C69A Ultrasonic Cylinder Thickness Test
 

There has been some question / mystique about Canadian engine cylinder walls being thicker or better material. Not sure about the material question but I did find a C69A engine block for a project I'm working on and thought I'd share the ultrasonic test with the rest of the Ford community.
The measurements are taken in 4 X,Y directions in the cylinders from the top of the cylinder and down about 4 inches from the top. My block is standard bore with some wear (I'd guess .005" to .008" on the worst walls). The technician recorded the thinnest reading of each quadrant on the sheet. Looks to be mostly over .2" but a couple of locations at .17" - fortunately not on a thrust surface.

What are you guys seeing for cylinder wall thicknesses for a US made 59A engine block?

Re: C69A Ultrasonic Cylinder Thickness Test
 

I checked a std bore 59A block recently.

These were the results.

https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/attac...4&d=1648922705

Here are your numbers:
https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/attac...5&d=1648922857

Without spending a long time analysing the results, I would say there isn't a big difference between them. Would anyone agree or disagree?

Re: C69A Ultrasonic Cylinder Thickness Test
 

Ford at the Rouge and Ford of Canada at the Windsor foundry likely followed along each others practices pretty closely. Materials were all coming down the same river but I'm not sure whether they were exactly the same resources or not. I figure that they probably were for the most part.

Nodular casting technology was still in its experimental stages in the early 50s and wasn't widely used yet. The latest technology in flathead V8 castings was by the French manufacture of the SUMB truck engines since these were still being cast right up into the early 1990s.

Re: C69A Ultrasonic Cylinder Thickness Test
 

Great information- your ultrasound guy did a much more detailed report than my guy did. I’d have to agree. They are pretty much the same… Maybe even a little better for the 59A.