292 with 239 heads

[Rancheroboy]

A couple of questions: I have a 57 Ranchero with a 292, which I bought off the original owner in 1993. He had taken it back to Ford in 1961 where they installed 1961 292. I soon discovered I have 239 heads on the 292. I confirmed by checking casting numbers. First question, is there any reason they would stick 239 heads on a 292, other than it was what they had available. I have no problems, rockers are oiling well. I think the 239 heads have smaller intake valves so I probably don’t make the same power as a proper head would. Second question, The spark plugs that were in it, and what I have always replaced with are Autolite AP85. Checking with several mail order shops this plug is not what is called for. Autolite 216, along with many other brands/numbers. Is the Autolite 85 completely wrong for this engine? I have been fighting a mild cutting out problem at highway speed for years. Everything in the ignition has been changed except changing plug types. Thanks for any info you may have.

[rotorwrench]

If it has 1954 heads, which distributor does it have? 1956 was a change year for those. Loose distributor bushings can cause intermittent problems

[darrell]

those are 54 heads alright with the small plug.what are the casting letters on the block.they are above the oil filter on a 61 block.i have a feeling you dont have a 292

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by Rancheroboy

... is there any reason they would stick 239 heads on a 292, ...

Yes, but it's not a good one.
Heads, intake and block each have their own casting numbers.
The 239 heads use a smaller dia. sparkplug with a gasket, also smaller intake ports which should have a matching intake manifold. (photo)
What is the prefix of the casting number across the top rear of the intake manifold with '9425' in it.
The prefix might be EBU if it's a 2bbl or EBY 4bbl.

Also, if the distributor and carburetor are mismatched (with pre '57 239 parts) the timing might not be advancing correctly. Pictures or casting numbers of those various parts on the engine will be very helpful.
Casting number charts at these links...

http://www.ford-y-block.com/technical.htm

http://www.y-block.info/castings.html
.

[Sid]

239's also have smaller intake runners. Is you look on the oil filter side of the engine on the side of the block just below where the cyl. head mates to the block there should be some letters and #'s there. If it is a 61 block it should say C1AE R or maybe C. A 57 block may say ECZ or EDB. There are other codes also. The 6015 is on all Y blocks as Ford engine part #. You may also look near the dist. as Dearborn blocks have the letters there and near the generator up side down. I don't think Dearborn cast any blocks larger then 272 and nothing after 57. Also many re builders have bored 272 to 292 because of availability of rebuild kits. I hope this somewhat helps.

[packrat5]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

This is going to be a fun posting to follow.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by packrat5

This is going to be a fun posting to follow.

Damned if it ain't. I thought I had heard about everything. Wrong as usual.

It is hard to say what happened in 1961. It may have been a REMAN ordered wrong or a junkyard take-out.

I would verify the complete engine.

As far as the AUTO-LITE plugs go, correct install is 216.

[Rancheroboy]

Thanks for all the great responses. The block number is C1AE 6090R and it has EBU on the heads under the rocker shafts. I did suspect the distributor could have bad bushings so I bought one from Rock Auto. Wasn't the problem. The original distributor was Ford 12/27, the replacement Rock Auto sent was Motorcraft 12/27. I discovered after I returned the core this new distributor was shorter and didn't reach the oil pump shaft. I put in a longer 390 shaft and solved that. The original plugs when I got it were Autolite 85, I installed the Autolite AP85, which are almost 1/8" longer, fortunately they don't hit the piston. I will switch over to the 216 and see if it improves. A few years ago I changed to an MSD coil and bypassed the resistor. That was a stupid move. Toasted two Pertronics units a a few condensers before I went back original. Running points/cond now. Everything in the ignition is new except for the resistor, which I've checked and it is good. The 2 barrel Holley has been rebuilt by a local professional carb guy.

[Rancheroboy]

One thing I didn't mention is the timing has to be up around 18 to 19 deg for best performance, doesn't run well at all any lower than that. I checked and 0-TDC on the balancer is TDC on #1 piston.

[Sid]

With those heads on your 292 it would probably hinder performance. If changing the plugs doesn't take care of the intermittent miss maybe confirm the coil is hooked up the proper way. _ to the dist. Also what condition is the ignition switch. That year switch may be sloppy after all these years. If you ever have the heads off you may consider looking for 292 heads. It may also mean changing the intake also. ECZ G heads will give the best performance and compression. You may want to confirm the outer portion of balancer is not moving on the rubber.

[dmsfrr]

12127 is a generic number for many/most Ford distributors, the prefix and suffix letters/numbers are the important ones.
"new distributor was shorter" We've heard that a few times before, a common problem with chain auto parts store rebuilds.

6090 is a generic cyl head number. C1 = 1961(+)
The engine block number will have '6015' in the middle of it.

"it has EBU on the heads under the rocker shafts" Yes, '54 239ci.
If it doesn't have a matching intake manif you may have vacuum leaks due to the different port size.

Timing... the distributor may have an internal problem or not have the vacuum line connected correctly. Possibly a bad vacuum advance canister.
.

[Sid]

Which carb. are you running? The 54-56 dist is a load a matic and needs to run with the carb. from 54-56 which I believe was equipped with a spark control valve. If you are running the later 57 or newer Holley or Autolite you must run the 57 and newer dist. and that would explain so much initial advance. Initial should be somewhere around 10 deg. or so + or - and total about 35 + or -. That would get you in the ball park.You may want to check total advance. Running the earlier distributor and later carb. does not advance properly.

[Rancheroboy]

Thanks guys, more great info to chase. I'll let you know what I find.

[KULTULZ]

The original distributor was Ford 12/27, the replacement Rock Auto sent was Motorcraft 12/27.

He has the 57/ Dual Advance DIST, although the replacement is a SBF.

Do you see any Casting ID Nos. on the intake manifold and what type of carb are you running? Photo?

How a set of 239 heads got there is a mystery.

[Sid]

I would also think with 239 heads if it has a later intake there may be a vacuum leak as the ports are smaller on the 239-256 engine. At this point it may be wise to look for a pair of of 57-58 ECZ heads intake and dist. so everything matches. Most of the later y block heads after 56-58 will probably have lower compression and/or smaller valves. As stated earlier the G head is the best if you can find a pair affordable. Otherwise ECZ C is good for a basic good choice. The early pre 57 dist. belongs in the scrap bucket unless you are trying to keep a 54-56 Ford original.

[JeffB2]

Spend that tax refund! You know you want these! http://www.eatonbalancing.com/2010/1...esting-part-i/

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Rancheroboy

The block number is C1AE 6090R and it has EBU on the heads under the rocker shafts.

C1AE-6090-R



Wait a minute...

6090 Is an ENGINEERING BASIC PN for a CYL HEAD. A block would be 6015.

[KULTULZ]

GENTLEMEN- (You Too OLDMICS)

It seems we have a SECURITY BREACH.

This gentleman came here seeking advice and forgot something very important. I just noticed his avatar showing a very nice 57 Ranchero.

I believe before any more fancy TECH INFO can be given that he be required to post a few photos and share with this group.

What say 'ye?

[paul2748]

I would be wary about using that distributor - did you check the location of the gear to make sure it is the same as the old distributor?

[Sid]

Ideally you want to use a dist.that the part # starts with FEH---FEK---B9AE--- C0AE--- C1AE--- C2AE--- C3AE----.This is the prefix the part # starts with followed by 12127. There may be other parts that fit but these are 57 thru 64 y block distributors.

[Daves55Sedan]

Okay I'm confused. I always thought that the 1954, 239 Y-block heads had the intake ports closer together than the 272/292 heads, thus requiring the smaller intake gaskets that are included in standard Y-block engine gasket sets. That means that the intake manifold itself would not be interchangeable between the 239 and any later Y-block. The only carb that fits on the 1954 intake is a Ford EBU or Holley 2100 which are not compatible with the '57 and later distributors due to mechanical advance.
Has anybody ever noticed that the head castings of the 239 and 272 heads appear identical except for the casting insert at the intake surface is different? Probably due to the different spacing of the intake ports.
So what intake manifold do you have? Or have I been wrong about all this?

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Daves55Sedan

Okay I'm confused.

Join the club ...

I always thought that the 1954, 239 Y-block heads had the intake ports closer together than the 272/292 heads, thus requiring the smaller intake gaskets that are included in standard Y-block engine gasket sets.

That means that the intake manifold itself would not be interchangeable between the 239 and any later Y-block. The only carb that fits on the 1954 intake is a Ford EBU or Holley 2100 which are not compatible with the '57 and later distributors due to mechanical advance.

Has anybody ever noticed that the head castings of the 239 and 272 heads appear identical except for the casting insert at the intake surface is different? Probably due to the different spacing of the intake ports.

So what intake manifold do you have? Or have I been wrong about all this?

It is confusing until you start to cipher on it and even then a lot of info has been forgotten/deleted and you have to wade through the usual wives tales/misnomers.

There were two 1954 239 engines, one cast and assembled @ the DIF and the other @ the CF. The biggest service problems are with the DIF version. The CF version was an update and was the pattern for all following FYB's.

The intake runners are smaller than later engines, specifically but coolant passages are also somewhat different. That is why an overhaul gasket kit contains two sets of intake gaskets, to enable the kit to fit more than one engine and lessen inventory.

FORD also offered head gaskets to allow the DIF heads to be mounted on a CF engine.

[paul2748]

I thought the second version came out in 55 when the 272 came into being. They had the smaller cam journals and the different drives for the distributor/oil pumpo

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by paul2748

I thought the second version came out in 55 when the 272 came into being. They had the smaller cam journals and the different drives for the distributor/oil pumpo

It is confusing -

During 1954, all 239-cubic-inch passenger-car engines and some 239 truck engines were built at the Dearborn engine plant. At about the middle of the model year the manufacture of 239 cubic-inch truck engines was transferred to the Cleveland engine plant. In 1955 all 239 truck engines were built at Cleveland.

Not all parts, however, were interchangeable between the Dearborn engines (both car and truck) and the Cleveland engines. The cylinder block assembly, block, heads, head gaskets and camshafts on the Dearborn 239's were not interchangeable with the respective parts on Cleveland 239's.

The Dearborn-built 239 used a "large" camshaft with a thirteen-tooth distributor drive gear and bearing journals 1/8 inch larger in diameter than the "small" Cleveland camshaft and all other Y-block camshafts. The Cleveland- built 239 and all later Y-blocks used camshafts with a fourteen- tooth distributor drive gear. (Parts interchangeability among 239's is addressed in the service bulletins section of this book.

Above excerpt from


http://www.jcs-group.com/cruisin/muscle/engines.html

Most of text shown above was taken from –

THE FORD Y-BLOCK – James Eickman -1984 [/quote]

Left out is the description of the 256 TRUCK ENGINE and it's phasing to the 272.

[54vicky]

kul I agree with paul but I have only been playing with the engine for over 50 years gathering parts rebuilding etc.never heard about 2 different engines.strange that the engine in question has supposedly been running in the car since 1961 that is a lot of years if intake and heads were mismatched something is not being disclosed.hopefully the pictures when and if they appear will clear up some questions.with regard to the link you provided you must remember the old adage do not believe anything you read and only half of what you see. as to the camshaft specs he provided a simple search will show only one camshaft and one gear for 239 it is a one year only block with regards to camshaft bearings and distributor gear.myths are meant to be busted

[KULTULZ]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by 54vicky

kul I agree with paul but I have only been playing with the engine for over 50 years gathering parts rebuilding etc.never heard about 2 different engines.strange that the engine in question has supposedly been running in the car since 1961 that is a lot of years if intake and heads were mismatched something is not being disclosed.hopefully the pictures when and if they appear will clear up some questions.with regard to the link you provided you must remember the old adage do not believe anything you read and only half of what you see. as to the camshaft specs he provided a simple search will show only one camshaft and one gear for 239 it is a one year only block with regards to camshaft bearings and distributor gear.myths are meant to be busted

If you are disagreeing with the reference I provided, that is your choice. If you think that there were not two versions of the early engines, again your entitled belief.

TED EATON and JOHN MUMMERT will say the same in their TECH ARTICLES. If you feel that you know and have more experience than them, you need to publish your information.

How many references have to posted to rid the hobby of 'I never saw one so it can't be'? Being a hobbyist only and not in the service field is lending yourself to not seeing all that FOMOCO produced.

Paul asked for confirmation and I responded. At least admonish in a respectful manner.

[Sid]

It is a fact that there is a very early version of the y block in 54 that did utilize a dist. gear of it's own. Therefore a different cam. Upon rebuild it may be possible to upgrade to the later cam but I never tried it. Why waste money on a 239 when you could have a 292 or 312. EBU EBV and EBY blocks were the odd ducks. I also believe there was something about a groove in the center cam bearing on very early y blocks. When the ECZ blocks were introduced everything pretty much standardized thru 64. It would also be interesting what head gaskets were used on the gentlemans 1961 292 as the 239 was different.

[packrat5]

I knew this was going to be a fun posting. Was I right? Let's keep it going.

[paul2748]

It certainly is possible (as far as I know) to run 239 heads on a 272/292 block as long as the 239 intake is also used. This way, the ports in the head match the intake, including the water ports. And a later load-o-matic is used (except for the 56 dual diaphram model) that has the correct gear and oil pump drive. Actually, a 57 and later distributor can be used with the 239 head/intake combo as long as the vacuum was not hooked up. Engines can run almost as good with just the mechanical advance only



The problem with the mismatch is the heads/intake situation


While there was a certain amount of standardization starting with 1955, there still are differences between the years. One example is the cam - in the early years a cross drilled cam was used (for oil supply to the rockers), then a cam with a groove and then back to a crossed drilled cam and then in the last years I think they went back to the grooved cam. Internal parts of the distributors also changed over the years although they are interchangeable throughout 57-64.

[Sid]

Yes the whole top end may be used all together but it would probably be a dog on power. The early 239 intake valve was barely 1 5/8 and I would be surprised if compression hit 8.0 even on a 292. I would bet if he got a set of 57-59 heads,an ECZ9425B intake and the later dist. he would add at least 40 h.p. Even with a 2 barrel he would probably add at least 20 h.p.

[54vicky]

when you see one take a picture and post it then I may stand corrected

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by 54vicky

...when you see one take a picture and post it then I may stand corrected

I guess you are directing this to me ...

Tell you what, you stand right there and I will be back in a while...

Why did I over-ride the IGNORE BUTTON?

[Daves55Sedan]

Originally Posted by paul2748

It certainly is possible (as far as I know) to run 239 heads on a 272/292 block as long as the 239 intake is also used.

This stands to reason. Have you noticed that when you get a complete engine gasket set for a Y-block, they come with one set of head gaskets, but there are two sets of intake-to-head gaskets. The set that has the smaller and closer-together ports is for the 239. The larger set fits all 272, 292 and 312 engines.

[dmsfrr]

from comment # 4.

Originally Posted by dmsfrr

...
The 239 heads use ... smaller intake ports which should have a matching intake manifold. (photo)
...

Originally Posted by Daves55Sedan

This stands to reason. Have you noticed that when you get a complete engine gasket set for a Y-block, they come with one set of head gaskets, but there are two sets of intake-to-head gaskets. The set that has the smaller and closer-together ports is for the 239. The larger set fits all 272, 292 and 312 engines.

Photo: a '55+ intake gasket laid over a '54 239 gasket for a port size comparison.

[KULTULZ]

It certainly is possible (as far as I know) to run 239 heads on a 272/292 block as long as the 239 intake is also used. This way, the ports in the head match the intake, including the water ports.

1954 FORD PASS CAR 239 - 6051 CYL Head Gasket-

Used when replacing cyl block or cyl assy with 1955 model and using the 1954 EBU cyl head - (2) B5C 6051-A

49/59 MPC FINAL ISSUE 1964

What this is saying (IMO), if one wanted to use the 1954 DIF cyl head (EBU) on a CF block (EBV-ECG), FORD issued special gaskets for the swap.

I am certain what this describes was when replacing a DIF block or short due to a warranty claim or regular service (as the DIF replacement block was most not likely available at some point), there were coolant passage differences.

The 1954 DIF EBU engine was PASS CAR issue mostly as the CF was opened later in the model year and it's engine design produced was the later upgraded Y-BLOCK. The EBV was the 1954-55 CF truck engine and was cast, machined and assembled at the CLV FOUNDRY/ENGINE PLANT.

So you can't say can without knowing exactly what you have.

[KULTULZ]

I was scouring the NET regarding the FYB engine differences and came across this thread-

http://1954ford.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=3665

It is the desire by others of early FYB info knowledge and the lack of documented facts is why I am trying to figure all of this out. It has become fairly obvious but I am lacking much reference materials to lay it all out correctly.

FYB FACTOIDS are spread out all over the NET (and publications) and some are true/accurate and some are not. Hopefully, future info seekers will see this thread and be able to ascertain the difference(s) in the early engines.

[54vicky]

Kul what I was saying is unless you with your own eyes see something it is probably based on proposed items that were later discarded.if you look through your collection of literature re- assembly manuals with different printing dates you will find instances of this.

[rotorwrench]

This can always be blamed on the"Whiz Kids" HFII hired to run Ford after the war. The Edsel is a good example. What were they thinking when they came up with the timing chain set up for the Y-block.

Joking aside, the Y-block went through less teething problems than the first 221 V8 of 1932. All of the different designs of engines went through changes during their first few years before they were improved as well as they could get them for the era of each example. The Ford Windsor V8 engine started life as a 221 in 1961 just like the flat head but it didn't stay that way very long.

[KULTULZ]

I seem to be losing something in the translation it seems.

Anyways, I have gone far enough to satisfy myself as I have no desire to acquire/buy any further research materials. I just wanted to track down what everyone was seemingly having trouble with regarding the earlier Y.

[Daves55Sedan]

Originally Posted by Sid

Yes the whole top end may be used all together but it would probably be a dog on power.

All I can say is, there is no lacking in power, performance or acceleration in this old '55 car with a 292 truck crate motor which was later rebuilt, bored out 60 over and balanced by a racing engine builder years ago. It has 1960, 292 heads on it with the original '55 2bbl intake manifold and original Ford EBU carb with 1 inch venturi's and factory load-o-matic distributor.
As far as the fuel distribution and the vacuum advance, it is basically the same as the factory 11954, 239 (except for the '54 has the slightly smaller intake).
I couldn't ask for better power and acceleration.
I had a rebuilt completely stock 1957, 292 with original flat style 2bbl carb. Comparing it to the 292 in my '55, I would choose to drive the '55 any day of the week. Not saying the '57 was a dog. It wasn't, it was great. But the '55 always beat the '57 getting on uphill highway ramps with very short merge lanes without taking your life in your own hands. I never had to worry about not having enough room to merge in the '55. That thing can push 0-60 in nothin flat.

[Daves55Sedan]

Back in the '70's, I used to frequent Dan's Used auto parts in Mascoutah. Lotta old stuff there. I ran across and old milk delivery truck that was loaded in the back with nothing but old intake manifolds and saw an intake with an EBU carb on it that looked like my '55 manifold, except that it seemed smaller to me. I kept rummaging and found a '56 intake that had a Holley 2110 on it and compared it with the other intake. That is when I drew the conclusion that the first manifold I encountered must have come off of a '54 Ford car with a 239. But I was not aware that the '54 truck engine had a manifold more on the order of the standard 2bbl '55 manifold (and thus the truck engine would have had the 272 heads also I assume.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Daves55Sedan

That is when I drew the conclusion that the first manifold I encountered must have come off of a '54 Ford car with a 239. But I was not aware that the '54 truck engine had a manifold more on the order of the standard 2bbl '55 manifold (and thus the truck engine would have had the 272 heads also I assume.

There you go, exactly what I have been trying to get across.

The TRUCK 239 (late 54- 1955 CF) was different in design(s) from the PASS CAR 239 DIF. TRUCK did not get the 272 until 1956, but used 256/272 heads in 1955. All of this will be explained in FORD SERVICE LETTERS but getting hold of them all at this date would be a challenge.

When you discuss the FYB, you have to consider all installs incl.- FORD - MERC - TRUCK (LD and HD).

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by 54vicky

Kul what I was saying is unless you with your own eyes see something it is probably based on proposed items that were later discarded.

if you look through your collection of literature re- assembly manuals with different printing dates you will find instances of this.

I think you are mis-interpreting what it is I am describing. If you are describing FORD SHOP MANUALS, they are updated quarterly with either new and/or upgraded service procedures. They offered very little in description or theory. SERVICE LETTERS provided this info that FOMOCO deemed necessary to be released to dealers for warranty/service repair.

A PARTS MANUAL only shows current service parts (date of publication). It does not either give needed service info, other than what the user can differentiate. The are manuals that will allow one to track down deleted SERVICE PARTS.

The actual history of the FYB is not concise even among experts as all will give differing description(s) in their TECH ARTICLES.

Am I explaining this correctly? I am interested in the developmental history of the FYB SERIES. Most has been forgotten.

I want to know exactly why FORD issued two versions of the early FYB. But without a source of the early SERVICE LETTERS, it will be near impossible.

I went through this same thing some years back with the MEL. Same fairy tales. I came across the period LM SERVICE LETTERS and pieced it together.

[rotorwrench]

The Cleveland engine plant started out casting the Lincoln and truck Y-blocks in 1951. With most design and initial production of the small Y-blocks starting at Dearborn, it would make sense that updates were done there. The Cleveland plant likely took a bit of time to tool up for the new smaller engine series. By the time they got started casting, a number of improvements were already incorporated into the design.

[54vicky]

Kul if you let me know what period of time I will when I have time look through the the bulletins I have it is a pile.almost every one from 54 missing a few.most managers also.a couple of osi books from that period.

[54vicky]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by 54vicky

Kul if you let me know what period of time I will when I have time look through the the bulletins I have it is a pile.almost everyone from 54 missing a few.most managers also.a couple of osi books from that period.

Rotors post makes sense to me we really need a flux capacitor to answer for sure I hate it when a myth gets perpetuated

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by 54vicky

Rotors post makes sense to me we really need a flux capacitor to answer for sure I hate it when a myth gets perpetuated

ROTORS post is describing the DIF. It was setup (new) to manufacture the new I6 and LYB. The FYB came along a little later and first year (1954 model run) manufacturing began in the DIF.The CF was opened a little on in the 1954 model year and was tooled for the FYB but the engine was different in many ways from the DIF engine. DIF stopped manufacturing the FYB after the 1957 model year and began the FE/MEL SERIES.

I appreciate your offer and if you ever have the time, please research 1954 to 1955 FYB service/production letters.

Now while I am at it, there was a similar thread here (I think) discussing the intro of the FYB. It's release was scheduled for 1953 but held back because of material shortages (KOREA). Another poster (I cannot remember his name or the thread) posted the FYB designing actually began in 1948. He is correct. This is when the order came down for new engines and the needed plants and tooling. I apologize for dismissing his contribution.

BTW- I just had a colonoscopy and came out with a clean slate. My wife always refers to me as a$$-hole and I just wanted to be perfect for her ...

[KULTULZ]

The problem with the mismatch is the heads/intake situation

While there was a certain amount of standardization starting with 1955, there still are differences between the years. One example is the cam - in the early years a cross drilled cam was used (for oil supply to the rockers), then a cam with a groove and then back to a crossed drilled cam and then in the last years I think they went back to the grooved cam.

I forgot to address this one earlier concerning cross-drilled and grooved cam journals -

If you are using a camshaft with a cross drilled center journal you must use ‘55-early ‘56 cam bearings designed for cross drilled cams.

If you are installing a cam with a grooved center journal you must use the late ‘56-’64 cam bearings.

John Mummert - http://nebraskalandtbirds.org/sitebu...mblyerrors.pdf

I also came across this reference that the cross-drilled cam journal was used again but that is false.

[Rancheroboy]

How can I post images? The insert images icon above wants a URL.

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by Rancheroboy

How can I post images? The insert images icon above wants a URL.

Click on the "Go Advanced" button at the bottom of the text box and look for the 'paperclip' icon at the top of the new/expanded text box. Click the paperclip icon to get a small pop-up window and Browse to the image file in your PC, click/select the picture, then Upload. If you get an error message when uploading, the 'file size' of the image must be just under 2MB to upload.
.

[54vicky]

someone will probably be along to help you will need to post your OS as each have different methods for attaching and resizing hopefully you figure it out as it will answer some questions hopefully.

[Daves55Sedan]

It has been my experience that pic's will not post if you have selected the quick reply box at the bottom of the list of threads. Right above it, you will see a little blue rectangle labelled "POST REPLY". Pick that and use it for the post you want to embed photos in. The can link photos directly from the hard drive on your computer to the post. After uploading is complete, close the upload window, then "insert" the pic in the dropdown list you want on the post.

[paul2748]

If you click on "GO Advanced" you can load pictures. Then scroll down to Manage attachments and click on it. Same as the paper clip thing

[54vicky]

I will jump back in on my OS after hitting the manage attachment button and it opens I then go to pictures or the place I put the picture then I highlight the picture and then at bottom I hit open it will then place the picture in the attachment location it may take a couple of seconds then I hit preview to check and see if it is the one I want as I said different OS may have different methods.we will hopefully get you there

[Rancheroboy]

Turns out my cutting out problem had been a tired/weak fuel pump all along. All is well now. I went to Mummert's shop here in San Diego with many Y-block questions, one being the 239 heads on a 292 block. Turns out the 1961 292 is the only 292 block that 239 heads will work on.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Rancheroboy

Turns out my cutting out problem had been a tired/weak fuel pump all along. All is well now.

I went to Mummert's shop here in San Diego with many Y-block questions, one being the 239 heads on a 292 block. Turns out the 1961 292 is the only 292 block that 239 heads will work on.

Did John say why the 239 cyl heads can go to a 61/ 292? Are these EBU or EBV marked? What intake manifold are you using?

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

Did John say why the 239 cyl heads can go to a 61/ 292? Are these EBU or EBV marked? What intake manifold are you using?

Try reading the entire thread KULTULZ and you won't have to ask repetitive stupid questions ...

EBU