59 block questions

[CA Victoria]

I was confused by this block I picked up: it has “59” stamped on the bell with the narrow lip above the cam cover. It is relieved too. I found an older post which our friend Walt commented on:

Walt Dupont--I have had a few of those engine in my shop. They have real thick cyl. walls. The only thing I can figure is there a replacement engine for the 39-42 221 made in 46-48.


One of the sites I read stated that the serial number was stamped on blocks as required by local regulations. I have another stamped 99a xxxxxx block out of a 46 Mercury with the same physical attributes.....any thoughts on the 99C xxxxxx prefix?

It has a crack.
A couple post I have read regarding cracked blocks describe the typical crack from one of the center exhaust valves into an adjacent cylinder as being a tough crack to repair. Can this area be successfully repaired?
any thoughts on criteria for evaluating go-no go to salvage the block before extensive cleaning and further testing?
Is this area solid cast in between the valve cup and cylinder?

(I will add photos tomorrow...)

[38 coupe]

All sorts of stuff got stamped on blocks over the years. Post pictures of the deck and we can help ID the block.

[cas3]

That sure looks like the correct ford # stamps

[Tinker]

Motors were never stamped with vin on the deck. ya maybe someone stamped them. Not hard to get stamps. Most dealers had them.


Usually the kiss of death is lower valley cracks along the oil pan. They all have cracks, guess it depends on what you want to build andwhat you want to pay for.

[petehoovie]

Originally Posted by CA Victoria

I was confused by this block I picked up: it has “59” stamped on the bell with the narrow lip above the cam cover. It is relieved too. I found an older post which our friend Walt commented on:

Walt Dupont--I have had a few of those engine in my shop. They have real thick cyl. walls. The only thing I can figure is there a replacement engine for the 39-42 221 made in 46-48.


One of the sites I read stated that the serial number was stamped on blocks as required by local regulations. I have another stamped 99a xxxxxx block out of a 46 Mercury with the same physical attributes.....any thoughts on the 99C xxxxxx prefix?

It has a crack.
A couple post I have read regarding cracked blocks describe the typical crack from one of the center exhaust valves into an adjacent cylinder as being a tough crack to repair. Can this area be successfully repaired?
any thoughts on criteria for evaluating go-no go to salvage the block before extensive cleaning and further testing?
Is this area solid cast in between the valve cup and cylinder?

(I will add photos tomorrow...)

[Bored&Stroked]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Are you saying the crack is from the exhaust valve to the cylinder NEXT to it, or through the transfer area to the cylinder that feeds this valve/port? Can you post a picture of it?

[deuce_roadster]

Your picture is of the intake surface of the block and a port TO an intake valve. The bad cracks described are seen from the deck surface usually with the valves removed.

[CA Victoria]

Still need to get the valve out to get a look see how deep the visible crack is into the ex cup. A few days of rain ahead so i will get it onto a stand and finish disassembly so it can be cleaned up and i can mag test the top side first.
It this area solid cast?
Any thoughts on the best pin to use?

[Tim Ayers]

Originally Posted by CA Victoria

Still need to get the valve out to get a look see how deep the visible crack is into the ex cup. A few days of rain ahead so i will get it onto a stand and finish disassembly so it can be cleaned up and i can mag test it.
It this area solid cast?

The water jacket is behind the cylinder where the crack is. Depending how deep and long the crack is, hopefully it can be pinned and then the cylinder will need to be sleeved.

[CA Victoria]

I learned this evening that this is more than likely a service replacement block 59A-6010-A.
(ford service bulletin 07-15-1946)
It will be interesting to see what the wall thickness is for this block.

[petehoovie]

Originally Posted by CA Victoria

Still need to get the valve out to get a look see how deep the visible crack is into the ex cup.
Any thoughts on the best pin to use?

[KiWinUS]

I have seen all model flathead crack like that. Have repaired many by pining new seat and sleeve.

[Bored&Stroked]

That is a very common crack and like Tony (KiwinUS) mentioned, it can usually be fixed. BUT - it should be fixed by somebody who has used IronTite plugs for a long time, knows how to correctly drill, knows how to "overlap" the plugs, has the correct taps, etc..

Lastly, before that process is done, the block needs to be cleaned, magnafluxed on ALL sides (pan rails can easily be cracked), then pressure tested. This will identify any other cracks to deal with. Depending on how many cracks and where they are located, then a decision can be made to "save the block" or not.

If you're going for a larger over-bore (say 1/8"), then it is usually a good idea to sonic test the block so the machinist knows how much material they have to work with and can recommend a safe over-bore.

After that, the valve seat is knocked out of it, then a series of overlapping iron threaded pins are screwed into place, then the block is bored for a new sleeve and a new valve seat is pressed in place.

Once the engine is built, I highly recommend that upon it's first water-fill and start-up that you use a "ceramic seal" type of water-glass product to help coat the inside of the block and ensure that everything gets sealed up. I use Moroso Ceramic Seal.

My guess is that unless there are additional cracks in very bad places (inside the exhaust passages, pan rails, etc), that the block can be saved.

Best of luck,
B&S

[CA Victoria]

Thank you Amigos-that was the info/expertise that I was looking for......will clean it up and mag it. I do not have a pressure test plate so if no other issues pop up then off to the machine shop for the final check & repair.

[rotorwrench]

The VIN stamped on the intake deck is not common. The number indicates a 1946 commercial VIN. Some states required a serial number be stamped on the engine but I'm not sure which state or when that was the case. The VIN was generally stamped on the half bell of the transmission. It was then stamped on the frame when the engine was mated during production.

There were two different types of blocks that were cast with the "59" on the top of the rear bell. The 41A 221 block started production before the 59A 239 engine started in civilian production. The 221 was a replacement for pre-war engines beginning in mid to late 1944. Both types were produced in 1945 but I don't know how long the 41A block was produced. The 41A block had characteristics of the prewar engines while the 239 did not. This leads to confusion when a person finds a "59" marked block with small bores of a 221.

[CA Victoria]

Thank you, that pieces the information together I had read. Coincidently both of my blocks are stamped with a 99- series, 1946 serial number which in of itself is not related but interesting. May have been a DMV requirement when an engine was replaced.
Both blocks are 3-3/16 with the 59 embossed on the bell housing and the pre war front cover ledge.

[Bored&Stroked]

You mentioned that your 59 blocks have the pre-war timing cover ledge - would like to see a picture of the front of them as I've not seen that in a 59x block, though same say they have.

[Tim Ayers]

To add to this mystery, my 59L has the pencil holder lip. Anything is possible I guess.

[Roger W Gerow]

Years ago in 1961 I purchased a 1947 Ford long door coupe. First owner was a school teacher, second owner was a mechanic, third owner was me. Not long after my purchase, $150.00, I pulled the heads and had .045 taken off them. When cleaning up the exposed area including the visible intake surface I discovered the entire serial number along with the stars on the left rear surface. The engine appeared to have the acceptable appearance, grease, oil and dust. Will never know if the engine was ever replaced since new. It was sold new in Yakima, Washington to the first owner. The second owner lived in a little town near there. I lived in Yakima too. So thats my story.

[CA Victoria]

Here are photos of the 59 block. I believe the relief is a factory modification.
The other engine came out of a Ca car-1946 Mercury Station wagon.

[38 coupe]

Tim, thank you for posting pictures of your 59 block. Can you add a picture of the whole front of the block? I'd love to include that picture in the flathead block information file I keep adding to.

[CA Victoria]

Thank you all for sharing your knowledge.

[38 coupe]

Thank you! I have not before seen a 59 block that passes the "pencil test".

[Tim Ayers]

Originally Posted by CA Victoria

Here are photos of the 59 block. I believe the relief is a factory modification.
The other engine came out of a Ca car-1946 Mercury Station wagon.

The relief is indeed done from the factory. Legend has it that they were used in trucks to prevent valve seat cracks from overheating when getting overworked. LOL.

My 59L is also factory relieved. I'll try to get a pict of the pencil and the 59 L number of the bell.

[Bored&Stroked]

Thanks for the picture . . . it definitely has the "ledge" that was common in many pre-war blocks.

It just goes to show us all that for every story/rumor that comes about, there is a conflicting story to contradict it. I have a 59L - it came from Kenz and Leslie in CO, when I get back to Ohio, am going to have to check the front out. I also have a 59Z - that has the factory reliefs . . . time to dig it out as well.

Not that it makes a difference, just interesting to know all the nuances.

[Tim Ayers]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Here are picts of my 59L with the pencil test. Hard to get good picts since it's in the car.

[rotorwrench]

The 41A blocks had the "59" on the back bell when the post war engines began production due to sharing the same rear shell mold. The front is just like the pre-war 221. As far as other differences in wall thickness and all that, I don't know but they came with 3 1/16" bores when new. They will pass the pencil test since that is a 221 characteristic.

[tetanus]

Here’s my 59 block with 3-1/16 bores,and pencil test. I was told it was out of a40 which seems right on as all the parts on it were 40 ford. Also no factory relief. It did not have the rear main rope seal that threw me off for a bit. It has real thick cylinder walls compared to any other I have.

[tetanus]

Must be some kinda phenomenon around here I looked at another block I had and it’s the same thing 59 block 3-1/16 bore and passes pencil test. Feels like it has a lot of meat in cylinder walls also. This one does have rope seal on rear main. No reliefs either

[38 coupe]

Interesting, thanks for the additional pictures.

[Reds34]

I am by no means a professional, but what shape are the water outlets in the block? Are they round or trapezoidal?

Red

[tetanus]

They are the two round bottom and center and the triangle top one

[CA Victoria]

Curiosity has struck......
I had another block that was already machined when I bought it. It had a thin area in one of the cylinders. I was told about core shift, that the way the molds are made it could happen to one or both banks.

Sonic testing will confirm the cylinder wall thickness & any major irregularities in the aforementioned 59 block, (ie core shift).
What is the minimum wall thickness needed to maintain the block integrity?
One cylinder is sleeved with appx .090 sleeve showing and .160 cylinder wall left behind it.
Elsewhere I can get in to measure I am finding the wall thickness from .25-.31 (it is bored .060).

I’m assuming that the center two cylinders naturally run hot sharing a single exhaust port. I have also heard that sleeved cylinder do not cool as well. Is this a concern?

[rotorwrench]

Sleeved cylinders do just fine as long as the sleeve around .090 to .125". It's the ones that have a thin wall that may run warmer than usual.

[Bored&Stroked]

Cylinder Wall Thickness: I don't like to be below .150 - if at all possible. Back in the day, there were lots of guys that claimed that as long as you were over .080 to .100 you were fine (for racing engines).

The problem with that today is that a lot of corrosion may have taken place since new - so there can be heavier rust pockets around the cylinders and you run the risk of water coming into the cylinder the thinner the walls (even though you thought you were good with your .100 sonic test results). Sonic testing is an approximation and even with 12 test points per cylinder, you obviously aren't checking the entire cylinder wall for imperfections.

Also, if you're racing it really hard and/or with boost, you can split cylinder walls when you start getting them too thin. Also, the thinner the cylinder walls, the more tendency for ring sealing issues as well as more heat getting into the water jackets.

[CA Victoria]

A friend sent this to me....

[Seth Swoboda]

Originally Posted by CA Victoria

I learned this evening that this is more than likely a service replacement block 59A-6010-A.
(ford service bulletin 07-15-1946)
It will be interesting to see what the wall thickness is for this block.

I have an engine just like this. It was a 24 stud 221 cubic inch block of the 59A variety.

I had the block bored to a total of .125

That made this engine standard bore for a 59A enigine. Plenty of wall thickness and 59A pistons and rings in standard size are easy to obtain.

[GB SISSON]

Originally Posted by CA Victoria

A friend sent this to me....

Now that letter is a remarkable find. I have at least one of those blocks. Can someone tell us if that replacement block passes the pencil test?

[CA Victoria]

The 2 mentioned in post 20 do.

[Bored&Stroked]

Interesting that the letter mentions that SAME block for the entire 59x series. What has been common belief is that the 221 (90 HP blocks) had thinner cylinder walls that the 239 (100 hp blocks). I've heard for 40+ years that you had to be careful trying to bore a 221 CI 59X block due to thinner walls - that they wouldn't support a 3 3/8" bore. The above letter refutes that - claiming they're all the same. What we don't know is if the foundries all used the same patterns/core boxes or not.

Anybody have any first-hand sonic test experience with the 3 1/16 221 blocks? I've never built one?

[petehoovie]

Originally Posted by CA Victoria

A friend sent this to me....

[38 coupe]

Originally Posted by Bored&Stroked

Interesting that the letter mentions that SAME block for the entire 59x series. What has been common belief is that the 221 (90 HP blocks) had thinner cylinder walls that the 239 (100 hp blocks). I've heard for 40+ years that you had to be careful trying to bore a 221 CI 59X block due to thinner walls - that they wouldn't support a 3 3/8" bore. The above letter refutes that - claiming they're all the same. What we don't know is if the foundries all used the same patterns/core boxes or not.

Anybody have any first-hand sonic test experience with the 3 1/16 221 blocks? I've never built one?

I suspect the foundry did their own thing and made blocks using existing 221 cores. How else do you explain the 59 blocks that pass the pencil test? I also expect a few of the blocks did use the regular 59 cylinder cores and can be bored big, but that probably wasn't typical.

[Ol' Ron]

Frank Casey of Mass. Is the best crack pinner by anyones standards, Not sure if he's still around, but someone here will know.
Gramps