Thanks for the kind words, Rick.  I hang my hat over at Squarebirds.org now, as their Webmaster.

Bill Knighton brings us news of the Oceanside Thunderbirds in Perth and other hot rodding events.  I am very impressed with the Australian's enthusiasm for fine Fords and hot rods.  I'm also jealous of your car.  I hope my '55 will look as good as  your car after I get it painted.  I love your colors, and will use them; Colonial white on top and blue on the body (mine's a Fordor Customline, not a prestigeous Fairlane).

Cheers  - Dave 

Royal Oak, Michigan (Four miles north of Detroit, and 12 miles NORTH of Windsor, Canada).  That's right, we're north of Canada.

Ford 292 Y-Block major overhaul by simplyconnected

I have not done the groove behind the camshaft bushing modification so I don't know what depth it should be. I don't want to give incorrect info if I don't know.



Perhaps Ted can jump in here he has done that mod and would be the most knowledgeable as to depth of the groove behind the bushing. There was a picture in one of the previous posts as to the tool he used. I cannot find it at the moment. I would like to know the depth of the groove behind the bushing also as I feel that is the best of the two modifications due to the camshaft bushings wearing in and could choke down the oil flow to the top end over time especially if your are running higher valve spring rates.



Playing devils advocate now these engines are not normally our daily drivers anymore. Would it wear into the bushing if we only put under 10K miles a year and running stock valve springs?

I have seen many high milers with the groove deepened in the camshaft still oiling the top well.



The after market cams I have measured were between .014" -.017" deep also.. There were some aftermarket camshafts about ten years ago that were about .013" deep. These camshafts were bad news for top oiling. The original Ford camshafts I have measured were about 021" deep.



How we arrived to use the figure of .032" for depth was we had a fleet of school buses with 292's in the early 60's that had bad top oiling problems. The original camshafts were .021" deep and not oiling sufficient, the group of us mechanics felt 50% deeper would be a good starting point. It proved to work well.

Here is the post that describes how to do the modification.

 http://www.y-blocksforever.com/forums/Topic36955-3-1.aspx?Highlight=cam+groove+modification

1956 Fairlane Victoria (ORREO)

 

Overlooking Beautiful Rimrock AZ

Mike.  Thanks for finding that posting and putting up the link for it.

 

Marv.  The problem with many of the new replacement Y-Block Ford cam bearings is that they are now constructed using a much softer babitt material than the originals.  As a result, bearings made from this softer material have a propensity for advanced bearing wear or deformation into the camshaft groove and especially where the valve spring pressure has been increased.  This same issue shows up with the Ford 427 sideoiler engines where the #2 & #4 cam journals use a similar groove for top-end oiling.

 

Regarding the depth of the groove in the center camshaft journal itself, here’s the spec posted by Dennis K. awhile back.

 

And here’s the link to that particular thread.

http://www.y-blocksforever.com/forums/Topic11666-3-2.aspx

 

Based on the original Ford specification for the camshaft groove, a groove machined into the block behind the center cam bearing should be at least this deep and even deeper would be desirable.  My own preference is to go at least 1/16” wide by 1/16” deep.  Any excess in oil flow to the top can be regulated with drilled set screws that are threaded into the bottom of those rocker stands where the oil comes out of the heads.  A favorite orifice size in these set screws for top end restriction would be 0.078” (5/64” drill).  If the hole size is 0.125”, there’s a good chance that oil flow to the top end can be excessive and especially if the rocker shaft oil tubes are still being used.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

Thanks Ted for the reply regarding the change in the bearing material composition. I was not aware that the new bushings are mfg with a softer material this will definitely lead to a faster wear than the old stock. Thank you.

One point I was trying to bring out is the change to the bushing design where the mfg has attempted to fix the poor oiling problems. With this change now we likely will have excess oiling to the top end unless we add a restriction to control the flow. This is something for the re-builder to watch for.

marv