Register now to get rid of these ads!

Honest opinion on 460 Fords

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Silent_Orchestra, Jul 27, 2007.

  1. Silent_Orchestra
    Joined: Jun 17, 2007
    Posts: 1,313

    Silent_Orchestra
    BANNED
    from Omaha, NE

    I have a 460 Ford Cobra Jet, that i want to build a rod around, we have 'em in all our trucks and they're an absolute riot, un goddly amounts of torque. which brings me to the problem, i think they have to much torque for a little rod, am i right? I just have never seen one and thought it would be kick ass, so let me know what you think.

    bobby
     
  2. T-Time
    Joined: Jan 5, 2007
    Posts: 1,627

    T-Time
    Member
    from USA

    Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Sorry, I couldn't help but laugh. The urban myth, ever since the 385 series Cobra Jets were first introduced, is that they have no bottom end torque and are dogs. Total myth, as you know. I've had to listen to this myth for years. I've been dispelling this myth, person by person and car by car, by putting the money where the mouth is with my '70 Torino CJ since 1979. Since 1970 (even before my time with the car), it has only lost three races. :D

    If a hemi or a BBC will work in a rod (and there are plenty of those two engines used in lightweight hotrods), then so will a CJ. Think "heavy duty" in your construction, though. Use a nine inch Ford rearend.
     
  3. DE SOTO
    Joined: Jan 20, 2006
    Posts: 3,857

    DE SOTO
    Member

    Personally, I think it should be in a car that has a hood so you cant see it.

    They arent the best looking engine & IMO they look outa place in a Hot Rod.
     
  4. T-Time
    Joined: Jan 5, 2007
    Posts: 1,627

    T-Time
    Member
    from USA

    Are you sure you aren't thinking about the 428 CJ? Those are some ugly engines. The 429/460 is a very good looking engine (maybe beauty is just in the eye of the beholder). You're right though that they look out of place in most early, open-hooded, traditional style rods. I do like them in T-buckets, though.
     
  5. hivolt76528
    Joined: Dec 27, 2005
    Posts: 61

    hivolt76528
    Member

    Just 'cause it runs , don't mean you have to keep your foot in it does it ? I also run all 460's in everything I have, mostly because if I concentrate on one enging and build 'em all that way I can more easily keep a good supply of parts and don't have to have such a variety . I love the 460/429's and you are right they do produce all you want in the torque dept , I am not sure what you mean by a 460 CJ as far as I know there is no such animal , unless you are talking an aftermarket head motor .Even the stock engines are good , add a good flowing head to any of them and you'll really see the power . I believe if you cam it right you can run a very tall gear , and get some decent milage as well as run great and you know ther isn't anything that sounds a good as a big block . I am building a 460 based engine now , it's all aftermarket , though a 605 cu inch A-460 heads and 2 -1050 dominators and putting it together in a sand/mud rail that should produce somewhere in the 1100 horse range --nope --there isn't such thing as too much power -just have to use it wisely !!
     
  6. Silent_Orchestra
    Joined: Jun 17, 2007
    Posts: 1,313

    Silent_Orchestra
    BANNED
    from Omaha, NE

    You are right 429/60's are nice lookin engines 428 is ugly. i was thinkin' of gettin' my granpa's center door t, throwin a 460 in it, a 9 inch, a set of radir cheater slicks, on steelies, and bunch of other shit, but there i go thinkin' again.
     
  7. Silent_Orchestra
    Joined: Jun 17, 2007
    Posts: 1,313

    Silent_Orchestra
    BANNED
    from Omaha, NE

    Damn right it's an urban myth, we pulled a D7 Cat out of field with my dad's F350 that's got the newer 460cj in it. And on the racin' thing just last night we were screwin' around in the 350, and raced a kid in a 5.0 mustang, it was sad. It was fun watchin' the bed and the rear half of the frame flexin' in the mirror though. The engine i have i think came from a torino, it used to be in my dad's fairlane. and thanks for the info i thought that but i wasn't sure.

     
  8. Revhead
    Joined: Mar 19, 2001
    Posts: 3,027

    Revhead
    Member
    from Dallas, TX

    I can attest to the torque.. I had a '78 ford f-150 with a 460 and c-6.. It was a beat -up, craptastic farm truck before I got it.. well and while I had it as well. Anyway my parents motorhome broke down. We pulled it back to the house with the truck. It was a 26' motorhome and it pulled it up the hill to the house like it wasn't even there. I was very impressed.
     
  9. DE SOTO
    Joined: Jan 20, 2006
    Posts: 3,857

    DE SOTO
    Member

     
  10. MichaelDorman
    Joined: Apr 27, 2001
    Posts: 849

    MichaelDorman
    Member

    I've had a couple of 460s in some of my cars. I liked em' alot. Chep plentiful and parts are everywhere for em', Smoke the tires without so much as a thought.
    But I do think that it would look realy out pf place on a open engined car. They aint the worst looking engine out there, but they aint gonna be winning any beauty pagents either.
     
  11. tjm73
    Joined: Feb 17, 2006
    Posts: 3,560

    tjm73
    Member

    Ford never made a 460 Cobra Jet. Ford only made 429 Cobra Jets. The 460 is/was a truck and Lincoln engine.
     
  12. MichaelDorman
    Joined: Apr 27, 2001
    Posts: 849

    MichaelDorman
    Member

    Yea, the 460 is from the 429 familly. The 429 got all kinds of Hi-Po upgrades like Super CJ stuff...even a shotgun hemi variant. Not so much for the big brother though.
    But the 460 is a great and reliable engine.
     
  13. Scotch
    Joined: May 4, 2001
    Posts: 1,489

    Scotch
    Member

    The new 429/460 SCJ heads from Ford and the P-51 Kaase heads really wake a 460 up. I think that was what kept them from being legendary back in the '70s - the lack of a good cylinder head. The similarly-sized Chevy 454s, the B/O/P 455s, and the Mopar 440s would run all over them. Now, with a good head on top of one, the 460 Ford can really hold it's own.

    I'd do whatever Jon Kaase says to do with one - that guy rules!

    ~Scotch~
     
  14. DE SOTO
    Joined: Jan 20, 2006
    Posts: 3,857

    DE SOTO
    Member

     
  15. Gotgas
    Joined: Jul 22, 2004
    Posts: 7,197

    Gotgas
    Member
    from DFW USA

    Literally, everything. Not even close.

    The 390/406/410/427 engines (I'm sure I'm missing a few ci variants) were the "FE" series engines. The 429/460 were "385" series engines.

    They look a lot different... and they're both ugly. :D
     
  16. DirtyThirty
    Joined: Mar 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,396

    DirtyThirty
    Member
    from nowhere...

    great motor...good oiling, decent heads, especially on the intake side...canted valves, lots of speed parts, torque a-plenty...out of place in an early fenderless car? yeah...kinda, but so what. The way you dress it has a whole lot to do with it! I am putting one in my F-100 gasser...it ain't "trad" like an F.E., but...they are a dime a dozen, so WHEN I hurt it...I won't cry. I'll just find another $100.00 core...
    but, if had lots O' $$$...I'd probably use an F.E....which also looks a little outta place in an early, fenderless rod, too, to me...but, again: who cares.
     
  17. DE SOTO
    Joined: Jan 20, 2006
    Posts: 3,857

    DE SOTO
    Member


    LOLOL .... OK, I KNOW ALL THAT.... BUT YA STILL DIDNT INCLUDE THE 428........WHICH SERIES IS THAT ? FE ? "385"?

    The first guy said the 428 was ugly, I thought that a 428~429~&460 were all the same family. so they all looked as ugly as each other.

    So..... Can anyone tell me... is the 428 like a 426~460 .... or is it in the FE family
     
  18. DirtyThirty
    Joined: Mar 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,396

    DirtyThirty
    Member
    from nowhere...

  19. DE SOTO
    Joined: Jan 20, 2006
    Posts: 3,857

    DE SOTO
    Member


    HAHAHA .... FINALLY !! :D

    Thanks for clearing that up .. Had me stumped for a bit..
     
  20. BigRed390
    Joined: Mar 21, 2007
    Posts: 483

    BigRed390
    Member

    Damned hateful people.... (mutters under breath about lack of taste.)

    FE's are beautiful! Best engine ever made, just had a few problems with the cylinder head design, weight, parts availability, and that "leaks out of every gasket" thing. But who's countin'?
     
  21. tjm73
    Joined: Feb 17, 2006
    Posts: 3,560

    tjm73
    Member

  22. DirtyThirty
    Joined: Mar 8, 2007
    Posts: 2,396

    DirtyThirty
    Member
    from nowhere...

    HaHa! yep...they are a red-headed step child...but, an ill-tempered one, that you should never turn your back on. I LOVED my 390 Galaxie...it was flat out mean. but, they are more costly to build for performance than the 385 series motor, bang for buck. but...the FE DOES have more "freakin' cool" points.
     
  23. hivolt76528
    Joined: Dec 27, 2005
    Posts: 61

    hivolt76528
    Member


    I just need to know --what is a good looking motor to you ?? a SBC ?
     
  24. Boynamedsue
    Joined: May 11, 2005
    Posts: 238

    Boynamedsue
    Member

    small block mopar, or a blown hemi:D
     
  25. T-Time
    Joined: Jan 5, 2007
    Posts: 1,627

    T-Time
    Member
    from USA

    Don't get me wrong...I really, really like FE's. I just don't think that they look too good. Their performance capability is an entirely different matter!
     
  26. BigRed390
    Joined: Mar 21, 2007
    Posts: 483

    BigRed390
    Member

    Well, since you put it that way, i'll let it slide, but just this once!:D
     
  27. T-Time
    Joined: Jan 5, 2007
    Posts: 1,627

    T-Time
    Member
    from USA

    Scotch, I don't mean to start a pissing match (especially with a senior member!), but this just ain't totally true. Back in the day, a 429 with the CJ heads on it would run all over some of these engines. Pontiac 455 HO's were not equal to it, and neither were Chevy 454's. You can add the 400 Ram Air III and the performance versions of the 396 to that list, too. The 440 Magnum in a B-Body would run neck and neck with the 429 CJ Torino. On the other hand, the Buick Stage 1 and the STANDARD 442 engine (500 ft/lbs of torque!) would blow away the 429CJ Torino. (I don't know about the W-30, though...no experience there.) I'm speaking from many years of experience, not from looking at magazine test results. By the way, none of these engines had good flowing heads by today's standards.:)
     
  28. Scotch
    Joined: May 4, 2001
    Posts: 1,489

    Scotch
    Member

    the blown Hemi I can understand, but a SB Mopar is really hard to discern from a SB Chevy..????

    ~Scotch~
     
  29. hivolt76528
    Joined: Dec 27, 2005
    Posts: 61

    hivolt76528
    Member

    I take it you aren't talking about a blown "boss" hemi ?

    All BS aside though I guess that's also why women come in all sizes and shapes , for all of us to have something to admire:D

    I still like the looks of my "385" and don't see that much difference in any motors as far a a beauty contest , in their stock form aside from the exotics or SEMA queens . The every day driver as it came off the floor wasn't anything to really drool over look wise , except when you are a Ford nut , Mopar nut ...on and on --it's the things you do afterwards that help the looks

    As far as the true CJ's go , yes the lack low end torque because of the huge intake ports , but the new heads do bring to life those sleeping giants that ford produced . Even when you really get into things , look over a set of early Police heads --they have good sized valves better flow than anything else cast iron and stock , and the port sizes are between a stock and the CJ --they will work great with just a little work. Not as good as the aftermarket , but not the price either
     
  30. T-Time
    Joined: Jan 5, 2007
    Posts: 1,627

    T-Time
    Member
    from USA

    Again with the urban myth! ;)
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.