Compression on 61 144, advice needed

[dhbfaster]

Keeping in mind i want to keep my origional 144... I checked the compression.
Spec according to the book is 150-170. Mine was about 130, 120, 120, 130, 130, 130, give or take a point or so each. Low...but I really have no idea how much of an impact being this low makes.
I've had Advice anywhere from it doesn't matter that much if it runs to (more along the lines of what I have been thinking) might as well do it right and send it to s&j engines in Spokane...totally redone right and with a 7 yr 70000mi warranty.
Any words of wisdom??
Thanks as always!

[Ageless]

Spray some oil in each cylinder and retest. If the compression increases, you need a valve job. If still low, pull the head and use a inside micrometer to measure the bore.If it's less that .015" oversize, you ca get oversize rigs.

[falcon cobra]

The oil goes into the rings and will raise the pressure, if the valves are bad they will leak and the number wont go up much, if you really want the 144, just have it rebuilt... A berry hone job will get you down the road but not for verry long...jh

[dhbfaster]

So..S&J engine in Spokane says it's actually cheaper to turn my (1961) 144 into a 170 when they remanufacture it rather than keep it as a 144 because the 144 parts are now special order. I heard the block is the same, but I wonder if there's anything else different in these two engines? It would seem that boring out to a 170 would mean walls would be thinner and cooling could be a problem? Anyone know anything about this?

[Ageless]

The difference is in the stroke (crankshaft) not the bore. Both engines have a 3.5" bore. BTW, you could not gain that many cubic inches in bore alone

[ew1usnr]

"... I want to keep my original 144"

Cool! The "Thriftpower" 144 had a lot of design innovation put into it with the goal of making the six cylinder engine as lightweight as possible while still using a cast iron block. That engine only weighed 385 pounds and propelled a six passenger car while getting up to 30 mpg. The public loved it. If you stay with your 144 you will be keeping your Falcon true to its original pure economy design concept and you will have one of the few remaining 144's still driving around. I would love to try one out.

From what I have read, the 144 worked well with the three-speed manual (which you have), but its performance really dropped when it was coupled with an automatic transmission.

One weakness that I read that the 144 had was that the oil passage to the rocker arms was undersized and could become clogged. Ford's Y-block engines of the 1950's had the same issue. Kits were sold with an extra oil tube that corrected the problem. I saw this one for sale (since sold) on e-bay. I think that they had a fitting where you screwed in a tube behind the oil pressure switch and then connected the other end of the tube to the valve cover. I have also read that the clogging issue was a problem because people were using non-detergent motor oils back then and the oil passage clogged because of a failure to change the oil at the correct intervals. With modern oil and changing it every 3000 miles the original design should be fine.

144 rocker-arm oiler tube kit:
3365

Wikipedia says: The 170c.i. Special I-6 was a stroked version of the 144c.i., changing the stroke from 2.5" to 2.94".
I don't think that you can convert a 144 to a 170. They are different engines.

As a point of comparison, the 1950 Ford came with a choice of a 90 hp 226 L-head in-line six or a 100 hp 239 V-8 (both flat heads). The 1960 overhead valve Thriftpower six made 85 hp and it was just 144 cubic inches.

[dhbfaster]

Thanks for the advice guys...I did check the book and also found only the stroke is different between the two motors...very interesting. Now I'm wondering if they guy said it was just boring it out, or if it was something else. I think I'll keep it the origional 144...it's "not that much more" to keep it origional. (I seem to be saying "It's not that much more to..." quite a bit.)

[SmithKid]

Just a side note that might reinforce your decision: Back in the early and mid 70s I was big into dirt bikes and my favorite place to ride was a couple hundred miles away (Mattawa, WA), so I bought a 1960 Ranchero. Almost every week-end that I could I loaded it up with 3 motorcycles, 3 bodies, 3 five gallon gas cans, 3 toolboxes, and of course, 3 helmets, leathers & assorted riding gear and lunches. We headed off over a mountain pass to RIDE!!! That poor little motor was abused horribly by rowing the Dagenham back and forth between 2nd and 3rd gears to get over the mountain pass as fast as we could. The motor (144ci) never gave me a bit of trouble and it achieved an average of slightly over 20 mpg on this trip for over two years. AMAZING!

[Gina K]

Yup, I agree with Gene. I have had many Falcons and a Comet with 144s and never had any problems. Keep it original!

[dhbfaster]

Thanks...
My falcon was my grand father's car since new- it was sort of his utility car that we didn't have to worry about scratching, and it got great mpg and was easy to maintain...at the time he couldn't drive any more, I was about 15 (car was 17) and he gave it to a quick lube business my father and uncle started- they painted it green in mexico, re-did the interior, took the back seat out...and used it as a delivery for a number of years before they gave it to my dad. (All the work combined in mexico back then probably cost $150.) It just always kept running...so, I always said I am going to bring it back to pretty much how it was originally...might as well stick with the plan as much as possible. Thanks for helping me stay on track-

[olgraybeard]

Compression is within 10psi of each other with no real low cylinders why not just drive it. If you just got to spend money give her a complete tune up and maybe a 1/2 quart of atf a couple of weeks before next oil change to clean out any sludge in the engine and a carburetor kit.:shift:

[Jeff W]

Compression is within 10psi of each other with no real low cylinders why not just drive it. If you just got to spend money give her a complete tune up and maybe a 1/2 quart of atf a couple of weeks before next oil change to clean out any sludge in the engine and a carburetor kit.:shift:


I agree - as long as you don't have a bunch of blow by (smoke out the breather) or high oil consumption - Just clean up , paint and drive.

[falcon cobra]

Why not just put a 200 in it ? no one will know but you, they look the same....jh

[Luva65wagon]

We are all still negating the key issue... what is causing the readings to be 20-30% low overall? If just low compression due to rings, then you can probably get by with the approximate equal 20-30% loss in power. If it is due to valves, then you might not want to 'just get by'. Burning valves, or valves needing to be adjusted, are not things you want to just let go.

So do as was mentioned earlier and squirt a bit of oil in each cylinder (make sure it is well distributed to go around the entire top of the piston and rings - fog it in, if you can) and see whether the increase of compression is significant. If it is, then this is just rings and normal wear. Live with it, or not. Often you can use a good engine cleaner and/or running some Berrymans in the gas to clean things up and improve compression. Valves on the other hand, you may want to address.

Keep in mind that valve jobs only on high-wear motors can add stresses to the lower end with not-so-good results. So if you go that route, at least inspect the lower end.

And for what it's worth, I get the desire to keep things stock. Yes, it is true that you can pretty much swap a 144/170/200 all with each other with minimal efforts - typically carburetion only (from mounting issues mostly). So unless you are really worried that it is going to lower the value of the car, which I have to say that is probably never going to be an issue with a Falcon, I would do whatever you feel to do. We are all looking at and doing things to our cars to improve their ability to maneuver among the newer cars on the road. And to do so safely. Safety should be #1 priority, then go from there. A good running 144 isn't a bad motor, but getting parts at 3-times the expense may not be worth the effort to preserve it - just for the sake of doing so.

:)

[BadBird]

Dump the six. Do what John Henry is doing. You'll be hitting yourself in the head saying " I could of had a V8". Kidding of course. Just me being me. :3g: Larry

[Luva65wagon]

Dump the six. Do what John Henry is doing.

Are you confusing me with John again? Oh man...:NERVOUS:

[dhbfaster]

Yep, I can see all those points. I've got a perfectionist streak, and a "don't do things twice streak" and that all conflicts with the fact that it's a bit rediculous to spend too much money on the old car that lasted so long because well...nobody ever had to spend any money on it! I'm not worried about the value of the car...because in that sense it's basically priceless-I'm not going to sell it. Every time I think about upgrading it, I think it will detract a bit from the memories, the story, the nostalgia and the fun of being able to show my grand kids their great, great, grandfathers car- pretty much the way it was (except with better paint, and well....maybe carpet instead of the origional rubber floor which actually costs more than carpet, and maybe vinyl seats instead of the fabric that wore out right away...and oh, of course it's never had seat belts (or killed anyone) in 52 years- but I plan to add them, and...I'm not sure what's next- but I don't think it will be a V8. That will be for another project.

Safety first- I agree. I redid the entire brake system right away. Then took care of the floor. Cleaned the carb (and put in new gas)...and actually got it to run without the choke part way out-and low compression or not it "seems" to run pretty smooth to me. There's a lot of smoke coming out of the motor vents (not the tail pipe as much- I haven't driven behind it but I didn't see a cloud behind me- (then again I have no mirrors! ) When I took it on my one big drive it seemed like she was working fairly hard at 55 mph on highway 99. So...that and the smoke is what drove me to check the compression. However, the car hasn't been driven much a all. (I do have to get a rear axle and seats back in there before i can drive it again.) Really...I just want the engine not to leak oil all over my garage, and run good enough to get up to highway speeds, look good like the rest of the car will, make it on a short road trip, etc. When I starting calling shops- it seemed like to do anything was pretty pricey...so that's why I was looking at the total rebuild-which was actually cheaper than some of the custom shops around here to just do part of the work. Then there's taking the engine out again if I want to do something else to it. AND, I'm going to paint the engine compartment red again...If i take the engine out for that anyway...how easy does this engine go in and out? Anyway, after I get the axle and seats back in, I'll take it for another drive and put some oil in there and follow your advice Roger and really check it out so I know what really needs fixing, (I can't stand not knowing root cause), and hopefully maybe I just need to replace some seals and do some other basic stuff. This engine has had very regular oil changes every 3000...thanks again everyone-all comments appreciated!

[dhbfaster]

Just a follow up...finally checked the compression again. I did a before and after.
I wasn't able to drive the car this time (no axle yet), but I did warm it up as good as you can in a garage. (~30 min at around 1200rpm) On average the readings (before squirting oil) were a bit lower than before (~-10) maybe because it's winter instead of summer, or maybe the different warmup routine? A bit rushed with the family waiting to go to dinner..so I only check four cyl, after squirting the oil in there...one cyl increased by 10, one by 25, and two by 20 psi.