|
Post by doberdawg on Nov 2, 2014 14:49:39 GMT -5
7 inch spacers Roy, really? Sure that would work. Not in the least safe, not in the least simple, not in the least a bolt in swap as I always, correctly, said could not be done between 1962 MERC METEOR 221 & anything from 63 or later. As I said, you can cut & weld to make anykthing work. What a waste of time by those too afraid to be wrong to not want to see real time of real 62 Merc Meteor 221 compartment next to a 63. Instead they want to change the perameters (I say 62 - they change years) I say Merc They switch cars. Sorry I wasted everybody's time. I expected honesty, integrity, & curiosity. I got UN-knodgable - for the 221 from 62 Meteor to 63 anything - people self proclaimed know it all's switching topic from 62 Meteor to 63 anything to Meteor gurus with Daggenhams in V8's 61 cars, 64 cars, early v late 221'as & - what a joke installing 7 inch plates to make something (be it dangerous to drive) work that should not. What would it take to enable pics to be posted here? Problem would have been solved instantly. Sorry I encountered some bored individuals wanting to be right & closing off the facts & altering them so they could be right. 7 inch welded plates !!!! With an off set that would make my 5 inch problem disappear. That would be the 5 inch difference I mentioned a dozen times with nothing but arguments from those NOT familiar with 62 Meteor 221 mounting. done, finished, point out how wrong I am & pretend you are correct.
|
|
|
Post by roy on Nov 4, 2014 13:49:18 GMT -5
I;m not going to get personal here or attack your mental prowess but, Maybe try & find a hobby, or perhaps join a debating club, you may find like minded people, who have interests like yours. I;m beginning to understand why there is so little traffic here anymore, Oh, and, I;m not looking for a witty reply, cause I doubt I will ever bother looking for any knowledge here.
|
|
|
Post by doberdawg on Nov 4, 2014 16:10:13 GMT -5
No witty reply. I learn a lot from you & others on this site. That said & with the knowledge that I am absolutely totally correct in this thread - does, how ever make me wonder why you - or others - did not want to see pictures. You/they would learn why a few local experts (& me, not an expert) learned convincingly & SURPRISINNGLY that a 62 Meteor 221 will not easily replace a 260/289/302. The picture is So crystal clear.
Roy, why can we NOT post pictures on this site???
|
|
|
Post by w2zero on Nov 4, 2014 19:42:51 GMT -5
I reiterate, the physical outside dimensions of the 221 are the same as the later sbf's. It is a 5 bolt bell and will bolt up to the rest of the early 5 bolt bells. The two engine mount bosses on the sides of the block are six inches apart. The motor mounts are interchangeable with all 62-63 V8 Meteors and all 62-65 Fairlanes with the exception of the top brackets that changed to seven inch spacing later. The modification to adapt a six inch upper bracket to a seven inch block with a piece of quarter inch steel drilled to sandwich between the two is a common and accepted practice amongst many Fairlane and Meteor owners who don't have access to a welder to add an inch to the bracket. Your assertion that the 221 would fall down between the shock towers just doesn't wash. I will include a link to a 62 221 Meteor to illustrate. Same shock towers as the rest of the 62-65 Fairlanes and 63 Meteor. 62 221 meteor for sale www.allcollectorcars.com/for-sale/1962-Mercury-Meteor/1419127/Since this site is no longer paid for by Stu, it doesn't have the same premium features as before, like posting pictures. Bandwidth costs money.
|
|
|
Post by doberdawg on Nov 5, 2014 12:52:24 GMT -5
The shock towers in the 62 meteor are not remotely similar to those in 63 - 65 - not even remotely. The distance between them is MUCH less (MUCH closer together). Discussions are difficult because I speak of Body engine mounts & you keep going back to engines. I don't have the technical vocabulary to play it your way. Correct, the motor would not really fall to the ground, the steering linkage - only - would prevent it. The motor mounts for MY 1962 Merc meteor 221 are NOT the same as, or similar to, 289/302 the latter interferes (blocks) with the oil filter - not possible to use both a filter [considered firewall mount] & the 260 mounts on my 62 Meteor 221.
I have had only 1 221. I have R&R a few dozen 260 & 289/302 engines & still have a dozen or so old used 260/289 mounts all the same, all will fit all 260/289s I have experienced, but NOT a 62 221.
Thanks for your heart felt - be it incorrect - opinions on MY 62 Meteor 221. & for the record it came new in the 62 Meteor I have. The car has a total of 35000 verified original miles. I do not believe any part was ever changed except oil filter.
Thanks for explaining why we can not post pictures.
|
|
|
Post by w2zero on Nov 5, 2014 16:50:05 GMT -5
And here is a video of a 62 Meteor 221. Four door but pretty nice for the price, dandy view of the shock towers and the original yellow paint on the air cleaner and valve covers. www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e7p00iQZ2wGo back to the link I posted for my car stuff and click it. You can see in the upper right hand corner where you can join photobucket free. Then you can upload pictures there and share. I only use it since I already have a bunch of albums stored there. Other photo sharing sites may well be easier to use.
|
|
|
Post by doberdawg on Nov 5, 2014 17:31:49 GMT -5
Thanks, I may try photo bucket again, it was too complex 2 or 3 years ago. I only wanted to post the pics of the meteor & a Ranchero engine bay with no engine clearly showing the - WAY - different shock towers & more importantly distance between them at bottom (motor mount holes). & that simply so you could see that I am not crazy or a trouble maker. I know what you would say - WOW I would never have guessed.I don't know if there were early & late 62's or different plants or what. I do know everything I have said is 100% true. I admit to being no mechanic, but can replace anything I remove, & figure fixes (fabrications) for simple necessities. Neither I nor some better mechanics (one a great mechanic by anybody's yard stick) all agreed. The 62 221 was NOT going in any of my 63 Fords without major mods - perhaps the plates you mentioned, but even with them no Ford Mount I am familiar with would have worked. I did get a lead on 221 only mounts, but did not want to spend nearly $300 (& still have to modify compartment.
|
|
|
Post by w2zero on Nov 5, 2014 19:56:27 GMT -5
You should probably find a better photo sharing site than photobucket. It is a pain in the butt to use in my opinion and I only use it since I signed on many years ago. Feel free to wander around in there if you get bored and check out the other albums too. Odd, the whole album with the B-24 flight is missing.... Here is the injection in progress. s6.photobucket.com/user/w2zero/library/?sort=3&start=all&page=1Yeah, definitely find a better photo sharing site. I think google has one.
|
|
|
Post by barnfind1962 on Feb 14, 2015 23:43:54 GMT -5
I have a early J 260 block in my 1962 Meteor is that rare date is 2C16 block is C2OE-6015J
|
|
|
Post by doberdawg on Feb 15, 2015 13:56:36 GMT -5
I would check all numbers on car closely. I don't believe the 260 was available until 63 1/2 model year. Also, & I don't care to get in an argument again, I have several 63 Meteors AND a 63 fairlane here on property. I pulled a 221/3 speed OD transmission from a 62 which I know 100% certain came from factory in this totally original car. There is no way in hell without cutting & welding to put it in a 63 car that had a 260. HUGE difference in distance between motor mounts - HUGE. And those thinking you can buy different mounts - well, let's just say that when I was looking retailers fell into 2 categories those who mistakenly thought they were same as 260/289 & those that correctly said we stock the 260/289 mounts but have not been able to get the 221 mounts for years. I actually was so convinced that they were interchangeable that I had 221 in air on hoist lowering into a 63 1/2 Ranchero (factory 260 - blown) when my jaw dropped. Since then I have done a lot of research & found very few that thought (knew d**n well) that I was right. The others have expressed their opinions here. I sold the 221, but had it sitting next to 2 260,s & a 66 289. Incompatibility was obvious when looking at actual product instead of memory or magazines. But the real difference was looking at the empty motor compartments - differences SCREAMED - NO WAY !!!
|
|
|
Post by ca on May 17, 2015 20:35:57 GMT -5
I am told that the heads will switch, but should absolutely NOT be switched, piston V valve problems. These posts repeatedly leaves out the MOST important piece of info, the YEAR of the supposed 221 to 260 swap - which I doubt. It could be done, you could cut the front halves off of both cars & swap, then weld them on. I have heard but not verified that some 221's came in 63s ( I doubt it, but...) Those 221's - if they exist - may be interchangeable with 260. I see the 221 as a 62 ONLY engine. The 260 was a 63 & 64 ONLY engine Facts guys not opinions, please!!! This is why you see MANY more 63 V8 cars converted to 289/302/351 but rarely see 62 (falcon/comet/fairlane/meteor conversions - lots of work eliminating shock towers (go Mustang 11 ) probably makes it doable??> The 221, 260 and 289 are all the same d**ned engine, 302s could be included as well as the 351 except it's taller to allow for the big stroke increase. The VERY FIRST Cobra that was built, overseas, had a 221 in it. They pulled it when shipped then put a 260 in that one. The first Indy Car that Jim Clark rode around the Indy 500 in, had a 221 block with .3000 bigger sleeves(or was bored, depending on who you talk to) FACTS are that I have 2 1962 221s and a 1963 289 and an HO 302/5.0 sitting in my garage, and they are all they same block except for extra metal on the 289 and 302 blocks, around the cylinders, and the spacing in the 6" to 7" motor mount bungs. Then the extra freeze plugs. The only problem with putting 289/302 heads on a 221 is that the valve faces are too wide to fit the cylinders and will bump the cylinder bore edge. The valve stems/guides are in the same place in all of the SBF Fords 221-351. The only part from a 289 that won't fit the 221 is the pistons= 3.5 VS 4.0 bore. If you put smaller headed valves in 289/ 302 or 351 heads, they will bolt on a 221. The crankshafts are identical whether 221 or 289. When I first ordered headgaskets for my 221 they sent me 4" bore ones. I almost had to use those until I found the correct 3.5" bore ones. Same motor mounts for the 62/63, 221, 260 and 289s. I didn't address the 5 to 6 bolt bellhousing differences as they don't really apply to this argument. 221s were the base engine in Meteors and Fairlanes in 62 and 63. If anyone wants pics, lemme know, then I'll get off my lazy but and take pics. I couldn't let this argument die, as there may be new people out there reading this info. Any questions or pics of any of the pieces for comparison, just say so and I'll put them up.
W2zero is right as usual in this thread. He doesn't have a lot of cars laying around in his front yard, but he knows what he is talking about on a "been there, done that" basis.EDIT: Forgot to include the 255 of 1980-1982 in the engine line. I had one in a Mustang back in the 80s. 255 had a smaller bore(3.68?) but pretty sure it was the same stroke as the 302. Small valves, oval type intake ports and an unusual intake manifold= still a SBF.
|
|
|
Post by doberdawg on May 18, 2015 12:16:13 GMT -5
The reason you can't get the post to die is all the wrong info. At least SOME 221-s like the one in my 62 Meteor will absolutely NOT bolt in say a 63 Meteor to replace the 260, nor will the 260 from the 63 bolt in at least SOME 221's. When the post began I had both cars, engines removed & sitting next to each other & both car's hood's removed you could see even without a tape measure the HUGE difference in the distance from mount hole in cars (seems like 7 inches 62 and 12 63). I ordered mounts & they blocked the oil filter & would NOT work. They were perfect for 260's & 289's but not MY 221. I am not a great mechanic, but know several all of who looked (many do modifications as often as they brush their teeth), everybody with eyes (& tape measures) who looked agreed on one thing. NO WAY. I lucked out & sold the 221 engine to a guy wanting one (nobody does)to put in his 62 Meteor (came out of mine with 60K original miles on car & in my family from day 1. It would not bolt in his 62 Meteor.
So, just like the fact (I guess) that some early cobras had 221's (something I did not know but believe) Ford changed blocks probably because they were changing bodies.
So, as long as somebody keeps digging up this old thread it won't die. And all you great mechanics (& I mean that not being sarcastic) think they know it all & insist of the interchangeability I have one thing to say:
REMEMBER, IT IS WHAT YOU LEARN AFTER YOU KNOW IT ALL THAT COUNTS & a little bit of knowledge (perhaps a lot is some cases) is a dangerous thing.
|
|
|
Post by ca on May 18, 2015 18:01:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ca on May 18, 2015 18:04:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ca on May 18, 2015 18:36:18 GMT -5
The reason you can't get the post to die is all the wrong info. At least SOME 221-s like the one in my 62 Meteor will absolutely NOT bolt in say a 63 Meteor to replace the 260, nor will the 260 from the 63 bolt in at least SOME 221's. When the post began I had both cars, engines removed & sitting next to each other & both car's hood's removed you could see even without a tape measure the HUGE difference in the distance from mount hole in cars (seems like 7 inches 62 and 12 63). I ordered mounts & they blocked the oil filter & would NOT work. They were perfect for 260's & 289's but not MY 221. I am not a great mechanic, but know several all of who looked (many do modifications as often as they brush their teeth), everybody with eyes (& tape measures) who looked agreed on one thing. NO WAY. I lucked out & sold the 221 engine to a guy wanting one (nobody does)to put in his 62 Meteor (came out of mine with 60K original miles on car & in my family from day 1. It would not bolt in his 62 Meteor. So, just like the fact (I guess) that some early cobras had 221's (something I did not know but believe) Ford changed blocks probably because they were changing bodies. So, as long as somebody keeps digging up this old thread it won't die. And all you great mechanics (& I mean that not being sarcastic) think they know it all & insist of the interchangeability I have one thing to say: REMEMBER, IT IS WHAT YOU LEARN AFTER YOU KNOW IT ALL THAT COUNTS & a little bit of knowledge (perhaps a lot is some cases) is a dangerous thing. You won't find many "know it alls" around here in the longtime guys. Most are pretty humble and love learning new stuff. We've seen many "doberdawgs" pass through over the years and we all love engaging and sharing with them. We would like the "doberdawgs" to stay, but they seem to move on eventually as they perceive a slow response as "they don't know". At 62 yrs, I don't have much of an ego problem, I've asked questions many times on this board that I already know the answer to= It's good to stimulate conversation. Arie use to build these Meteors on the line Ford line. W2zero's parents gave him a Snap On ratchet as a teething ring and I've been working on engines for over 50 yrs. Rob, Stu, Roy, Thayne, Andrew and on and on have all done major work on their Mercs. I wrenched on a Trans Am car for over 2 yrs, I wrenched on a Pikes Peak overall winner in the early 70s, owned my own repair garage for a few yrs, I still have valve and seat machines in my garage at home, I ran almost every piece of auto machine that I can think of, so I've picked up a little knowledge over the years, BUTT I'll humbly bow to you anytime you want to show me something new. It's just not going to happen in this case= I have proof and you have a story. I hope you stick around this site so we can argue about all kinds of stuff= I really do appreciate everyone that I engage with.
|
|