I don't think I can count how many of these I did in the early seventies. They were a real problem. I won't get into the theory of operation, I know what an EGR is, what it does and why they are there. Anyhow, to answer your question, you use a solid sinker slightly larger then the EGR port and tap it into the hole in the manifold. Done. You can eitherreplace the spacer with a non EGR type or **** can italtogether. If you decide to get rid of the spacer, you'll need to get shorter carburetor studs. While I don't disagree with some of the other's comments, I can tell you that I personally ran a 73 Gran Torino 400 and a 76 LTD 400 (both original owner) to over 150k with theEGR plugged as Idescribed. No problems ornoticable decrease in MPG,still ran great when sold.

 

......

 

Actually, the 400 came out in 71 as a replacement for the FE series (390) of engines because the FE was at the end of it's development, it was getting more and more difficult to make it meet new emissions standards and they were just too heavy. The 351m/400is basically the same as a Cleveland but they have a taller deck height and therefore they are also a bitwider. I owned three of these motors over the past 30+ years and the only negative comment I can make is that they were smogged to death. Low compression, retarded cam timing and very lean jetting. That said they are every bit as strong as a Cleveland and they actually respond very well to tuning. The reason for removing the valve was simple, back in the days before computer control, EGR's were pretty dumb, inefficient and unreliable. And in the case of Ford, the plates would rot out regularly. They would cause a poor idle, surging at highway speeds and cronic detonation. As far as the Cats are concerned, Ford started using them in 74 and my 76 LTD had them ( not just CA.) manifold mounted. The slight change in mixture did nothing to raise the temperature of theCats, but it did make all of the vehicles run much better over the entire operating range with a great reduction in detonation due to the richer mixture.With the detonation gone, static timing could be increased for better response and drivability. And as I stated before,I didn'tnotice anydecrease in fuel economy. If anything,highway mileageincreased due to the advance in static timing.

 

Yes, yes, possibly, and no.

Unless you're talking only about WOT performance when the EGR system is typically not recirculating anything, eliminating the EGR (or perhaps only limiting its maximum flow) will provide a little more part-throttle power and slightly snappier throttle response. While you would not expect to see any improvement at the drag strip after disconnecting it, that's not the only venue where acceleration performance is important. You may or may not have to re-tune or run higher octane fuel.

BTW, I'd keep the spacer itself regardless of the EGR- it also affects the vacuum signal to the carb and hence its fuel delivery curves.


Norm

 

interesting. Im not real expeirienced with the emission stuff, but im slowly learning. on that subject of spacers...If i were to upgrade a 302 (what i have) with some mild heads, headers, intake and a four barrel carb.. what sort of spacer (if any) would make sense? mabeye a more inportant question would be, how do i figure out what spacer?

 

Later model intakes and carbs don't require a spacer.

 

.....

 

Let me start by saying that "he" owned (just retired) a five bay 4000sf auto shop. And "he" knows just a little about the difference between theory and real world applications. I hate to break it to you but the two are sometimes a bit contradictory.Now, I never stated thatI richened up the mixture. WhatI said was that the mixture was slightly richer after the EGR was removed which helpedlessen detonation. I'm sure you know that the reason for this is because the combustion gasses are no longer diluted by mixing them with exhaust gasses.I also never said thatI had a serious issue with any ofmy three vehicles. WhatI did say was thatearly Ford EGR systems were problematic at best and that it was not uncommon for the EGR plate to corrode out (I never said he had this problem only thatI had seen it many times) and create a massive vacuum leak.Theprimary causewasthe use of leaded gas in cars equipped with EGR and no CAT. I said thatIremoved the EGR valveto improve the overall operation of the vehicle. As I previously stated,my vehicles, all three of them,were in excellenttune and had no other problems and were still running great with 100k plus on them.And emissions back then were not a problem,I know beacuseI was a licensed NYS vehicle inspector from 1971to 1975.Remember, I'm talking about 30+ years ago. Done.

 

I would just like to point out....that mine is 4 foot long and I often pass out it takes sooo much blood but its worth it.




Yes there is a joke and commentary all at the same time

 

Point and joke well taken. Forgive me for being a thick headed, but street smart,old fart. Just a point of clarification though, it was a pi$$ing contest, not a size contest. At least to me.