+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Water Pump measurements for 352 engine?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    173

    Water Pump measurements for 352 engine?

    Hi All,
    I need to replace my Water Pump in 1959 with 352 engine. When ordering they are askign me if I want the "Long Shaft" pump or not? They tell me the measurement for the Long Shaft is about 8.5 inches and this doesnt include the end of the pump. I really thought there was one size water pump for the 352.

    Does anyone know what the correct size of the pump should be?
    Thanks

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Leander, Texas
    Posts
    188
    The long shaft pump was used on the FE engines through 1960, when the 390 engine came out they went to the short shaft. The water pump mounting is the same on all the FE engines but when they started using alternators they changed some of the bracket holes. I think just saying you want the long shaft should be enough information but if you lay the water pump flat on the ground it should measure about 9" to the end of the shaft.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    47
    Hello
    I changed my pump last year; I bought a remanufactured pump on E-bay. When I got the pump it was a shorter axle, I didn’t know there was long and short pumps. A friend helped me and made a distance in aluminium, it works just great! Here are picks from the pumps,




    Lars

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    173
    Thank you for the information - I appreciate it.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    103
    Can someone chime in on the overall placement of the engines vs. radiator fan spacing? My 59 has a 1966 390 engine and it cannot use the long shaft water pump or it will put the fan into the radiator. I must use the short shaft water pump and even then the fan is kinda close. Terry at Jerry's Classic Cars told me that the early engines sat farther back and that installing a newer engine does this. But he never mentioned why. Were the motor mount bolt holes drilled slightly more forward on the early engines to cause them to sit farther back in the chassis and have more radiator clearance?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Leander, Texas
    Posts
    188
    I think that the engines all set in the same distance because if you look at the spacing from the firewall there the same, I believe more space was added on the front of the engine when they came out with the 390 engine. the 57, 58 & 59 engine bay was probably designed for the Y-block and the early FE block was made to fit in that space & in 1960 they added more room to the front of the engine for the accessories anyway that is my take on the subject.
    I installed a 1966 Thunderbird 428 with the C6 transmission in my 58 Skyliner and I had to redo the mounting brackets on the radiator to get enough clearance even with the short water pump.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    103
    Thanks for the input. Those 428's are a lot of fun. I have a 428 Cobra Jet in my '65 Galaxie with two 4-barrels. Gotta love that massive torque.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts