Hi  I am new to this  sight and have a 1964 F100 with a 292 engine  I an starting  the rebuild and want to know  what  I have!  
Are the  rods the heavy duty truck rods or are they the same as used in the cars!  will a forged  crank bolt into the  engine or are the heavy duty truck  engines different!

If it is the original 292, then it has the standard rods.  The parts do interchange, so there is no telling what's inside now.  The only way to know for sure is to take it apart and see what's there.



Lawrenceville, GA

Hmmmm...  Let's back-up a bit on Charlie's answer for clarification purposes.

From 1954 - 1961 any 239, 256, 272, or 292 engine except the HD 292 truck engine used forged rods with the letters EBU showing on one side of the rod web adjacent to the big end of the connecting rod.
In 1962 Ford began using a different forged rod in the standard production 292 y-block engines they were producing from '62 - '64.  This different rod had the letters C2AE on one side of the rod web adjacent to the big end of the connecting rod.
The EBU rod and the C2AE rod have the same center to center dimension of 6.324 inches
The C2AE connecting rod is considered to be stronger than its predecessor the EBU rod.
_______________________________
The HD 292 truck engine was produced from 1961 to 1964.  It was unique in the components used for the rotating assembly.
This 292 HD engine was not used or found in F-100 trucks or F-250 trucks, or in passenger cars.
The HD 292 crankshaft was forged steel, not cast iron
The connecting rods used with the HD forged steel crank application were forged steel, but carried the letters C1TE and had a center to center length of 6.252 inches
The HD 292 engine used a unique flat top cast piston with a piston pin compression height that was different than the pistons used in 272, 292, or 312 engine applications.  The piston pin compression height for the HD 292 engine with the C1TE, 6.252 inch c to c rods was 1.830 inch.

Getting back to your question, small block... Yes, a C1TE forged steel crank can be used in any 292 FoMoCo engine block from 1955 to 1964.  IF using a HD 292 forged steel crank in your '64 F-100 truck, I'd use your existing '62 - '64 292 C2AE connecting rods with it because the C2AE rods are considered to be stronger that the earlier EBU rods used in '61 and earlier 292 passenger car and standard duty 292 truck applications.

IMO, unless you're building a supercharged or turbocharged y-block engine, a cast crank will take whatever abuse you have in mind for the assembly.  Too, the forged steel 292 crank weighs more that the 292 cast crank!

The above info is based on information from John Mummert's website Ford y-block.com in the technical section.  Click on the link below at
http://ford-y-block.com/dimensions.htm

I hope what I've written helps with your questions.     


NoShortcuts
a.k.a. Charlie Brown
near Syracuse, New York

Charlie.  Total agreement on your crankshaft and rod breakdown.  I’ll add the following.
 
If the engine is still original to the 1964 pickup, then expect to find the C2AE rods which would be the upgraded rod over the previously used EBU rod.  The HD 292 steel crankshaft will bolt into any of the 272/292 blocks without issue but the weight of the crankshafts tends to make them counter-productive for performance use.  If running a supercharger, then the snout strength on the steel cranks is much better than that on the cast cranks which then makes it a valid consideration for that purpose.  Ford cast both 292 and 312 blocks at least all the way through 1967 for marine, industrial, and warranty purposes.  Most of those engines used the C1TE rods in the 312’s and the C2AE rods in the 292’s.  The exception would be the HD 292 engines which could be found with either the C1TE or C2AE rods.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

Over time, I’ve scratched my head quite a bit about the y-block HD 292 truck engine…

The HD 292 truck engine rotating assembly 'concoction' was only used from '61 - '64.
The forged steel crankshaft was only used for the HD truck application.
- this was an expensive part to produce.
- I speculate that engineers' calculated the need for a stronger crank for the loads the HD truck engine was calculated to experience in lower rpm, heavy load operation.

Coupled with the stronger forged crank for the HD 292 truck application, Ford opted to use a shorter (!) connecting rod than they used in any other y-block 272 or 292 applications.
- WHY did Ford move to a shorter connecting rod in the HD 292 truck engine???

Separate, but related, question to this...
 - WHY did Ford spend the $$$ to produce a different connecting rod for the HD 292 truck application?
- Why didn't Ford engineers simply use the already in existence, produced, and available ECZ connecting rod that had been used in the regular production  312 y-block engine from 1956 through 1960 with its 6.252 center to center length?
Evidently, Ford engineers calculated that a stronger connecting rod was needed for the low speed torque loads they anticipated that the HD 292 truck application would experience in its regular use.

My understanding is that because of the use of the shorter, specially made C1AE connecting rod in the HD 292 truck engine, a piston with a different piston pin compression height was required in order for the connecting rod to clear (not interfere) with the engine block.
-  the HD 292 truck piston application had a different piston pin compression height (1.830 inch) than those used in any other 272, 292, or 312 y-block engine application (1.768 inch)
- Ford’s production and stocking of different pistons for the HD 292 truck application further spelled more expense for the offering. 

Back to the pivotal question I asked above… WHY did Ford move to a shorter center-to-center length connecting rod in the HD 292 truck engine???

Usual thinking seems to be that longer connecting rods, that is connecting rods that have a greater connecting rod to crankshaft stroke ratio, improve high rpm power.  I THINK that Ford engineers conversely believed that shorter connecting rods, rods that reduced the connecting rod to crankshaft stroke ratio, would improve the HD 292 truck engine’s low speed torque production.

I’m told that:
- the longer a connecting rod, the more mechanically efficient the connecting rod and crankshaft linkage system becomes.
- there could be debate as to whether decreasing the ratio of connecting rod length to crankshaft stroke is counterproductive to torque production because it increases rod angularity and therefore increases piston to cylinder wall friction.
- an engine’s rod/stroke ratio can affect an engine’s rpm capability and performance output, that is, the engine’s performance power curve.

I speculate that the HD 292 truck engine was NOT intended for high rpm operation or high rpm power production.  Ford engineers spent some serious money modifying the 292 standard production engine utilizing a forged steel crank, special length connecting rods, and special piston pin compression heights.  I speculate that the expense was incurred because of engineers’ calculation of the need for greater low rpm strength of the crank and rods AND their belief that the shorter connecting rods would increase lower rpm torque production for the HD 292 truck engine application.

I wonder whether dyno tests would prove the lower end torque production curve thinking correct???

THANKS for others thoughts on this.  

NoShortcuts
a.k.a. Charlie Brown
near Syracuse, New York

Also, one might ask, why did they go to all that trouble when they had the FE/FT "big blocks" already in production by the early 60's? Those would seem more suitable for HD applications, leaving the standard 292 for F100 use with no need to spend money on an engine series that was soon to be out of production for the most part. All the more a puzzle considering Henry's penchant for penny-pinching.

hear on the west coast,especialey in the idustrial world ford powered lumber cariers,small cranes, forklifts as well as marine,all thes aps had 30to 40%of ther power com off the front of the engine.the cast iron cranks wher noted to break off the crank nose.i never heard of a forged crank breaking at the front .skajet was a loging machine maker that used a lot of 272 292 ind. engines ine yarders and othe uses. hard to say is they had influence with ford.no user ever went to fe 332 or 352s,they wher problematic in early years in cars,where ys wher considered bulet proof.also ford and chrysler engines as well as light trucks wher dominent in the loging industry,gm wher no wher to be seen till the late 60s

      Thanks  for  all the   information The  rods in the pickup are C2AE!    The  valves in the heads on the engine are real small. I have a set of heads off a 1958 engine with the  big valves so he will probably  use them!
A bout the rod length I was just talking  about the reasons  with a old ford mechanic a while a go because  I was curious about the same thing,  his explanation  for shortening the rods on the Heavy duty 292 were as follows
1   A larger compression height  made more  room for ring lands making  the  piston stronger
2  The taller piston had better support under heavy load, this  avoided the piston  tilting helping to get a good ring seal!
 I asked  him why not   just  extend the lower skirt of the  piston and use the long rod ? he  said  when they experimented with  that they found  the  lower  skirt  was likely to crack! 
 About the  re design  of the 292  for heavy duty use, he told me that  Ford was  disappointed in the Super duty  engines, in both  performance and the way they slurped gas!
There were guys that would  refuse to buy the  super duty engines, they wanted an engine that  would get better  mileage!    The 292 302 and 332 were still in demand

  

They went with the shorter rod for the heavy duty truck engines which was 312 length (which was a good thing if you wanted heavy duty rods in a 312) due to the compression height of the top of the piston, I believe the pistons were also forged instead of cast to handle the heavy loads and yes they were not intended for high rpm, most or all had the governed carb distributor setup which I believe was factory set to 3800 rpm.

55 Vicky & customline

58 Rack Dump, 55 F350 yard truck, 57 F100

59 & 61 P 400's, 58 F100 custom cab, 69 F100, 79 F150, 82 F600 ramp truck, 90 mustang conv 7 up, 94 Mustang, Should I continue?

Small block:  INTERESTING comments from the old Ford mechanic about the HD 292 truck engines.  Because of the limited HD truck application, I find that few owners of y-block cars and light duty trucks are knowledgeable about the ins-n-outs of this Ford application.  The sodium filled valve stems with their 7/16 (?!?) diameter are probably another interesting discussion.

You indicated that you've got a set of '58 vintage large intake valve heads.  I've attached a link to John Mummert's web site with the listing of different y-block heads and their original application.  Click the link below...
http://www.ford-y-block.com/cylinderheadchart.htm

It's AMAZING the number of different heads that Ford produced for the y-blocks between 1954 and 1964.  At one point, it was a matter of what transmission the engine was to be mated with or whether it was to have a two barrel or four barrel carburetor.  In '57 they started simplifying the whole thing a bit...

Welcome to the site, and thanks for making the time to share what you have picked up for info on the why-fors of HD 292 engine application. 


NoShortcuts
a.k.a. Charlie Brown
near Syracuse, New York