w/o the tranny?

Bill - I think what you are saying is that when you tighten the torque converter's retaining nuts it pulls the converter forward from the fully-seated position approximately 3/8". And that's valuable info as we noticed that the converter's studs were just coming through the flexplate, so wondered about that.As I think about this, there are two things the spacer needs to do: Put the flexplate in the correct position for the starter to mate with it. And we have two choices of starter - an M-block starter or a 460 starter. The MPC says that the 351M/400 takes a E1TF 11001—BA and the 460 takes a E1TF 11001—CA, so they are two different starters. However, I can't tell you what the difference is. Put the torque converter in the right spot to mate properly with the flexplate and yet be correctly positioned with reference to the transmission's input shaft.The thickness of the flange on the spacer determines where the flexplate is relative to the back of the block/front of the tranny. And the length of the nose of the spacer determines how far forward the torque converter can be pulled. Thinking through it this way has helped. Thanks. As for needing a spacer or not, let me draw it up and let's see what we think.

Thanks, Jonathan. I appreciate the support. And, in the almost light of day, we did make good progress yesterday. Just not as much as I'd planned or hoped for. The adapter is the prototype to Tim's. I drew it up, with the help of many others, and machined it. The fit was perfect and I told Tim about it. He was interested so I sent him the drawings and he made several. I wonder how many he's sold? But it obviously isn't quite right for an E4OD swap. As for how many E4OD's there are behind 400's, I haven't read about any others. So this is may be another first-of-its-kind, and little glitches like this are to be expected. I just didn't see it coming. Hopefully later today I can figure out what the issue is and fix it.

Yes, the flexplates are quite different. Here's the table from several days ago and you can see that the flexplate is .250" different between the two engines. And the end of the crank is .460" different in relationship with the back of the block. Anyway, drawings with measurements will be coming tomorrow.

I'm no expert on this, but I think it's pretty easy to damage a torque converter doing that. I know it's a risk if you don't get it to make the 3 "steps" going onto the trans. I don't know what I'd recommend, but if the torque converter is damaged I'm thinking you'll want to know that before you get the trans installed.Bill - Yes, the M-block used a C6. But the issue is that the M-block's crank ends about 1/4" closer to the block than the 460's. So if you put everything together w/o a spacer to move the flexplate back, there's 1/4" of slop in the system.I want the flexplate to be exactly where the 460's flexplate would have been. That way a 460's starter is a perfect fit. And I want the pilot for the torque converter to end at the same spot as a 460's so there's no slop in the system. Bob - We didn't tighten the bolts any where near enough to damage anything. We were very careful to check that we could turn the engine over, and when we sensed that there was a bind we stopped tightening the bolts. I'll draw it up tomorrow and I think it will be easy to see what I'm talking about.

Ok, you are on the map. In fact, it shows you residing in the house my son and DiL sold about a year ago. And if you like ice cream, the shop across the street is wonderful. As for a truck that hasn't run in years, you are going to find that EVERYTHING is wrong with it and needs repaired. I've pulled several out of fields or yards, and have vowed to never do it again. In fact, unless it is to be parted out, I won't consider a truck that cannot be driven to ascertain what is wrong with it. Saying it another way, the issue is that you will wind up spending far more on such a truck than you would on one that is being driven frequently. At least on the latter you know that basic things like brakes work.

Welcome! Glad you found us! Where's home? We have a member's map (Bullnose Forum/Member's Map) and I'd be happy to put you on the map. As for the 300, it is certainly a truck engine. Lots of low-end torque. Said to pull anything, just not terribly fast. So I don't think you'll go wrong with one of them. But, what are your plans for the truck? How do you plan to use it?

Must remember: Two steps forward and one back is still progress. Two steps forward and one back is still progress. Two steps forward and one back is still progress.......... Ok, so the best laid plans of mice and men. Things didn't go exactly as they were planned. Close, but no cigar. As you know, today was a big day. My brother came down to help me install the engine, transmission, and transfer case and then put the cab back on the truck. Well, we got the engine installed, and here he is guiding it home: And, here he is doing the same on the tranny: Then the "fun" started. We got the transmission lined up and connected to the engine, but it wouldn't pull up tight to the engine w/o binding such that you couldn't turn the engine over. After installing 6" G5 bolts as guides, and a jack stand on a skate, as shown below, we were able to pull the tranny back and inspect things, slide it forward to test, slide it back, ...... We did that drill multiple times until we proved that the adapter is the problem. And, the issue with the adapter is twofold. First, on the front side of it the recess that goes over the rear of the crank wasn't machined cleanly enough. In the pic below you can see that there is a bit of a ledge at the end of the arrow, and that was keeping the front face of the adapter from mating fully with the rear face of the crank. So we put the adapter in the lathe and bored it slightly deeper and cleaner, which allowed it to mate correctly with the back of the crank. But, that still didn't allow the tranny to mate with the engine. So we took more measurements and determined that the projection on the rear of the adapter is at least .175" too long. In other words, we were pushing the torque converter to the rear and into the transmission, therefore binding things. So tomorrow I'm going to spend time accurately measuring the 460 and its flexplate as well as the 400 and its flexplate, and determine what the dimensions of an adapter should be to put everything in its proper position. Then I can modify this adapter to match those dimensions.

Welcome! Glad you joined. Nice project. I hope you will start a build thread so we can follow it. Where's home? We have a member's map (Bullnose Forum/Member's Map) and I'd be happy to add you.

Delco - I'll check into it. Is your experience after the change, meaning today?

I put a later clock in an earlier truck a few years ago. If I remember correctly I pulled the pins out of the connector and plugged each one individually into the mating connector on my truck, and then wrapped that with electrical tape to ensure it didn't unplug.

Last night I was impressed with how much difference it made on this tablet. Then I fired up my laptop and was stunned! WOW! But, I've not made it to the shop with the big monitors.

Several things. First, I had email notifications that you two had posted, but when I came to this thread not only did I not find your posts but I didn't find Jonathan's and another couple of mine. But, after trying a couple of times here they are. And, the extra width is great for documentation and pictures, but is also a problem with text as the eye may lose track of which line you are one as you scroll from side to side. Let's run it this way and see what we think, but I suspect that problem is easily offset by the much larger documentation. Grumpin - I can't wait to see this on my giant monitors in the shop! I may have to back up to use them. Steve - I can't change the message reply box as it is set by Nabble, the forum outfit. But I will ask them if they can. I'd already spotted that. All - Keep your eyes peeled for any anomalies and let me know, please. But, all of you should chime in with your thoughts as well.

Yes, I did change something, as you found out in the other thread.

Yippee! Congrat's! But, before you dial the idle mix screws in perfectly you should at least connect the PCV hose. That's because that is a metered vacuum leak, and you need to account for that air in your idle mix setting. Also, when you connect the vacuum line to the distributor you need to think about which port on the carb to use. If you use the one that has manifold vacuum your idle speed will shoot up due to the extra advance. I recommend you use the one that doesn't have vacuum at idle but does any place above idle. And, I really do not think you should have a vacuum line coming out of the carb and going to that vacuum tree. I am very sure that is not correct for this carb. I'd leave that fitting on the tree capped and if the one on the carb isn't the ported one for the vacuum advance then cap it as well.

If you whip something like this together (even without the dolly) out of some scrap lumber, you can bolt on the engine mounts: https://supermotors.net/getfile/1144582/thumbnail/20190108_1423weight.jpg I don't think changing out the stands for the mounts will be a problem, Steve. We'll just dangle the engine from the shop crane, use the battery-powered impact to remove the stands, and then install the mounts. And with one of us holding the engine it should be easy enough for the other to torque the bolts to 50-70 lb-ft. But thanks for the suggestion.

Well, there are lots of advantages to the new approach. One is that it lets me make the pictures on web pages bigger. As an example, check out Page 56, which hasn't been resized to take advantage of the new real estate, with that of Page 57 which has been. Can you see the difference? The downside is that I have to visit each of those pics and adjust them in the Weebly editor. And, since we don't yet know that this doesn't break something, I'll not do any more than Pg 57 and the whole next section. But, go look at the wiring diagrams. Zoom in on them and watch while they now fill all of your screen. I'm a happy camper, so I sure hope y'all don't burst my bubble. But, tell me the truth!

This should fix that. Now, by using percentages instead of pixels, we can control how much of the screen is used. So narrow screens show pictures smaller and the text goes way down the page. And wide screens, like this laptop, have wide pictures and the text uses all of the screen's width. On top of that, the website pages themselves are bigger. Documents use more of the screen. I'm wondering why I didn't do this years ago! Just checked out another Ford truck forum for comparison. Wow, there sure is a lot of real estate used for adverts. And even when you have an adblocker turned on that's wasted space.

Several possible problems. One is that you over-torqued the bolts and either bent the cover or split the gasket - or both. Or, that you put the gaskets on with RTV and torqued the bolts down w/o letting the RTV set up. When it is wet it is a lubricant, and gaskets frequently squirt out from under the valve cover. If using RTV I tight down finger tight and let it set overnight. Then torque things down.

And, as a test, I'm going to post a pic in normal mode, meaning with no resizing: Yipes! That's much better/bigger.

Cool! I like the color.

I made a change to the website tonight to put the width at 100% instead of 1000 pixels. I'd like your comments on how this works, but at first blush it seems to utilize the width of my screens much better. And, it seems to now work on my phone (iPhone 10) in portrait mode as well as landscape mode. So, please check it out and let me know.

There are products like Ospho and Rust Check that you paint or spray on and they convert the rust to something that stops the rust. You might try that.

I have a gallon of Ospho so I have been using that on the larger pieces. I have a can of the Rust Check converter (aerosol) I have been using on little parts, both with good results. I will do the bumper with that, and squeeze a little more time out of it. The bumper is showing it's age and starting to peel on the bottom, but it's not terrible...not yet at least. I'll probably throw it on the 4x4 when it get that far, and buy a new one for the 84. Did my drums in Ospho today and will paint them tomorrow. They're barely worn at all, so they'll do just fine. Ha Took a bit of a break from welding my side panels to clean up the garage and make some room. I was getting tired of looking at the rusty drums on the floor, so they became parts of the garage clean up. Mrs. Rembrant and I went hiking along the ocean today (5 miles of rocks) so I've lost some of my garage enthusiasm...lol. I'm glad you and Mrs. Rembrant got out today. That sounds like a lovely hike. The brake drums look good, but will the Ospho or Rust Check do much on the bumper? It didn't seem to have a lot of rust. As for cleaning, I need to take a page from your book and clean before the shop gets into the I-can't-stand-it mess. I really DO need to do that.