Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical 63 Ford 221 cu.in.V8

Discussion in 'Traditional Hot Rods' started by flopalotofit, Oct 24, 2014.

  1. flopalotofit
    Joined: Apr 1, 2010
    Posts: 130

    flopalotofit
    Member

    I Have a 63 Fairlane to restore , has a bad crank thrust journal. If I cant find a crank , does anybody still do weld-up and regrinds ?? What is the possibility of using 260 parts in my block ? Any help is appreciated Heritage Rod & Custom
     
  2. mustangsix
    Joined: Mar 7, 2005
    Posts: 1,408

    mustangsix
    Member

    Parts for a 221 might be hard to find I think. Even 260 stuff may be difficult these days.

    A 5-bolt bellhousing style 289 would swap over and might be easier to find if you were willing to swap engines, but even those are not too common anymore.

    If it doesn't need to me a numbers matching resto, how about upgrading to a later 302 or 5.0 and a later transmission? That would open up a lot of possibilities and could be made to look original. It would probably double the power as well.
     
  3. cptn60
    Joined: Jul 18, 2006
    Posts: 97

    cptn60
    Member
    from Joke City

    I can't verify if he is still there; worth a try. Hank the Crank / HTC
    Hank the Crank / HTC
    10640 S Garfield Avenue
    South Gate, CA 90280

    Website: www.hankthecrank.com
    Phone: 562-861-7682
    Fax: 562-861-2263
     
  4. Mike51Merc
    Joined: Dec 5, 2008
    Posts: 3,855

    Mike51Merc
    Member

    Here's what I found in a book (therefore the accuracy is somewhat assumed but not guaranteed):
    "The 221, 260 and 289ci engines all share the same crankshaft and connecting rods, resulting in a
    2.87-inch stroke."


    My comment: There may be some differences from year to year pertaining to seals and such, but since 289 cranks aren't really rare or valuable it's probably worth a shot to get one and try it out, probably cheaper than having your 221 crank worked on. I have a 289 crank (with a block) that you can have for free if you come and get it.
     

  5. deathrowdave
    Joined: May 27, 2014
    Posts: 3,544

    deathrowdave
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from NKy

    I am thinking 221 is a cast crank , you would be way ahead of the mess to find a good 289 replacement crank kit with bearings .


    Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
     
  6. Canus
    Joined: Apr 16, 2011
    Posts: 102

    Canus
    Member

    I have a 221 crank if you are interested. I'm in North Carolina and shipping might be prohibitive. PM me if interested.
     
  7. sunbeam
    Joined: Oct 22, 2010
    Posts: 6,219

    sunbeam
    Member

    Any 221,260, or 289 crank will work look for M1 stamped between the front main and the first rod throw. A 302 crank could be used if you use 302 rods. It would get you 230 inches
     
  8. Mike51Merc
    Joined: Dec 5, 2008
    Posts: 3,855

    Mike51Merc
    Member

    With all respect, stroking a 221/260/289 is an iffy proposition because the bore depths aren't as deep as the 302. It can probably be done, but longevity becomes the question.
     
  9. Stormtron
    Joined: Apr 30, 2009
    Posts: 215

    Stormtron
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Given that all front accessories for SBFs will bolt onto all other SBFs I would be tempted to go to a 5.0 H.O. and bolt all of the 221 accessories to the front of it. The timing chain cover, water pump, oil pump and pan, etc. will bolt up. The main difference is the firing order of the motor and the bellhousing (easier to find the later bellhousings anyway). I have been running them carbed in my Fairlane for 11 years and they work well and it is an easy and cheap way to gain some HP.
     
  10. If you're trying to do a 'correct' restoration (where the motor will pass as stock at a bit more than a casual look), using a later motor will cause some issues. Yes, the 221 stuff will all bolt to the motor, but as Ford built this as an 'economy' motor, not all of the parts will work well on a later motor. The valve covers are shallower than the '64-up versions and you'll have clearance issues with the later valvetrain, particularly the later pedestal rockers. The exhaust manifolds are much smaller compared to the 260/289 bits, and will seriously limit performance. The front crank damper is much smaller/lighter compared to the bigger motors, and can't be used on a later 50 oz motor in any case which makes getting the right pulley combination with the late damper problematic.

    If all you need is a better crankshaft, as noted the 221/260/289 all used the same stroke, so finding a decent 289 crank shouldn't be all that hard. I believe the 260/289 cranks had larger counterweights, so a rebalance may be needed. If you can find one, a 'upgrade' to a 260 would be well worth it (the 221 was a real dog, that's why Ford discontinued it in '63) and could be made to be almost indistinguishable from a 221.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  11. I have what is supposed to be a 221. Its locked from someone leaving out the plugs. Anyway I not going to use the block or the heads. Im keeping the generator stuff, timing cover oil fill and intake.PM me if interested
     
  12. Kerrynzl
    Joined: Jun 20, 2010
    Posts: 2,954

    Kerrynzl
    Member

    Drop a 302 crank and rods into it and stroke it.[use 221 pistons]
    The speedway boys in NZ do this all the time in their 240" class
     
  13. sunbeam
    Joined: Oct 22, 2010
    Posts: 6,219

    sunbeam
    Member

    You can stroke a 302 .400 but you can't stroke a 221 .125 that doesn't seem right.
     
  14. Mike51Merc
    Joined: Dec 5, 2008
    Posts: 3,855

    Mike51Merc
    Member

    I'm no machinist. Just repeating what I read from reliable sources.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.