Topic: 1970 428CJ Water Pump Bolts

[1970 Snake]

Can anyone advise why the water pump engine connection bolts on a 1970 428CJ have one bolt that has a standard head instead of the cup type on the other three. I thought possibly that some one over the years had replace the pump and misplace one of the original cup head bolts, but this is a photo of the available repro's and my originals are the same. Additionally it would be good to know where this one std head bolt goes, mine was place on the lower passenger side of the pump.

Additionally I also found the same issue with the intake manifold bolts, out of the ten bolts, two have stud ends for shaker and rev limiter ground, and one again has the a std head not the Ford slotted head, but is embossed with an "F" on the head.

[Coralsnake]

Regarding the water pump

That bolt goes directly into the water passage of the block, that is why it is different. It goes on the passenger side, lower hole of the water pump.

[Coralsnake]

It should not have a lock washer under the head.

[1970 Snake]

Great much appreciated, what about the intake bolt any comment on that?

[Bob Gaines]

Great much appreciated, what about the intake bolt any comment on that?

The two on the right are typical on the 69/70 428 CJ Mustang. The one on the left is what I have seen on earlier Ford/Shelby duel four aluminum intakes (hard to find). Probably other applications as well.I have not seen the "F" maker mark grade 5 bolt used on a CJ cast iron intake.

[1970 Snake]

Thanks Bob, that's good to know. The bolts in the picture are all off my 1970 cast iron intake just chemically cleaned and plated and I will probably put the "F" one in the middle passenger side under the heater transfer tubes so it can't be easily seen, although I am toying with installing a C7AE-9425-F PI aluminum intake on my motor, and from what you indicated that bolt would be correct for that intake?

[Bob Gaines]

Thanks Bob, that's good to know. The bolts in the picture are all off my 1970 cast iron intake just chemically cleaned and plated and I will probably put the "F" one in the middle passenger side under the heater transfer tubes so it can't be easily seen, although I am toying with installing a C7AE-9425-F PI aluminum intake on my motor, and from what you indicated that bolt would be correct for that intake?

FYI in the last 20 years the cast iron intake has been proven to make more horsepower then the C7AE aluminum intake . It seems counter intuitive but true. I can't remember the exact number but substantially more then enough to compensate for the heavier weight. The C7 aluminum intake did not use the generic bolts with the "F" maker mark.  I have extra correct bolts for your Cobra Jet intake. I would be glad to trade you the correct bolt for your intake for the F marked one as I work many times with earlier intakes. PM me if interested. 

[RoyceP]

Yes I was part of the team testing manifolds, carburetors and intakes at Jay Brown's "Chicken Coop" dynamometer facility. We tested all the intakes and carburetors over a period of about 30 days on the same 428CJ engine. Many interesting facts came from the sessions, which Jay turned into his excellent book "The Great FE Intake Comparo". You can probably find a copy on Amazon these days. From memory I believe the cast iron CJ intake was worth something like 15 HP over the earlier aluminum PI design, which is totally different in many design features. A lot of us were surprised.

FYI in the last 20 years the cast iron intake has been proven to make more horsepower then the C7AE aluminum intake . It seems counter intuitive but true. I can't remember the exact number but substantially more then enough to compensate for the heavier weight. The C7 aluminum intake did not use the generic bolts with the "F" maker mark.  I have extra correct bolts for your Cobra Jet intake. I would be glad to trade you the correct bolt for your intake for the F marked one as I work many times with earlier intakes. PM me if interested.

[1970 Snake]

After doing some research regarding the available data Jay produced, it looks like the C7AE PI aluminum intake did produce 6HP less than the CI CJ intake. This definitely seems odd, but assume the PI intake would flow and perform better past 6000 RPM, but seeming I am not going there its a bit of a mute point. So 6 HP would not be noticeable in the seat of your pants throttle response, but assume the weight difference would be noticeable in handling in corners. Will likely put the CI CJ manifold on and also use the "F" bolt which my engine had on it. Thanks for the input and help guys.

[Bob Gaines]

After doing some research regarding the available data Jay produced, it looks like the C7AE PI aluminum intake did produce 6HP less than the CI CJ intake. This definitely seems odd, but assume the PI intake would flow and perform better past 6000 RPM, but seeming I am not going there its a bit of a mute point. So 6 HP would not be noticeable in the seat of your pants throttle response, but assume the weight difference would be noticeable in handling in corners. Will likely put the CI CJ manifold on and also use the "F" bolt which my engine had on it. Thanks for the input and help guys.

No stock hydraulic cam 428 CJ engine is going to see much 6000 RPM or above (maybe once  ) and as far as handling although the lower weight difference in front would have a positive handling effect I doubt that difference would be enough to be noticeable set of the pants let alone on a street car with street tires .The point is you can rest easy knowing that you are not missing a lot of potential by having the factory cast iron intake over the the Aluminum one.

[1970 Snake]

So, after much self deliberation and after having port matched and other fixes on a C7 PI aluminum intake I own, I have taken your advise Bob and I spent the better part of the day cleaning up my original cast iron -C 1970 428CJ intake to install on my engine build. BTW I also figured out why the "F" bolt was in the manifold. A previous owner many years ago replaced the timing chain and did a valve job, when the intake manifold and timing chain cover where re-installed the assembler (who ever that was) put one of the intake manifold bolts in the timing chain cover on the timing pointer hole and put the "F" bolt which used to be in there on the manifold. I went through all my disassembly pictures and saw this error, then checked both bolt lengths and they are the same, just thought I would let you know. Again thanks for the help regarding this thread, stay safe all.

[RoyceP]

The black bolt in the WCCC photo needs to have sealant on the threads in order to avoid a coolant leak. Originals were furnished with sealant on the threads of that one bolt. The repros are not.

Can anyone advise why the water pump engine connection bolts on a 1970 428CJ have one bolt that has a standard head instead of the cup type on the other three. I thought possibly that some one over the years had replace the pump and misplace one of the original cup head bolts, but this is a photo of the available repro's and my originals are the same. Additionally it would be good to know where this one std head bolt goes, mine was place on the lower passenger side of the pump.

Additionally I also found the same issue with the intake manifold bolts, out of the ten bolts, two have stud ends for shaker and rev limiter ground, and one again has the a std head not the Ford slotted head, but is embossed with an "F" on the head.

[1970 Snake]

Yes thanks, I used a coat hanger wire to poke and to see which holes go into the water jacket and sealed those bolts with a pipe thread sealant. I have also decided to keep the lock washer on the dark water pump bolt as I believe mine did come from the factory with that washer. As you can see in my picture the washer that was on that screw has a very distinctive hatch marking around the perimeter of the lock washer just like pretty much all of the Ford lock washers of the day on my car.
BTW, I have all my factory bolts chemically cleaned and then plated for rust protection or factory replication, even after that process the bolts that had the factory sealant, still have that light colored dot of sealant (about 1/4" diam.) on the threads, I originally thought that it was a thread locking compound like the thread locker solutions, but you are indicating its a sealant?