My twincam strip and rebuild/put together

[rgh0]

Clearly the 701 block has been from the recon program and stamped with the original engine number when fitted in the early 70's to a 1500 C0rtina

I don't think this block was originally from a recon. engine. Somebody way back when walked into a Ford dealership and bought a new 1500GT engine for a Cortina. Either that or a Cortina had it's engine replaced with a new one not a recon. one.

Sorry my wording was loose. The new block was provided by Ford in the 70's for rebuilding an engine or for a complete new engine if they provided those at the time ?

[promotor]

[

My guess is that the block is a recon unit for a mk1 cortina 1500gt (Ford's code for the mk1 1500gt was 118e) and the head was mated to this at a much later date.

I must admit this one is a little strange because the "118E" part of the engine number stamping looks to me like it was stamped at the factory and not aftermarket as a recon. The font and style of the "118E" stamping is as per Ford factory standard. I would expect a recon unit to retain it's original number or to have no number if based on a new block.

Perhaps for new Ford engines supplied through spare parts using new blocks they stamped the blocks with a model series code and engine number before the long block assembly was supplied to Ford dealers. As spare parts engines would have still been supplied after the car itself ceased production. This would explain the reason for the block being a 701M (1970) code rather than something earlier like a 120E, 122E or 2731E code

Yes from what I've seen blocks like this stamping could only be done by either Ford or someone authorised by Ford to put the relevant stamps on the blocks. They appear to be quite unique to Ford in their style and that it must be for use within the Ford group (or those authorised by them).

Ford did produce 120e blocks for the late Consul Capri 116e 1500gt's as advised by a very well versed member of the 116e owners club (early ones had a 116e cast into the block, very late ones had 120e cast in) but the number stamped on the engine mount would have the actual engine number (possibly the end part of the chassis number?) in one plane and then stamped above that to the right would be 116e - ie the model number of the car - regardless of whether it was either a 120e or a 116e casting number. I believe the model number of the car is stamped on the engine mount in all cases when supplied for a known car. That would appear to only apply to Ford cars without a Lotus engine as Lotus would put their own numbers over the engine mount, without reference to the car code. So, a mk1 Lotus Cortina - code 125e - didn't have 125e over the engine mount as far as I'm aware, just the Lotus LF number. Same for mk2 Cortina Twincam. I think Mk1 Escort Twincams just had a 5 or 6 digit reference over the mount, probably the last part of the chassis number as per Ford cars of the period.

Perhaps 2cams70 can advise what your engine(s) are in your escorts in terms of numbering method (not asking for the actual number!). I know it could be even more complicated for Aus mk1 Twincams / GT's.

I've had people asking me when I've sold 1500gt engines in the past whether it has a 116e or 120e stamping on the engine mount, presumably because they are looking for a block that is more period correct, even if the rest of the number below it would be incorrect for their car!

So the 118e number to me would mean this block was destined for a Mk1 cortina 1500gt as a replacement engine.

Not sure of the time line on how the stamping was done for recon/replacement engines but as you suggest it's certainly a sensible idea to stamp the car model number and then add the other details below - ie engine/chassis number - later on as indeed.

[promotor]

My guess is that the block is a recon unit for a mk1 cortina 1500gt (Ford's code for the mk1 1500gt was 118e) and the head was mated to this at a much later date.

Ford used to supply (or organise the supply of) recon bottom ends for mk1/mk2 cortina (maybe a dealer fitted unit after a failure?) - I've seen a few 4 bolt cranks in 701m blocks before! Not sure if the block in the photos came with a 4 bolt crank originally but it's certainly a 6 bolt proper Lotus one now.

118e cars finished production in 1966 as far as I'm aware.

Hi Promotor
Have you ever seen an early Lotus twin cam head with a ford engine number on its rear face and no lotus number

cheers
Rohan

sorry I misinterpreted the photos I thought they were both of the rear of the head... my eyes are not what they used to be

Clearly the 701 block has been from the recon program and stamped with the original engine number when fitted in the early 70's to a 1500 C0rtina

The head numbers shown in the photos are the casting numbers. Below them on the rear of the head near the face to the block should be the Lotus engine number the head came from stamped.

cheers
Rohan

Hi Rohan,

I thought you thought you'd seen something that wasn't there, I was waiting for the penny to drop for you!

Regarding the cylinder head, didn't that early type head finish in production around 1964? Most I have seen actually have the date stamped underneath the head near to the gasket surface. I've got a couple that have complete dates from 1963 on there (can't remember the exact full dates that are on there though!)

Definitely an engine put together from bits. Perhaps the owner of the 1500gt car did it as they wouldn't need to much to make a 1500gt into a Lotus Twincam rep. The factory Lotus Twincams were based on Mk1 Cortina 1500gt's anyway!

[2cams70]

So the 118e number to me would mean this block was destined for a Mk1 cortina 1500gt as a replacement engine.

Not sure of the time line on how the stamping was done for recon/replacement engines but as you suggest it's certainly a sensible idea to stamp the car model number and then add the other details below - ie engine/chassis number - later on as indeed.

I think for new long engines regardless of whether destined for fitment to cars or supply as spare parts they were all treated the same by Ford. The engine number coding follows the structure of any other part number of the period - i.e there's the model code 105E, 109E, 116E, 118E etc. of the vehicle the part was first used in followed by some other digits. In the case of engines these digits are the engine serial number in the case of other parts it's numbers referencing what section of the car the part is in (engine, gearbox, suspension, etc.)

Ford would have built the engines and stamped them with their engine numbers before letting them out the door. Back then the engine numbers were created independently of vehicle chassis numbers.

I've seen 997cc Anglias fitted with engine numbers prefixed with either 105E or 109E. The 109E stamped engines had the later 109E block. (105E model = Ford Anglia, 109E model = Ford Classic)

[promotor]

Sorry to berni for the thread drift!

Good thread on your engine, keep it coming!

[2cams70]

Sorry to berni for the thread drift!

Good thread on your engine, keep it coming!

Yes sorry - I'm finished with discussing the origins of the block!

[berni29]

Hello guys

Some great information and insights thank you all again for taking the time to reply!

The rod bolts do look original I think, so will replace for sure.

I had a look for a date on the head and there is one, seems to be 21/5/63 or maybe 65

Thanks again

Berni

[promotor]

Hello guys

Some great information and insights thank you all again for taking the time to reply!

The rod bolts do look original I think, so will replace for sure.

I had a look for a date on the head and there is one, seems to be 21/5/63 or maybe 65

Thanks again

Berni

A word of warning on replacement rod bolts - the ones I have seen that look like the original Ford / Lotus ones don't appear to be of the same quality. I would only fit ARP if swapping bolts. That is purely based on aftermarket bolts (not ARP) I have personally bought and not liked the look of them. Perhaps there are people that use aftermarket bolts without issue and would feel that I am scare-mongering, but ARP are nice quality and not too expensive for what they are.

[berni29]

Hi

Thank you have just ordered a set of the ARP's, came in at just under £100 delivered.

All the best

Berni

[RichardHawkins]

Berni,

I think Rohan is particularly knowledgeable about bolts, so if not too late wait to see what he says. My car had been owned by someone who was very strong, rough, or both. My head bolts were a mixture of types and obviously stretched. I have replaced all the bolts on my car, and did so using ARP for head, ends, mains and flywheel. I made this purchase before realising Rohan’s expertise. He may have better advice as ARP may be over specified.

Hope this helps,

Richard Hawkins

[berni29]

Hi Richard

Thank you. Yes I am sure you are right about the over specification, but I guess if I am going to over specify (aka overpay) for any bolt it may as well be the rod ones.

I intend to reuse as many of the other bolts as possible once I have cleaned and examined them and measured for consistency.

All the best

Berni

[rgh0]

The analysis of bolted joints requires consideration of both the bolt and the materials being bolted together.

A key issue of this analysis is the elasticity of the bolt and its preload via stretch versus the elasticity of the materials being joined and the preload imposed on them in compression by the bolts. But many more issues to considered also such as washer use and why and thread and bolt length versus the join location. It is not as simple as it seems


For example
A rod joint is very stiff with a high preload and high oscillating loads and relative elastic bolts. The aim is a very high loaded bolt but one whose stress does not change much with the oscillating load on each engine stroke as a microscopic change in the rod join compression unloads the join compression to balance the load imposed on it by the crank oscillations. In simple terms this means get the best rod bolt possible and stretch it accurately to load it as highly as possible. I would always use ARP bolts or the SPS bolts supplied by Carrillo for their rods due to this. However you do need to ensure you get the right bolts with the right thread length and overall under head length. The normal suppliers sell a ARP bolt for "steel rods" which has actually the wrong thread length for at least the Carrillo rods I normally use as the bolt is to short by 0.1 inch so the bolt thread crosses the join plan which you do not want as it exposes the threaded portion which is more likely to fail due to stress raises to the oscillating load more directly.

Head and main bearing bolts less critical as the oscillating loads less in proportion and the joins more elastic.

I use standard grade 8 head socket cap head bolts on the main caps but you need to ensure you use a suitable hardened washers under the head. I don't see a need for ARP bolts or studs and I cant measure the stretch anyhow versus a rod bolt where I can to ensure it is loaded properly and very accurately to the limit of the bolt.

Head bolts get a little trickier as you are trying to seal against combustion gas pressure with a combination of a relatively flexible gasket, a somewhat flexible alloy head and a stiff cast iron block. On a racing engine I would use ARP studs with a composite fibre gasket. On a road engine with the original standard style copper / fibre layer ( used to be asbestos but now I dont know) / steel the standard later non reduced waist bolts seem fine. The early waisted bolts appear more likely to have problems if still being used today

cheers
Rohan

[berni29]

Hello Rohan

Thank you very much for taking the time to respond so comprehensively. All noted! I did say to the chap at Burton that these rod bolts were for the standard 125E rods so hopefully they will be correct.

As an aside the PO sent me the cam cover for the engine, as pictured below. Looks like the earlier type which given the previous information is correct for that head I think.

[berni29]

Hi again

A quick question. Do I need to worry about staining on the crank? Mostly the journals are nice and shiny. But not everywhere.

Many thanks

Berni

[2cams70]

Hi again

A quick question. Do I need to worry about staining on the crank? Mostly the journals are nice and shiny. But not everywhere.

Many thanks

Berni

That staining is due to moisture having entered the engine and caused corrosion. If it were me I'd take it to a crankshaft specialist and ask for it to be linished and dimensionally checked. Linishing is a polishing rather than grinding process. Best not to attempt to do it yourself with wet and dry or other abrasive. The direction the crank is being rotated in whilst being polished and also the grade of abrasive used is critical.