332-428 Ford FE Engine Forum-Firing order question. (2024)

Jan 22, 2021#12021-01-22T05:42+00:00

I have never seen this question here before or any time when I was more active 20 yrs ago. I am wondering why Ford opted for the 1-5-4-2-6-3-7-8 on the FEs rather than the firing order of 1-5-4-8-6-3-7-2 like the old Y blocks had. Just from a normal reasoning perspective, the old Y blocks had the superior firing order when you look at scavenging effects. It would seem that the uniform exhaust flow pulses would build more power ( I can't begin to guess how little or much ) across the rpm range. Always seemed to me that the FE firing order would cause issues with differences in fuel and air ratio between cylinders, due to uneven scavenging pulses. The only thing I don't know about is would the Y-block firing order require a different crankshaft (I know cam will be different) and /or would the change in the firing order affect the engine harmonics enough to be detrimental the making as much or more power? Would it throw balance off or create additional bearing wear? Has this even be done? I decided to ask this after I saw the question about the Doug's crossover headers. I know that they used crossover type headers in the old indy car days to get uniformity in the exhaust pulses and, by all accounts they worked. Since the 289 has the same firing order as the FE, I am curious if changing firing order would be a better solution to the exhaust flow issue rather than the crosover pipe? I have no way to experiment with or literature to validate/deny my line of thought that's why I am throwing this on the wall to see if others have wondered the same thing I have for several years now.

Jan 22, 2021#22021-01-22T14:04+00:00

Jan 22, 2021#32021-01-22T17:22+00:00

Jan 22, 2021#42021-01-22T17:39+00:00

Real benefits. That's why 180-cranks (flat cranks) are used. It treats the engine as independent four cylinders on a common crankcase. This goes way, way back. For engines where a flat crank wasn't an engineering option, they used things like the GT40 "bundle of snakes" exhaust. Obviously, that kind of unlimited solution doesn't apply to something like a Mustang. And sure, there are tuning considerations. But there are always tuning considerations for even minor changes. It's generally more rewarding making power with a four cylinder or a V6.

Jan 22, 2021#52021-01-22T22:55+00:00

I am pretty sure the Dougs, and several other header designs, cross 1 tube per side on a FE, purely for fitment. Trying to get something even slightly close to "equal length" primary header tubes on a V8 engine. while dealing within the limited engine compartment of a shock tower equipped Mustang or Fairlane is a daunting task. So by crossing 1 tube per side, and having it exit into the opposite side collector allows for a longer tube, and at the same time, frees up some room for the other rearward located tube. The first pair of headers we built for my FE Fairmont had # 3 & #7 tubes cross below the oil pan on the way to the opposite collector, making all the first 3 tubes on each side very close in length. #4 & #8 were a bit shorter, but with the #3 & 7 tubes out of the way, it left enough room for a decently radiused 180 degree tube for the 2 rear cylinders, to make them semi close in length to the other 6. Years later, TomP built a new pair of headers than not only tucked up quite a bit higher (the old headers would often scrape after a good wheelstand), he also made them without having to cross over from 1 side to the other. Nothing else was changed, but other than being harder to install, and providing more ground clearance, there was no change anywhere on the ET slip.

1978 Fairmont drag car, best with 428CJ & 4 speed Jerico 10.03@132 MPH, best with 427 w 428 crank, 9.97@132 MPH.
Current street/strip project; 1959 Meteor (Canadian Ford) Tudor sedan 428CJ 4 speed.

Jan 22, 2021#62021-01-22T23:58+00:00

Short(er) answer. My old engine shop, Pro Motor Engineering, Elk Grove Village, IL long ago (mid-70's) was actually deemed a test site for both SBC and BBC f.o. swaps. Story was, even with their NHRA winning SBC's in lots of higher Comp and SS classes, the swaps were hardly noticeble on the dyno and at the track. Converesly the BBC swaps on (at the time) really big hp engines (say 750+) gave at best a 7-8 hp gain, or about 1%. Noted builder Jerry Baker thought the minimal gain came from the somewhat unique paring of a BBC's intake ports (0-11-11-0 as opposed to Ford's 1-1-1-1-) and how the swap minimized the 'steal' from one intake tract to another. He said for our (sorry! but we did race Chevy's then) single-plane 427-based BBC at about 550-565 hp, it was a waste of time and money!

Jan 23, 2021#72021-01-23T00:01+00:00

Jan 23, 2021#82021-01-23T13:38+00:00

Jan 24, 2021#92021-01-24T00:31+00:00

Funny but the 5.0 coyote engine has the y block firing order.
Greg

Jan 26, 2021#102021-01-26T17:29+00:00

I think the firing order is largely inconsequential with regard to power output or header design. Ford claimed to have changed 302 / 351W firing order in the late 1970's due to a difference in main bearing wear characteristics. Same as rod length - much ado about nothing.

1968 Cougar GT-E Augusta Green / Saddle XR-7 427 side oiler / C6 / 3.50 Detroit Locker
1968 1/2 Cougar Cardinal Red / Black / Black 428CJ Ram Air C6 / 3.91 Traction Lock