400 ford opinions

dirt_worker wrote:How hard are the Aussie heads to come by? I thought I'd heard theyre kinda scarce...

Not hard for me:lol: 
They came off 302C here, Ford made the 302C from 1972 untill about 1987 (I think), so there is plenty of them. They came in 2 bbl or 4 bbl.
351C where all open chamber, also 2 bbl or 4 bbl. Except for the big port heads (4V) which all came from USA.
If I had to guess, the 302C out numbered 315C, 4 to 1.
Cheers Colin.

The 400 displacement version of the Ford 335 Series engine has more stroke than a Ford 385 Series 460. They share the same bellhousing mounting arrangement. They have very similar oiling systems. Aftermarket parts are available. If your going to tow, a good rebuild with a bit of mild cylinder head work in the correct areas and a camshaft that is suitable to your application would offer surprising usable performance in a lighter package. Also you wouldn't be looking for parts to change over to the 385 Series Ford.

Dave.

Yep , good engine . 9 mpg if you baby it. 

DanH wrote:

bigblok2000ranger wrote:Few guys up this way run them in Small Block pulling classes with 4V Cleveland heads and do pretty good, one big thing these guys do to fix the crappy oiling is chuck them up on a Bridgeport and align and drill a 3/8" oil hole from the mains all the way to the cam journals. These guys are spinning them to 9500rpm's and staying together.

the 400 guy's saying they drilling 3/8" from the mains to the cam are b/s ing you or are dumb ./or you misunderstood them.

would you do that mod to a stock 385 block? remember, almost the same oiling system as the 335's

The ones I seen it done to had the oil feed hole way off to one side and barely caught the oil hole in the bearings and the oil holes were extremely narrow just below the main webbing, now I may be wrong about the size of the hole and the depth. May just be to the oil galley.

Dave C. wrote:Yep , good engine . 9 mpg if you baby it. 

I don't remember my ole F250 being THAT bad on fuel. I had a 360 in a 68 that was alot worse than it for sure.

Our 78 f250 with a 400 got about 12mpg.  72 f100 with a 360 got 14-15 driving back and forth to college but about 12 driving around the farm and town.  I would really like to drop a stock 5.4 in the 72 truck just to drive everyday.


For the 400 build, I would do a 302c headed rebuilt stock lower end with a decent cam and an edelbrock 4v intake and a holley efi.

I would like to do a similar type build for my bronco until I can build a good 385 series for it. Found a guy that sells older Cougar parts, lots of them had the 351c in them, picked up a set of 2v heads for $50 for the pair. He must have had 40 pairs on the shelf, valves/springs/rockers all on them. He said he had over 100, but decided to start pitching them for scrap when he ran out of room and scrap went up in price.

A bit of helpful information.


http://www.ford-trucks.com/article/idx/5/104/article/High_Performance_Options_for_the_351M400_Engine.html

Good info Dave,i just put that in my favorites. Thanks Buddy  

bigblok2000ranger wrote:

The ones I seen it done to had the oil feed hole way off to one side and barely caught the oil hole in the bearings and the oil holes were extremely narrow just below the main webbing, now I may be wrong about the size of the hole and the depth. May just be to the oil galley.

The mains are just like a 351 Windsor main.

Kinda makes me wonder after reading Dave's link,just why in 1968 that ford installed the 429 in the thunderbird,and the NEW 460 in the lincoln. The lincoln was about 600# heavier is all I can figure.

bbf-falcon wrote:Kinda makes me wonder after reading Dave's link,just why in 1968 that ford installed the 429 in the thunderbird,and the NEW 460 in the lincoln. :idea:The lincoln was about 600# heavier is all I can figure.

Rick is it possible the Lincoln was/is to Ford as the Corvette is to General Motors? The "flagship".

Dave.

LivermoreDave wrote:

bbf-falcon wrote:Kinda makes me wonder after reading Dave's link,just why in 1968 that ford installed the 429 in the thunderbird,and the NEW 460 in the lincoln. :idea:The lincoln was about 600# heavier is all I can figure.

Rick is it possible the Lincoln was/is to Ford as the Corvette is to General Motors? The "flagship".

Dave.

I suspect that you are correct about the extra wt. on the Lincoln but, I also suspect that It'd be about giving the customer another reason why they should pay the extra $s for the Lincoln.

Suicide doors  

Lem Evans wrote:
I suspect that you are correct about the extra wt. on the Lincoln but, I also suspect that It'd be about giving the customer another reason why they should pay the extra $s for the Lincoln.

Lem may have a point! Looking at the engine itself in the 1968 Lincoln wasn't overwhelming, although the polished stainless plate attached to the radiator support identifying the Lincoln's means of motivation raised a few goosebumps on my neck! That "got to have it" mindset.

Dave.

Just a few facts of the 1968 Lincoln engine availability.

1968 brought some exterior changes. The parking lights, taillights, and front turn signals were once again in a wraparound design on the fenders to satisfy Federal standards for side marker lights, but looked very different from those of the 1965 model. The new 460 cu in         (7.5L) Ford 385 engine was to be available initially, but there were so many 462 cu in (7.57L) Ford MEL engine engines still available, the 460 was phased in later that year. In April, the new Mark III made its debut, as a 1969 model. Total sales would be down to just 39,134.

Dave.

Does anybody here have a set of the Aussie 2V heads they wanna part w?
Im starting to gather up parts for this project.