Question for carb experts

[Herman Munster]

Does anyone know if it's possible to convert the early type Autolite 4100 to use a the later model accelerator pump. The older type uses a longer accelerator pump and the latter a shorter type.
The longer one gets in the way of the water heater valve on intake manifold which I have relocated elsewhere for now. I'd like to keep the stock location which is why I was wondering it's possible to convert the carb.

[scicala]

There are actually three different thicknesses of accel pump covers. Your's pictured is '57 only (first year of the 4100). The second carb pictured has a pump cover used from '58 thru approx. '63 or '64 (shorter than the '57 style). The third style from '64 and up is the shortest of the three styles.
Shouldn't be a problem converting to either of the other shorter styles. You will need the newer accel pump diaphragm (#59) available at auto parts stores, and a shorter pump rod that goes from the throttle lever to the pump lever. The return spring (#60) should be useable from the early carb.
Of course you will also need to find the shorter diaphragm cover of your choice.

Or get a later 4100 if you want more airflow. The '57 Autolite 4100 has tiny ventui's and may flow about 400 CFM.

Sal

[willowbilly3]

Is the newer accel. pump diaphragm going to work on the earlier check ball type carb> Just wondering.

[rotorwrench]

My problems with those was keeping the vacuum diaphragm working on the secondary. I had a lot of troubles with those.

[scicala]

Originally Posted by willowbilly3

Is the newer accel. pump diaphragm going to work on the earlier check ball type carb> Just wondering.

Yes it will. That check ball version went to approx. 1964. After that they changed the design to a rubber flapper check valve instead of the steel ball. The diaphragms will work all the way till the end of production on 4100, 2100 and 2150 Autolite carbs.

Sal

[Herman Munster]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Sal, the carb I have is a 57 4100. I was just looking for a 4100 with 1.08 venturies for my 56 292 when I got my B manifold and got this carb purely by chance. I didn't want to over-carb the 292. I also like the simplicity of the Autolite.
Thanks for the info Sal.

[deucemac]

You should be able to use a pump body and arm, return spring, do and arm, and elastomer valve from a later 4100 or 2100 2bbl. Without any problem. Just make sure all the parts come from the same donor carb.

[scicala]

Herman, if you are not going to use the '57 4100, and are looking for a 1.08" 4100,
"Streatdreams" on Ford Barn just sold one in the "Swap Meet" section, but said he is going to post more. Might want to send him a PM if you are looking for one. I have a rough one, but it's a 1.12" from a '64 T-Bird (600 CFM). Has internal water damage.

Sal

[Herman Munster]

I have used it but have it off along with the intake right now. The choke heat tube inside the manifold is bad so I have replace it. The carb otherwise works fine. I could switch to an electric choke control but going that route would be more expensive that replacing the tube.

[Herman Munster]

This is my carb and manifold.

[Gene F]

I put an electric choke cap on my 57, and glad I did. I replaced the regular one, but it still never worked right, no matter what I did.

[scicala]

Amazing that the carb is basicly as long as the intake manifold. Have no idea why it was designed with the extra extra long accel. pump cover.

Sal

[Herman Munster]

Sal, I didn't realize how long the carb was in relation to the manifold until you pointed it out. The air cleaner I have for it, I believe it's also a 57, is also huge. The element is quite small though. I wonder why Ford made large air-cleaners.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Does anyone know if it's possible to convert the early type Autolite 4100 to use a the later model accelerator pump. The older type uses a longer accelerator pump and the latter a shorter type.

The longer one gets in the way of the water heater valve on intake manifold which I have relocated elsewhere for now. I'd like to keep the stock location which is why I was wondering it's possible to convert the carb.

...hmmph...

The 57 4100 was a one year design (HOLLEY) (elongated accelerator pump and divorced choke housing).

I wonder if the 4100 292/312 had a remote mounted heater control valve?

Can you show a photo of your air cleaner asm? I would think it would be the same for the 4100-4150-AFB equipped engines.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

...hmmph...

The 57 4100 was a one year design (HOLLEY) (elongated accelerator pump and divorced choke housing).

I wonder if the 4100 292/312 had a remote mounted heater control valve?

Can you show a photo of your air cleaner asm? I would think it would be the same for the 4100-4150-AFB equipped engines.

EDIT-

The fuel inlet is also elongated. Does it also interfere with the heater control valve?

[scicala]

BTW, the 4100 pictured is not a Holley. It's an Autolite Ford made carburetor.

Sal

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by scicala

BTW, the 4100 pictured is not a Holley. It's an Autolite Ford made carburetor.

Sal

The FORD 4100 and 2100 were designed by HOLLEY.

I don't think FORD was using the AUTOLITE name yet.

In 1961, seeking to enter the profitable aftermarket auto parts business, the Ford Motor Company acquired the Autolite tradename, an Ohio spark plug factory, a Michigan battery facility, limited distribution rights, and the services of several employees. Autolite products became standard original factory equipment in Ford vehicles. A federal antitrust lawsuit was filed against Ford, which dragged on through the remainder of the 1960s, and Ford was forced to sell its Autolite-related assets to the Bendix Corporation by 1973.

SOURCE- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autolite

The carb(s) also went under some design changes in 63/64. I am not sure if FORD bought the rights from HOLLEY or what, but just one example, if you go into the MPC, jets (9533) were the same as HOLLEY prior to 1964 and 1964/ were marked with an F after the jet size (different threads).

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

EDIT-

The fuel inlet is also elongated. Does it also interfere with the heater control valve?

I'm not sure if it did since I couldn't mount it because of the pump linkage binding with it. I am using a '57 specific fuel line that runs from the fuel pump to the carb.

Interesting info about the old 4100 carb. I would have never though it was designed by Holley. It's way too simple to be a Holley.

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

...hmmph...

The 57 4100 was a one year design (HOLLEY) (elongated accelerator pump and divorced choke housing).

I wonder if the 4100 292/312 had a remote mounted heater control valve?

Can you show a photo of your air cleaner asm? I would think it would be the same for the 4100-4150-AFB equipped engines.

I've wondered about a remote mounted heater valve but I haven't been able to find any good parts book illustrations of it.
I'll post a photo of the air cleaner when I get a chance, probably this weekend. I've never been able to find the right air filter element. I've been using one from a DeSoto which fits but not 100% perfect.

[rotorwrench]

Ford and Holley had relations in supply chain clear back to the beginning. They were one of the 4 original suppliers to Ford Motors. They worked together on a lot of stuff over the years but Ford generally made a lot of the units in house with Holley helping to produce overage production. Holley would also help with replacement parts. The Holley brothers never gouged Henry so they got along well with the company for over a 100 years.

The 4100 series were less expensive to produce than the Holley mainstay 4V carbs or the era but FoMoCo occasionally used Holleys for certain applications like performance and heavy duty governed applications.

The big air filter housings were designed to cut down on the sound levels. Most manufacturers employed large housings for this reason.

[Dobie Gillis]

Henry Ford and George Holley were big buds. The Holley brothers actually produced a car at the same time Henry was working on his 1st car. The lore is Henry took a look at it and immediately made a deal with Holley in which Holley would supply carbs to Henry and not make cars and Ford would not make carburetors except under license from Holley.

http://www.bristolmotors.com/Holley-ad%20web.JPG

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by rotorwrench

The big air filter housings were designed to cut down on the sound levels.

Most manufacturers employed large housings for this reason.

...hmmpf...

Makes sense and good point.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Interesting info about the old 4100 carb. I would have never though it was designed by Holley. It's way too simple to be a Holley.

If you think the 4100 is a good design (and it was), GOOGLE HOLLEY 4010 and see the ultimate 4100.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by scicala

BTW, the 4100 pictured is not a Holley. It's an Autolite Ford made carburetor.

Sal

I should have said HOLLEY designed...

My bad...

[Herman Munster]

I don't think I've seen a 4010 yet hear of it. Now I know. Thanks.

Here's my air cleaner. I don't know why the 2nd photo uploaded rotated. It appears normally on my computer.

[KULTULZ]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

I don't think I've seen a 4010 yet hear of it. Now I know. Thanks.

Here's my air cleaner. I don't know why the 2nd photo uploaded rotated. It appears normally on my computer.

THANX for those shots.

That is a 56 FORD 292 right?

I understand the engine sound suppression but it will hold a lot of engine heat around the carb.

[scicala]

The carb, intake and air cleaner appear to all be for 1957 to me.

Sal

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by scicala

The carb, intake and air cleaner appear to all be for 1957 to me.

Sal

Yes that's what it all looks like to me even though I never really planned it to turn out like that.
KULTULZ, all of these have been on my 56 with a 292. All have bolted on without any real modifications. I was able to use my original 56 bellcrank. I just needed to add a spacer under on of the bolt holes on the manifold with it bolted on. The other thing was I needed to readjust the accelerator rod that goes from the bellcrank to the carb linkage.

[KULTULZ]

Just wondering. My CRS is not allowing me to remember much detail of the period.

This is a 1956 292, right?

[scicala]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

Just wondering. My CRS is not allowing me to remember much detail of the period.

This is a 1956 292, right?

Yes, what is pictured is '56 292 or 312. except this one appears to have a later carb on it. '56 was the last year of the Holley 4000 teapot carb on Ford, Mercury and T-bird, except for the '57 dual 4 barrel setups.

Sal

[Herman Munster]

Sal, I see the air cleaner looks like a later 56 one because of the air inlet but how can you tell what carb is under it? You must really know your carbs.
I still have my original 56 manifold, teapot and air cleaner. This is what it looked like before I bought my car.

[scicala]

Herman,

I can tell it has a different carb because of the fuel inlet location on the front passenger's side of the carb. Teapots had rear fuel inlets. Now after a 2nd look at it it looks like a later '57 intake manifold too because of no adaptor to change the bolt pattern. More than likely a Holley 4150 or 4160 carb, or even a two barrel intake and carb.
I also agree I have seen two different 4 barrel air cleaners on '56 Fords. The one pictured and one with no vertical bar in the inlet.

Sal

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by scicala

... Now after a 2nd look at it it looks like a later '57 intake manifold too because of no adaptor to change the bolt pattern. ...

He is good.
The '57 4bbl intake manifold is bigger & chunkier looking than the '56 (& '55) 4bbl intake manifolds because it was upgraded with larger passages for the D code 312 engines.
The carburetor stud mounting holes are also noticeably closer to the intake runners.
.

[KULTULZ]

...hmmph...

GOOD CATCH!

So, although the photo appears as a dedicated restoration, in reality it is not.

One has to be sharp as to what he is purchasing.

EDIT-

It also appears the carb to be a WCFB it's fuel inlet being where it is.

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by scicala

Herman,

I can tell it has a different carb because of the fuel inlet location on the front passenger's side of the carb. Teapots had rear fuel inlets. Now after a 2nd look at it it looks like a later '57 intake manifold too because of no adaptor to change the bolt pattern. More than likely a Holley 4150 or 4160 carb, or even a two barrel intake and carb.
I also agree I have seen two different 4 barrel air cleaners on '56 Fords. The one pictured and one with no vertical bar in the inlet.

Sal

The fuel line inlet should have been an easy catch now that you said it. I forgot the teapot had it the back. I have the same CRS disorder KULTULZ mentions.

Originally Posted by dmsfrr

He is good.
The '57 4bbl intake manifold is bigger & chunkier looking than the '56 (& '55) 4bbl intake manifolds because it was upgraded with larger passages for the D & F code 312 engines.
The carburetor mounting bolts are also noticeably closer to the intake runners.
.

I'll have to put the two side by side and compare them. I'll try to take a photo.

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

...hmmph...

GOOD CATCH!

So, although the photo appears as a dedicated restoration, in reality it is not.

One has to be sharp as to what he is purchasing.

EDIT-

It also appears the carb to be a WCFB it's fuel inlet being where it is.

I'm now trying to make mine look like a period correct upgrade since all the parts I've come across are 57's.

[Crankster]

Tough crowd, that thing looks nice. I suppose it's not concours, but.

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

So, although the photo appears as a dedicated restoration, in reality it is not.
One has to be sharp as to what he is purchasing.

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

I'm now trying to make mine look like a period correct upgrade since all the parts I've come across are 57's.

Originally Posted by Crankster

Tough crowd, that thing looks nice. I suppose it's not concours, but.

I'm attempting the "period correct upgrade" route with a '55 Bird.
or at least a bit more like it should have been than when I bought it.

While I can definitely appreciate a car that's 'original', I'm not that hung up on it unless something is represented as what it isn't.
(like the engine in a certain car that was listed in 3 unrelated places as a 292, but was a 256)

.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Crankster

Tough crowd, that thing looks nice. I suppose it's not concours, but.

Not so much as others, but I am definitely anal...

To me, a period piece such as these being discussed should be assembly correct, and although that is actually an impossibility owing to all of the assembly detail/dealer prep/general repair procedures/variances ... well ... hard to explain.

There is a huge difference (to me anyways) between someone displaying a dedicated restoration or a modified car.

OCD- Correct Alphabetical Order CDO

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by dmsfrr

I'm attempting the "period correct upgrade" route with a '55 Bird.
or at least a bit more like it should have been than when I bought it.

While I can definitely appreciate a car that's 'original', I'm not that hung up on it unless something is represented as what it isn't.

(like the engine in a certain car that was listed in 3 unrelated places as a 292, but was a 256)

.

It is difficult for the untrained eye to differentiate between engines of this period as there is and was so much interchangeability.

You do some nice work. Are you a past tech or just advanced hobbyist?

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

It is difficult for the untrained eye to differentiate between engines of this period as there is and was so much interchangeability.

You do some nice work. Are you a past tech or just advanced hobbyist?

Regretting taking this thread a little farther off track, but you asked...

Yes they can be hard to tell apart. But Ford was making changes each year, if you know what to look for. When I was first trying to figure out what's what in engine parts this was my go-to website/link... http://www.ford-y-block.com/technical.htm
Here's another helpful one... http://www.y-block.info/main.html

The block & heads that were in the car (photos 1 & 2) gave the initial impression of being correct for the year '55 (freeze/core plugs in the ends of the heads) even tho the intake manifold and distributor were both '57 versions, a common upgrade.
But the EBY ('54 Merc 256) casting number on the block and heads was a dead giveaway (photos #3 & 4) along with 272/312 spark plugs not fitting in the heads.

Thanks for the compliment but it's been a trial and error (and error & error) process since this is my first pre 70's Ford, and my first project car in about 30 years.
This retirement project of mine has been dragging on a bit too long due to some large honey-do's around here and medical problems with other family members, but it's almost done, at least under the hood.

In a valiant attempt to re-rail this 'carburetor' thread the carb in the 2nd photo was an Autolite for a '63 T-Bird 390ci, and the Holley in the last 2 photos is an (ECZ) List# 1273, oem for a '57 312.

[Herman Munster]

I read there were 4 different types of my carb for 1957. Since the tag is missing from it is there still a way to figure out which one it could be?

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

I read there were 4 different types of my carb for 1957. Since the tag is missing from it is there still a way to figure out which one it could be?

Can you show a photo?

EDIT-

I expect this statement to cause some controversy but I had a 57 312 (my first of many) that had the 4000 on it (and the install appeared OEM - no butcher work - why would anyone retrofit). I didn't know what L-O-M was back then (1968). I am trying to find my 57 Service Manual to verify this.

So the 57 used the-

1) FORD 4100

2) CARTER AFB

3) HOLLEY 4150

4) HOLLEY 4000 (possibly).

[Herman Munster]

KULTULZwhat I meant was that there were four listings for the Ford 4100 carb, B7A-B. B7A-X, ECZ-U andECZ-Z. I found that mine is a ECZ-Z. These letters were stamped on the body of the carb. I think this might narrow down what Ford it was specific to.
The only thing I could find so far using the teapot in 57 were 312 T-birds with superchargers and twin quads.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

KULTULZ- what I meant was that there were four listings for the Ford 4100 carb, B7A-B. B7A-X, ECZ-U and ECZ-Z. I found that mine is a ECZ-Z. These letters were stamped on the body of the carb. I think this might narrow down what Ford it was specific to.

Yes, it should.

I will be back ...

[KULTULZ]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

ECZ-Z

1957 FORD 312 F/M 4100

Service PN B7A 9510-Z R/B B7AE 9510-A

Note: 1F - Stamped ID Located On Fuel Bowl

According to TEXT, ID TAGS were not used until the 1959 Model Year.

[Herman Munster]

That's why there isn't any tag on the carb. I thought it was missing. The text in the book was a little confusing saying some earlier service models had a tag.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

That's why there isn't any tag on the carb. I thought it was missing. The text in the book was a little confusing saying some earlier service models had a tag.

There may have been I.D. Tags used before, but this is what the FORD MPC says for the period (and they have been incorrect and/or wrong before).

If you notice, even later carbs that came through tagged usually had I.D. Info stamped somewhere on the carb.

...some earlier service models had a tag

This is another gotcha...

Service usually describes a later SERVICE PART REPLACEMENT whereas FACTORY ASSEMBLY PART means what came through from the factory.

This is why (to me anyways) that repair/restoration is so in-concise as all factory info may not be complete and/or incorrect and many that decipher may understand it incorrectly or display it incorrectly which then leads to hearsay issues.

One reason I never tried for an OEM CORRECT RESTORATION (other than $$$) as assemblies can differ from one assembly plant to another and among suppliers.

Much less, I am already OCD so one would most likely drive me over the edge...

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Here's my air cleaner. I don't know why the 2nd photo uploaded rotated. It appears normally on my computer.

That ACL is 1958 and up.

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

This is my carb and manifold.

Have you been able to modify your 1957 4100 yet? Below are three shots I found with the ECZ-B Intake and a 1966 4100.

I have not been able to find a photo of a 57 312 4100 OEM install yet. All I can figure is that the heater control valve (18495) was moved to the heater hose inlet (@ water pump)and the outlet was connected to the intake with an elbow fitting) as was the 1955 272.

[5851a]

Did 57 have a heat control valve? I had a 58 with 332 and don't remember a heat control valve anywhere. May have been removed but it didn't have any extra cables or vacuum lines. Just assumed they controlled temp from 57 year forward on cars with a blend door in the heater box.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by 5851a

Did 57 have a heat control valve? I had a 58 with 332 and don't remember a heat control valve anywhere. May have been removed but it didn't have any extra cables or vacuum lines. Just assumed they controlled temp from 57 year forward on cars with a blend door in the heater box.

Yes. That is what is being discussed here, the placement of the heater control valve and fitment of the 1957 FORD unique 4100 carburetor.

See the dia below. The actual control valve (18495 and 18502) was placed inside the heater core box for 1958. Notice the call-out on the description @ the bottom of the Ill, 57/58.

This opens another quandary, was the 57 4100 carb equipped YB's control valve moved into the heater control box?

The 312 8V intake had a separate outlet coolant supply cast into the intake.

[Oldmics]

Kultulz

Your illustration of the heater is the same as found in the 57 Ford shop manual.

Valve was inside heater cavity.

Oldmics

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by dmsfrr

I'm attempting the "period correct upgrade" route with a '55 Bird.
or at least a bit more like it should have been than when I bought it.

While I can definitely appreciate a car that's 'original', I'm not that hung up on it unless something is represented as what it isn't.

(like the engine in a certain car that was listed in 3 unrelated places as a 292, but was a 256)

Let me attempt to qualify myself...

What you are doing is fine. You are keeping it period correct w/o attempting restoration. It's a driver, correct?

What gets me when the hood is popped on a nice looking FORD is seeing a Mr. GASKET ACL HEI DIST, STANT RADIATOR CAP. DIE-HARD BAT and a JIFFY-LUBE OIL FILTER all entangled in cut-up wiring harnesses...

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Does anyone know if it's possible to convert the early type Autolite 4100 to use a the later model accelerator pump. The older type uses a longer accelerator pump and the latter a shorter type.

BTW- The 4100 shown here is the 1964/ re-design. The 58/63 retained the extended fuel inlet.

Did you mention somewhere while showing your air cleaner that you were having difficulty finding the correct replacement element?

Or am I hallucinating again..

[Herman Munster]

Yes, none of the elements are tall enough. I used a few websites that provided filter dimensions to cross reference one that came close which is how I found the Desoto filter. It still isn't a perfect fit.

[scicala]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

BTW- The 4100 shown here is the 1964/ re-design. The 58/63 retained the extended fuel inlet.

Did you mention somewhere while showing your air cleaner that you were having difficulty finding the correct replacement element?

Or am I hallucinating again..

1958 thru sometime in 1964, the pump covers looked like the picture you posted. 1957 was the first and only year they were "super extended". Starting in late '64 they had an even shorter cover.

Sal

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Yes, none of the elements are tall enough. I used a few websites that provided filter dimensions to cross reference one that came close which is how I found the Desoto filter. It still isn't a perfect fit.

It appears to me the ACL is 1958/ style.

It takes C3VY 9601-A. The measurements are in the text below.

-AIR FILTER CROSSING GUIDE-

Let me know if they sound correct.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

BTW- The 4100 shown here is the 1964/ re-design. The 58/63 retained the extended fuel inlet.

]

Originally Posted by scicala

1958 thru sometime in 1964, the pump covers looked like the picture you posted. 1957 was the first and only year they were "super extended". Starting in late '64 they had an even shorter cover.

Sal

What I was attempting to get across Sal (not too well it seems) is the 1957 (and 58/60) fuel inlet castings on the fuel bowl were extended so as to add to the interference with the 1957 FYB intake mounted heater control valve.

With concentrated ciphering, I found I was wrong and the extended fuel inlet casting was dropped on the 1961 model. The 2nd pump change was in 1964/1965 it seems. I remember selling Accel Pump Diaphrams (C4AZ 9B559-A) that included an extension pin so as to be able to be used with either post 1957 style.

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

It appears to me the ACL is 1958/ style.

It takes C3VY 9601-A. The measurements are in the text below.

-AIR FILTER CROSSING GUIDE-

Let me know if they sound correct.

I'll have to remeasure the inside of the ACL to see which one of those measurements come the closest. There is a possibility the ACL is from a Edsel but I think I had checked the Edsel filters and none matched up.
I've even checked Lincoln and Mercury in the past and got no match. I am nearly 100% I have a Ford produced ACL.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

I'll have to remeasure the inside of the ACL to see which one of those measurements come the closest. There is a possibility the ACL is from a Edsel but I think I had checked the Edsel filters and none matched up.
I've even checked Lincoln and Mercury in the past and got no match.

I am nearly 100% I have a Ford produced ACL.

No, it is definitely FORD, but a style used from 1958 until 1964 on all car lines.

A 1957 ACL is shown below 1st - 1958 ACL 2nd - Yours 3rd.

See the similarity?

I also gave a PN cross-over so you can find an aftermarket filter. What is the ratio, so many gallons of air to a gallon of gasoline?

[Herman Munster]

My filter needs would most closely match the filter at the bottom of the chart
C3VY 9601-A except mine needs to be about 3.25" tall instead of 2.14" tall. No one lists a filter like that, not even my Ford Ready Reference manual which lists every filter from the 50's up to 1966.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

My filter needs would most closely match the filter at the bottom of the chart- C3VY 9601-A except mine needs to be about 3.25" tall instead of 2.14" tall.

No one lists a filter like that, not even my Ford Ready Reference manual which lists every filter from the 50's up to 1966.

... hmmpf...

So all dimensions seem close but the actual height?

C3VY 9601-A equates to 1963 LINC and was used by most ACL 58/ up (Service Replacement), but there are some specialty listing(s).

There is one filter that sizes @ 6.58" ID - 8.40" OD - 3.22" H.

Other than the height, do the other dimensions come close (or could you post what dimensions you came up with when measuring housing)?

If the ACL is EDSEL, it seems the same would be used on the 58 361/410 (later 59/60 332/352). But EDSEL cataloging was separate from both FORD and LM cataloging and I have neither LM or EDSEL cataloging (yet)..

BTW- The C3VY was later assigned an AUTOLITE short number FA-4 for anyone that needs that info.

Get back please as this topic has me interested in finding the correct element. What year READY-REFERENCE CATALOG do you have?

EDIT- ...another...

Look @ the MPC page below. See if either PN matches up.

[Herman Munster]

I have one from 1966. I bought it thinking that I would find the part number for the filter I need. Wrong.
The filter I think I need should probably be:
Top - 10.39" O.D., 7.28" I.D
Bottom - 9.78" O.D, 7.28" I.D
possibly 3.22" tall.

I'm stumped. It's a Ford product. It shouldn't be that hard to find.
I think it might be an AC A82C filter but I haven't found the dimensions for it.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

I have one from 1966. I bought it thinking that I would find the part number for the filter I need. Wrong.

Air cleaner design was changed on the 65 model run due to upcoming emissions compliance.

The filter I think I need should probably be:

Top - 10.39" O.D., 7.28" I.D
Bottom - 9.78" O.D, 7.28" I.D
possibly 3.22" tall.

I'm stumped. It's a Ford product. It shouldn't be that hard to find.

I think it might be an AC A82C filter but I haven't found the dimensions for it.

I am stumped also. All of your wanted dimensions comply with C3VY 9601-A except height. I even dug out a 1967 READY REFERENCE GUIDE thinking it could possibly be LIGHT TRUCK but nothing found (also MPC 60/64).

This guide had FORD - MERC - LINC - EDSEL and LT and nothing shows in that height, even PC or HP. The lowered height of the the cleaner and element was due to their lowering the hood height in 1958 and on.

FORD deletes inactive/discontinued PN's from text after so much time. Whatever you have is some odd-ball application.

[Herman Munster]

Maybe that's why I got it for such a "good" price. It was a restored air cleaner and I only paid $60 for it with shipping included.

[KULTULZ]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Maybe that's why I got it for such a "good" price. It was a restored air cleaner and I only paid $60 for it with shipping included.

It is embarrassing... ... (for me) to not be able to find the element for that cleaner. It sure looks FORD.

Is there any chance of there being ID Stamping Nos anywhere on the assembly?

[Herman Munster]

I've looked and I haven't found anything other than "front".

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by 5851a

Did 57 have a heat control valve? I had a 58 with 332 and don't remember a heat control valve anywhere. May have been removed but it didn't have any extra cables or vacuum lines. Just assumed they controlled temp from 57 year forward on cars with a blend door in the heater box.

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

Yes. That is what is being discussed here, the placement of the heater control valve and fitment of the 1957 FORD unique 4100 carburetor.

See the dia below. The actual control valve (18495 and 18502) was placed inside the heater core box for 1958. Notice the call-out on the description @ the bottom of the Ill, 57/58.

This opens another quandary, was the 57 4100 carb equipped YB's control valve moved into the heater control box?

The 312 8V intake had a separate outlet coolant supply cast into the intake.

Brain-Storm Update-

As I frequently drift in and out from the real world to my dream world ... ... I have time to think ...

There were two heater designs for the '57, not taking into account A/C, RECIRCULATING (base) and FRESH AIR ($$$ option). The '57 4100 equipped car must have had the FRESH AIR HTR standard with the control valve in the HTR box. The HOLLEY and CARTER equipped engines could be ordered with either HTR, the RECIRC HTR still using the valve on the intake manifold..

If you are going to use the 57 4100 and cannot adapt to the later 4100 style accelerator pump asm on your ECZ-B intake on your '56, maybe plumb the HTR control valve onto the WP inlet and use the elbow on the intake to the HTR. This was the design in 1955.

EDIT-

WRONG!

I have since come to realize there were two heater styles in 1955/56 as there were in 1957/58. One style had the heater control valve on the intake, the other at the firewall.

The 1957 4100 had to be mounted on a 57 car with the fresh air heater as the control valve(s) were in the heater box. So to retrofit a 57 4100/ECZ-B carb/intake comb on a 1956, one would have to have the fresh air heater or one would have to install an inline control valve in the inlet heater hose.

While the placement of the control valve from the intake to the WP would stop the hot coolant flow, heat convection from the intake to the heater would heat the heater core somewhat making the cabin unpleasant in the summer.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

I've looked and I haven't found anything other than "front".

Best (IMO) to keep this info all together for others that may run into the same problem(s) and need the info...

THREAD CONTINUATION HERE-

- https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/showthread.php?t=234845

[Herman Munster]

Yes, I started a new thread about the filter so that discussion can continue there.

I had threaded the heater controller into the water pump but in the spot that there was a threaded plug on the drivers side of the pump. It seemed to have worked and the heater hose was long enough. It just looks odd like that.

[Smoke.eater]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

...hmmph...

The 57 4100 was a one year design (HOLLEY) (elongated accelerator pump and divorced choke housing).

I wonder if the 4100 292/312 had a remote mounted heater control valve?

Can you show a photo of your air cleaner asm? I would think it would be the same for the 4100-4150-AFB equipped engines.

My heater control valve is on the inside of the firewall,on top of the heater box.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Herman Munster]

Here's how I relocated the valve on the water pump.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Here's how I relocated the valve on the water pump.

That isn't going to work. The hose the valve is attached to presently has to connect to an outlet fitting (sans valve) (hot coolant) on the intake manifold coolant cross-over (behind thermostat) to the heater core.

The return (outlet) goes from the heater core to the WP inlet fitting. You will move the valve to this inlet.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Smoke.eater

My heater control valve is on the inside of the firewall,on top of the heater box.

You have the optional Fresh Air Heater. What carb do you have?

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

That isn't going to work. The hose the valve is attached to presently has to connect to an outlet fitting (sans valve) (hot coolant) on the intake manifold coolant cross-over (behind thermostat) to the heater core.

The return (outlet) goes from the heater core to the WP inlet fitting. You will move the valve to this inlet.

So it sounds if I want it to work I would have to move the valve to the other side of the water pump, the spot with the elbow.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

So it sounds if I want it to work I would have to move the valve to the other side of the water pump, the spot with the elbow.

Correct. You are just changing the position of the valve from the outlet to the inlet side of the system.

The photo below is a 1955 272. In place of the valve on the intake is a ninety degree fitting (hot coolant supply) and the valve itself is placed on the WP in place of the fitting (coolant return).

That's the only way I know to do it with your carb selection and recirculating heater with an external heat control valve, other than a llater model inline valve.

Did you start to modify the accelerator pump or go this route?

[Smoke.eater]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

You have the optional Fresh Air Heater. What carb do you have?

The teapot is off,now it has a later model 2 bbl motorcraft


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Smoke.eater

The teapot is off,now it has a later model 2 bbl motorcraft

Let me understand correctly...

You have a '57 FORD that came through with a H-4000 (teapot)? What engine?

I am trying to verify something. I had a '57 Club Victoria with a 312/FOM that had the H-4000 on it. It looked to me as OEM (no obvious signs of butchering) I cannot find my SHOP MANUAL to verify.

Just wondering ...

[Smoke.eater]

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

Let me understand correctly...

You have a '57 FORD that came through with a H-4000 (teapot)? What engine?

I am trying to verify something. I had a '57 Club Victoria with a 312/FOM that had the H-4000 on it. It looked to me as OEM (no obvious signs of butchering) I cannot find my SHOP MANUAL to verify.

Just wondering ...

My apologies I have the flu and may have missed that with my grogginess, I have a 56 fairlane 292. But I have not been able to find any useful information or pictures with my particular set up, they all have it on the intake


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Smoke.eater

My apologies I have the flu and may have missed that with my grogginess, I have a 56 fairlane 292. But I have not been able to find any useful information or pictures with my particular set up, they all have it on the intake.

Hey, you're OK. Don't worry about it. You say '56 so my question doesn't apply.

Go back to bed...

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

I've wondered about a remote mounted heater valve but I haven't been able to find any good parts book illustrations of it.

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Here's how I relocated the valve on the water pump.

You know something? That is going to be ugly when you open the hood.

Here are two photos on inline control valves, vacuum operated. The 2nd is off an 86 TAURUS. Either can be hidden out of site.

[Herman Munster]

I know it looks a bit weird located like that. I was also looking for possible in-line valves that were used on 57 or later that were vacuum operated to keep a period look but I haven't found anything.
Those plastic ones are a possibility but they would definitely need to be hidden. The problem is there isn't really anywhere to hide it since the heater hoses are fully visible.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by dmsfrr

I'm attempting the "period correct upgrade" route with a '55 Bird.
or at least a bit more like it should have been than when I bought it.

While I can definitely appreciate a car that's 'original', I'm not that hung up on it unless something is represented as what it isn't.

(like the engine in a certain car that was listed in 3 unrelated places as a 292, but was a 256)

Talk bout De'Jayvue All Over Again...

Years ago, I bought a '55 BIRD and a$$-u-me(d) it was a 292. I was working my first year @ the parts counter and dug out the 49/59 MPC and according to what I read it came through with a 256.

I dismissed it until I was re-reading this thread.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Smoke.eater

My heater control valve is on the inside of the firewall,on top of the heater box.

I have come to discover that the '55 and '56 FORD also had two heater styles, one with the control valve mounted on the intake and the other style @ the firewall. I cannot get a good photo to discern exactly where (outside or inside the firewall).

[Herman Munster]

This spot has a blank on the fire wall of my car.

[dmsfrr]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by KULTULZ

..... Years ago, I bought a '55 BIRD and a$$-u-me(d) it was a 292. I was working my first year @ the parts counter and dug out the 49/59 MPC and according to what I read it came through with a 256.
I dismissed it until I was re-reading this thread.

It's my understanding that during pre-production planning the 256, being the newest engine at that time, was slated for the Thunderbird's.
Example: this unfortunately undated FoMoCo "Introduction" brochure, page 6...
http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/stati...er/image6.html

But by the time actual production began in the second half of '54 the newer 292 was used.
http://www.tbird.info/first-1955-thunderbirds.htm

http://www.oldcaradvertising.com/For...d%20Ad-04.html

http://automotivemileposts.com/tbird/prod1955tbird.html

.

[Herman Munster]

Actually it is dated as 1954 but it doesn't say when it 54 it was released. Even the car in the second page has a 1954 plate on it.

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Actually it is dated as 1954 but it doesn't say when it 54 it was released. Even the car in the second page has a 1954 plate on it.

I saw the '54 plate too but didn't see anything more specific that would tell when the brochure was printed.
Except it was before the hooded headlight doors and either/or option for the hard/soft top were agreed upon.

.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by dmsfrr

It's my understanding that during pre-production planning the 256, being the newest engine at that time, was slated for the Thunderbird's.

Example: this unfortunately undated FoMoCo "Introduction" brochure, page 6...

http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/stati...er/image6.html

But by the time actual production began in the second half of '54 the newer 292 was used.

http://www.tbird.info/first-1955-thunderbirds.htm

http://www.oldcaradvertising.com/For...d%20Ad-04.html

http://automotivemileposts.com/tbird/prod1955tbird.html

...hmmpf...

THANX for the education. I did not know that...

[scicala]

Thank you Dmsfrr. I also never saw that brochure, or heard of the 256 Y-Block in the pre-production plans for the '55 T-Bird.

Sal

[Herman Munster]

Originally Posted by dmsfrr

I saw the '54 plate too but didn't see anything more specific that would tell when the brochure was printed.
Except it was before the hooded headlight doors and either/or option for the hard/soft top were agreed upon.

.

Here you go.

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Here you go.

Thanks. I wasn't looking in the right place.
It must be time for better glasses.

[scicala]

If you look close at one of the dash board shots, you can see the speedometer also only goes to 110 MPH.

Sal

[scicala]

I would guess the brochure was printed before even the 272 was introduced. Otherwise, why would they plan on the Merc. 256 since it's enemic compared to the 272 and 292.

Sal

[dmsfrr]

Originally Posted by scicala

I would guess the brochure was printed before even the 272 was introduced. Otherwise, why would they plan on the Merc. 256 since it's enemic compared to the 272 and 292.
Sal

I'll bet the 272/292 "EC" crankshaft hadn't been built yet.
.20 longer stroke... from 3.10 to 3.30

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

And about the same time the intake ports were redesigned larger (photo below, '54 vs '55 gaskets) along with changing from gasketed 14mm to larger 18mm tapered seat sparkplugs.
.

[KULTULZ]

Herman?

Have you made any decision on which way you are going to go?

Look at this- https://www.ebay.com/itm/1957-312-Fo...item48a6800b88

The 4100 you have may be worth more than you think. Maybe sell or trade for later style 4100? A later style will allow you to keep the control valve on the intake.

A 1.08 4100 flows approx. 480CFM (rated). A 1.12 4100 flows approx 600CFM (rated). Actual flow also depends on the engine.

Oh, BTW...

Go back to Post #63. I made some corrections. The 55 272 still bothers me as I have a photo of an install with the economy heater and no valve on the intake. The inlet hose on the WP is hidden enough not to see clearly whether it has a valve.

[Herman Munster]

I've decided to keep my 4100 and possible modify the accelerator after I see if if I've worked out the choke heat problem. I've replaced the choke tube that runs through the inside of the manifold. I've also found an NOS choke tube button for the tube.
But before I put everything back together, I'm also looking for a PCV adapter for the T-bird valley cover I'm going to use. I haven't installed the valley cover so everything is stalled because of it.

[scicala]

If your issue is not enough heat to the choke to open it all the way, it's possible your heat riser is missing or stuck open ? When the engine is cold, the heat riser closes and helps force exhaust gas through the intake manifold cross over where the choke heat tube is. Also possible the vacuum passage in the carb or choke that pulls the hot air through the heat tube, is plugged with carbon. I've seen that before.

Sal

[Herman Munster]

Thanks, I had checked the heat riser and it operates freely but can get stuck closed or open if it's forced by hand in either direction. The original heat tube was broken and was causing a mild exhaust leak. The passages in the carb are clean as expected since it was rebuilt but had sat on a shelf for many years before i tried it. The only operational problem I encountered with the carb was a deteriorated accelerator pump diaphragm. It was very difficult to find any without buying a entire rebuild kit. When I found one, I bought every one the seller had. I think I have 3 extras.
The thing is I'm now thinking to convert the carb to a later style pump because of the binding problem with the heater valve.

[KULTULZ]

Originally Posted by Herman Munster

Thanks, I had checked the heat riser and it operates freely but can get stuck closed or open if it's forced by hand in either direction.

The heat riser valve was usually lubricated @ service intervals in the old days. Without leaded fuel, they should last a lot longer than they used to-

https://www.amazon.com/Genuine-Fluid.../dp/B00BK7MLKE

Heat Riser Valve- B5A 9685-E - 1955-56 272-292 Dual Exh Only

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/OEM-1955-64-...RZP0Z-&vxp=mtr

If you decide to go with 1957 Exh Manifolds later, they require a different valve.

[Herman Munster]

No I'm sticking with my 56 exhaust manifolds. There's nothing wrong with them.
I use PB Blaster for most of tough lubricating needs.