Engines that dont suck!

By now some of you may realize that I'm a Ford in a Ford drumbeater. Based on about fifty years of history you'd think (evidence the number of early Fords NOT using Ford power) that Ford engines could'nt pull a rotton cork out of a wine bottle. Well just for ****s and giggles I'd like to submit exhibit A, the results of the Popular Hot Rodding Engine Masters Challenge 2006. I think this test is very telling because it was conducted by a Chevy leaning mag. Quick overview; this year the engines were 434" small or big blocks. Pump gas 10.5:1 comp. Readily available blocks and heads, no exotic stuff. They tested average torque and horsepower in three pulls over a broad rpm range.

Drumroll please! Five of the six finalists were using small block Fords with CHI heads (Cleveland based). It was a fight to the end with the little Ford out of BES edging Jon Kaase's big Pontiac for the overall win. In earlier rounds all different types of engines from various manufacturers were competing. I think this is the fourth overall win in the last five years that a Ford engine has won this compe***ion. What does this mean? Not a damn thing apparently because I'm sure this will resonate only with the guys who are already into Fords. Streetrodders will still bolt their 350/350 into every sort of rare and cl***ic Ford. It's no longer (or maybe never has been about available power) it's about the "it's cheaper" syndrome, right? This by far is'nt the first time canted valve Fords have shown their potential. In the early `70's the local "roundy round" track I went to had the Cleveland and Boss Fords banned in almost every cl***. At that time you could go to the junkyard or the local Ford dealer and buy these things readily. Wonder why the ban? I think they should have been allowed. Then racers could have used the best possible ch***is (midsize GM) with the smallblock with the greatest potential, the Cleveland Fords. Why not?

It happened in drag racing too. When the lb/cu.in. rules came into effect. The Cleveland Fords were evntually factored out of compe***ion.They carried something like 6.75 lb/cu.in. while the sbc's AMC's and small Mopars carried 6.45 lb/cu.in. If anyone doubts the effectiveness of the Ford style canted valve head I submit that ALL the manufacturers now competing in the various NASCAR cl***es have variations on that theme for their own engines, even Toyota!

OK sorry if this turned into my own personal *****- fest. Did'nt mean to just seemed to happen that way. Just a little frustrated by the overall lack of interest in anything Ford except Flatheads. BTW I'd like to give a shout out to the Aussies for the continued efforts to develop the Ford "Cleveland" engine.

A link and a picture: http://www.popularhotrodding.com/enginemasters/challenge/2006/0610em_2006_challenge_results/

 

First off ,I confess -I am Chevrolet or GM engine ...to the death....
Having said that I wil say that the Cleveland series Ford motors and heads even on a 302 when converted can be formidable engines.

I believe the problem in acceptance is one of logistics as well as the cost issue...
The availabilty of ANY Ford performance parts is just not that good,wether it be used or new.....

Lets face it if you are of a mind to build a hot Ford motor you are off on a trek of some distance and usually will break the kitty when you find any such parts.

I wont bore you with the details of how Chevrolet and others outperform the Fords but it is likely in most motorsports that is actually the results you will find.

I as a lifelong auto enthusiast, who has had to scrounge and do his own work in all areas of a cars construction, will venture a guess as to why Ford engines as a whole ****.......

They are a mechanical nightmare as to ease of maintenence/***embly rebuilding.....swapping......Again just my personal opinion here-

I say the most prominent problem Ford engines share is the fitment issue.....the interchangeabilty of parts is just not there.....

There,hope no blue oval feathers were ruffled by the harsh truth....

 

Roddind and racing,for me to do them always ment I had to do it cheep like most must. Yes,I liked Ford best,and had in the 50's and have even now a Y-block in my rod,but too race I used SBC's 350's,it was the only way to race at a cost that I could get parts and win with. I towed the Chevy race car with a Ford Wag,and at times would be ask why don't you tow with a Chevy PU.

 

It's amazing what the popularity of 5.0 mustangs (well, mainly the guys who race them) and the market that this popularity created has done for SBF product development.

I'm mostly a Chevy/Buick engine guy myself, but I've really come around to the Ford stuff here recently. Lately the idea that has been swirling in my head is running a "moonshiner style" (black 2-door with dog dishes) 56 Ford with a built 312 and a 4 speed.

I used to view the sbc's as superior in performance potential to the sbf but now I see them on a more equal plane, and I like it better that way. It makes things more interesting when guys running different motors are compe***ive. It's more fun.

 

I had a tube frame Mustang road race car with a little 310 cu in Boss 302 block with early SVO Cleveland aluminum heads that made 540 horses on the dyno

 

Ford is paying for the performance of it's engines in the 50's, as well as it's choice of a myriad of engines that had little or nothing interchangeable. Gm and Chrysler had a huge head start in the 50s and that's one of the reasons that guys have a stockpile of SBC and MoPar parts available compared to that of Ford.

"It's no longer (or maybe never has been about available power) it's about the "it's cheaper" syndrome, right?"

It's always been available power to cost, and still is today. Ford has a very nice program going, but it doesn't fit the criteria for "traditional" rods. Using today's technology is fine in a modern streetrod, but unfortunately for Ford, there are millions of SBC motors waiting for the used parts that sell cheaply. I notice that you didn't mention cost of the various engines in your post.

As far as "It happened in drag racing too. When the lb/cu.in. rules came into effect. The Cleveland Fords were evntually factored out of compe***ion.", I have no idea what you're talking about - lb/ci rules were in effect from the 50s in drag racing as cl*** designators. When did the "Cleveland Fords" appear?

I don't think there's anything wrong with using Ford engines in any car. But I'm not going to throw out my Chevy parts and learn a whole new engine because a late model test showed Ford made a few more horsepower than a Chev.
I always thought the Ford vs Chev vs MoPar vs AMC vs Crosley ad nauseam debate was silly. Let people use what they want for whatever reason they want.


Mutt

 

so you can get a ford to run pretty good with aftermarket heads? that doesn't help me get my $1500 (total) engine built.

Chevy churned out bazillions of engines with decent heads in the 60s/early 70s, while ford made a handful. That's why the exotic ford stuff never caught on.

 

I like the later 5.0's. Pretty impressive stuff. Cept they decided to quit making it now.

 

i really don't think that horsepower was ever the big issue.it's still mostly about the money. not just buildind the engine either.you can put 15 grand in any small block and it's going to run.

other problems with fords are different heads for different size engines, different transmissions for different engines,....things of that nature.

i'm a chevy guy, always have been, but i don't go around with blinders on either. when i was about 18 a guy i worked with took me for a ride in his boss 429 mustang. well, i'll tell ya, that thing will make even the most die hard chevy or mopar fan respect the blue oval.

 

I know I dont have any earth shaking ideals or comments about this, but would like to say a few things. I think the reason chevy has been so popular is simple, availability of engines and hi-performance parts, cost verses performance, and ease of installation in small places, like a hot rod engine compartment.
I own a 27 model T coupe with a small block chevy, but also own a 60 Ford Starliner with a 460 and am in the process of doing another Ford powered project as we speak. I enjoy them all very much, but must admit going with the Ford engines is always a little more difficult,but I do it because I like seeing something thats not a cookie cutter deal all the time.And because I got started with chevys maybe thats why Fords seem a little different to me?
Here is a perfect example of what I am speaking of: I think Ford must of had a deal going with a bolt company, a small block 351 windsor motor has several bolts, several different lengths holding the water pump on, a chevy usually has four bolts, a lot more simple set up.So much easier to install and works just as good.
Another example is the old chevy stuff, a bell housing from a 250 six will fit a small block, and a big block, how easy is that. But I must admit as of late, by trying to increase power, fuel economy, ect., chevy has changed a lot of stuff around and interchangability is not there as it once was.
But even though I know its a harder route and the results, may or may not be any better, I still enjoy the Ford stuff and will complete my current project with this in mind.
I really think all of us should do what ever we like and not worry so much about how we are accepted by others, or what others think.Thats what makes life interesting and usaully spawns new and better ideals.

 

I'm actually one of the founders of that compe***ion, altough I no longer have any affiliation with it.

The entire concept was to show the potential in 'real' engines running on pump gas with filters and mufflers in place at a given cubic inch displacement. The critical '2,500-6,500' rpm window the compe***ion is based on was purely my own idea. The concept of 'average hp and torque' rather than the big peak numbers magazines typically dote over was also one of my whiskey-fueled ideas.

The CHI heads are from Australia, and are great pieces. I hope more of them show up on the street.

Honestly, I am still in love with Jon Kaase's Pontiac. I hope it's port and chamber design becomes a CNC blueprint for the cylinder head manufacturer and this research becomes available to any and all Poncho fans. If sold with a matching intake, this top end 'kit' could wake up any factory-headed Pontiac because of Jon's tireless efforts to make it scream.

There's a terrific opportunity here for someone to take the CHI-headed SBF package and make it available to the public. I only hope Tony at BES or someone similar does so at an attainable price point. There's no question it's a killer setup.

There's nothing else like the Engine Masters Challenge, and seeing professional race engine builders fighting with pump gas and mufflers at 2,500 rpm (like street guys do) was my dream from day one. I'm glad to see it's still working, and working very well. It will result in better parts for the street, and more lethal street combinations from the intake to the heads to the cams. That was the whole idea.

~Scotch~

 

Seeing Pontiac a real close second made me happy. #2 tries harder, as they say. I won't knock a Ford, at least it's different, but I still wouldn't run one. Just personal preference -

 

Before I start, let me hasten to say that my family's owned Fords, always; after having run Mopar, Olds, & Chevy, I'm now exclusively Ford, for years, except for the Scout .

There are three arguments, to my mind, anyway, why the SBC has the edge to many people.

One, they ARE generally somewhat cheaper to build. That HAS changed to great extent with the 5.0s & parts availability
...but if you look more at carbed, earlier bodied combos, there's still a difference. If yer into flash...you can get a SBC Weiand 6-71 blower setup for under $2500, minus carbs. I don't think any Ford 6-71 kit's ever been under $3000 for the last 20 years; usually more like $3500. A grand can buy a lot more parts...

Second, to a novice, the word "Ford" is horribly complicated. There are a bewildering number of engines, variations, etc. What the avg. person never considers is that Ford competes against all of GM. It's not true anymore...but GM used to have five separate engine brands/lines for p***enger cars, along with two (actually more) trans case patterns. Each of the major brands had first & second gen engine designs, & in Chevy's case, the SB & BB split. B-O-P-Cad all had variations in deck height. We tend to overlook it nowadays, but in the past, manufacturers really had no particular desire for design commonality (or parts inventory reduction). It just wasn't the mindset. It wasn't uncommon for the same body to have different floor pan stampings for dual exhaust & single exhaust!

Looking at all this, it makes more sense for the different Ford engines. Different models, different intended markets & uses, so different drivetrains. However, there's no denying that Ford has an irritating habit of making design changes in midstream. Wanna see somebody cry? Inform them that the nice expensive rebuilt C4 they just picked up as a "deal" ain't gonna work because they have a 5 bolt case pattern on their 289. SBF, FE, Cleveland/385, Y block, 2 different MEL patterns (plus some MELs use FE) trans patterns.....On the other hand...Chevy, one pattern, all engines, for decades.

Third, for that matter, GM engine compartments are generally wide enough to accept swaps. Even though B-O-P & Chevy mounts are different, you can generally use available frame stands & mounts to transplant a Chebby into a Pontiac, or vice versa. Many Ford compartments are not friendly to big blocks or Clevelands of any sort. This is the reason why most Ford exhaust ports & exhaust manifolds are compromised, to clear early-mid '60s shock towers.

Myself, I know all this, and I don't care much. I'm also on a IH forum, and some people there get upset about what they consider to be a lack of magazine respect for the Scout & its capabilities. Me, I LIKE it that way. If it gets trendy, then the part prices go from cheap to ridiculous. Also, there's a certain satisfaction to achieving things with parts/engines others consider to be ****. So cheer up, Henry, if the unwashed m***es don't appreciate Fords...you, at least, have the brains to do so.

 

Just duck'in back in here to take a peek. The point is Ford actually made a bazillion performance engines too. This test allowed aftermarket cyl heads for all the engines. If the compe***ion was relegated to factory iron heads Ford does well still. The 2V Cleveland heads are excellent street pieces with 2.04" intake and 1.65" exhaust valves. Step up to the Aussie 2V iron heads (production heads which are readily available here and you get the better closed chamber design). Or if you wanna go full on lets put the best PRODUCTION headed sbc against a 4V Cleveland headed Ford at 434" and see how it would come out. I've never knocked Chevy but on paper the big Ford heads I feel are better suited to the big cubes of this years compe***ion.

I'm with you Squirrel I'm a $1500 engine type guy. IMO the $1500 Ford engine is the 429- 460. They simply produce gobs of power and you don't need many aftermarket parts to do it with. There is no special block or crank you need. The factory pistons and rods are good to 500hp. The early garden variety heads are better but anyones but the d2ve's will do. Even the factory dual plane iron intake will support 400 hp. Home port the heads. Spend money on the machine work, cam and valve train and a good carb. I promise that you won't be disappointed. I know it's disqualified because it's not "Trad" but shoot neither is a 350 or spider webs. Just think every big block Ford is a "tall deck". The stock 429- 460 is .110 larger bore than the 427- 454. They just beg to be stroked and respond darn well when you do. Plus they're cheap! I'm confident a complete running 460 can be had for $500 or less. Sometimes with the ****** or whole car or truck included.

Sorry for running on. Gotta get back to work.

 

This post has some great responses. As a guy who is on both sides of this Ford/Chevy fence, I have to agree with the cost and complexity point most of you have made. Having built 57 Fords with small block Fords, small block Chevys, Y-blocks, Clevelands and FE's, one thing stands out. Ford engineers and designers had to be ****ing with everyone when they introduced a new car each year. From starters to heads, water pumps to transmissions, blocks to flywheels, almost nothing is interchangable for more than a year or two. As a hot rodder, picking parts from a junkyard is a nightmare. Having spare parts for small block Ford in the garage never means they will fit the one you're working on. Trial and error is a way of life, and building or swapping these engines is nothing short of rocket science sometimes. Modern technology has given us the tools to make the Fords and Chevys both perform. I respect the owners of Fords with Ford engines in them, not just for product loyalty, but for the knowledge and effort they had to use to combine parts to make it work right. Every time I change a cam on my Chevy, I'm happy knowing I won't have to pull the engine and flip it upside down first, or remove 25 bolts from the timing cover and water pump. Well, at least until my Ford needs a new cam...Heh,heh.

 

EEK!!! C'mon parts interchangeability is'nt that bad. Maybe interchangeabiliy is not good from one engine family to another, but within families interchange is good. Remember to be fair in your ***esment. The whole Ford line of engines competes with the whole line of GM and Chrysler engines. In that light I think Fords are just as simple or complicated as the next. I wonder why B-O-P and Caddy specifies a different bellhousing flange. Maybe they did'nt want to be interchangeable with Chevy either. Anyone ever think of that?

Anyway gotta go again. Just a parting thought though looks like a decent weekend for Ford power. With the results of the EMC in hand and pole positions in both Craftsman truck and Nextel Cup at Talladega (powered by the only prduction based engines left in compe***ion) the ole' Blue Oval is pretty shiny at the moment.

 

See why I run Cadillacs?

Chicken

 

Even Chevy kinda copied the Cleveland with it's sb-2 motor....No more siamesed exhaust ports

 

(Not trying to steal the thread), but it does my heart good to see that there is another soul on this board that likes the I.H. Scout. Thanks, Homespun.

Roger

 

yup, and the Cleveland is a rough copy of the BBC (canted valves, non-siamesed exhaust ports)

fun game

 

2.19 intake, 1.71 exhaust canted valve arrangement, intake ports you can roll an egg down, dry intake, easily stroked to 400+ inches, and all done without buying ridiculously expensive parts!!! And as long as you arent going around in circles at sustained RPM's they hold together pretty well. Clevelands have an underserved reputation for oiling problems. Just run restrictors and a solid cam and they live great if you arent endurance racing.

If I had to pick an engine in the 350 cubic inch range to run without any aftermarket parts it would be a 4 barrel closed chamber cleveland.

Sorry, I like clevelands

 

THe 4bbl cleveland and boss 302 were neat engines, with very good heads....it's too bad they had such a short production run.

 

Actually, speaking as a 385-series guy...the 429/460 head is actually closer to the BBC than the Cleveland, port/valve wise. Not so much on the exhaust ports. If ya really want to split some hairs, the '65 BBC "bathtub" first closed chamber design is damn close to the mid '50s Packards. I have "heard" that GM bought the rights from Studebaker for the Packard chamber design....but I've never seen anything definitive to prove it. There are some striking similarities, though

If I had to make a definitive statement, I would say that the Kaase version of the Ford BBF SCJ cylinder head is the ultimate streetable version of the Cleveland, original 429 SCJ, & the BBC, all rolled into one. That's putting aside exotic or unstreetable stuff like A & C heads, etc.

Squirrel, I agree wholeheartedly about the "bazillions of heads" comment. Two things: first, the Ford head compromises for ch***is/shock towers; second, Ford has consistently focused on building grocery getters through the years, & then done performance as an afterthought, when they felt like it. Chevy has always been willing to factor a little performance into a car, or the potential for it, from the start. Maybe it was the Duntov influence?? I would venture to say that the Cleveland was the first Ford design with a LOT of potential that was produced in large numbers. Ford had a lot of awesome pieces...427MR/HR, SOHC, Boss 429, etc., etc., ....but you had to really want one & pull strings in order to get it. Otherwise you got stuck with a 352 2bbl., where the guy down the street got a 396/350hp in his Chevelle right off the lot, his pick of four or five of 'em at the dealer.

The Y block has some design features that are found in the SB2, for that matter. It's just like art, people are always borrowing good concepts. Truthfully, I love it all. As I said earlier I've raced the 426H in A/SA NHRA for awhile, Olds 455s & the Chebby 402 & 350 in brackets, & I'm a closet AMC freak. It all gives me a woody.
****************
Roger, ya gotta love the IH 345, an engine that makes all its power before 3000 rpm, weighs 1/2 ton, gets 9 mpg, & was designed for medium & heavy delivery & dump trucks. My Scout II has rust holes you can stick an arm through, but it goes anywhere, holds more than a Jeep, & never quits. I'm going to re-tub it next year...probably take all the fun out of it once it's pretty again.

 

Um-K, For those that care. You wanna know why the Ford Cleveland and 429- 460 heads are the best? It's the shallow angle of the cant and the rotation and location of the valves. The Fords cyl head architecture affords the room for voluptuous intake ports. Meantime the shallow valve side cant means you've got a valve that opens away from the cylinder wall (thus unshrouding it) yet the chamber is still shallow enough to get compression without having to resort to big old heavy domed pistons. Ford did this in the `60's and now today the trend is to have tight compact combustion chambers in production and race engines. In addition the Ford head whether it be a Cleveland, 460 or Boss 429 head all have good "charge motion" due to the intake port entry and position. On the negative side all the magazines have reported on how ****ty Ford exhaust ports are and to some degree they are right. Compromises were made to narrow the engines for packaging purposes. So what!, this stuff was overblown to make brand X look better if you want my opinion. I've ported quite a few heads, and on every single one the exhaust side is a whole lot easier to improve than the intake. Besides the exhaust pulse gets a whole lotta help from the piston ramming it outa there.

 

Yep...as you pointed out, about 30 minutes with a grinder on a pair of C8, C9, or D0VE heads, or D3VE heads, and you pick up 30+ hp & 1-2 mpg...& even a ten year old princess can do it.

Best deal in the junkyard, except now everybody's discovered the 460 & the prices are going way the hell up. See what I mean about trendy?? After years of fighting to prove Fords really are good, now I wanna start bashing them again. Inflation ****s.

 

what?, no Mopars guys jumping in here!????

 

Budget building a Ford is torture...always was...and the only one to blame is FORD themselves. EVERYTHING was done the hard way.

I love the sound of a hot Ford smallblock. Must be the firing order or something but it just sounds great to me.
That said...I like the sound of some change in my pocket too...so I went Chevy many years ago.

 

Why waist the time? Looks like another "my **** is better then your ****" tread.

A lot of car companies made some kick *** motors and they all made some real **** motors. The whole thing that burns me is when the mag guys say someone put in a "reliable 350 chevy". Gives the impression that no other motors were reliable. What ****! They should just tell the truth, the guy put in the 350 Chevy because it was cheap and when it breaks down, (and yes, every make breaks down) parts are available to fix it almost anyplace. Neither case make it a better or a more reliable motor.

You guys keep putting in your Chevy motors, Ford motors, or what ever you think is the best, and I will keep putting in my Mopar motors. It is amazing that if you have a favorite brand motor, things like interchangability seem so simple. I know what fits what Mopar stuff and I'm not ready to learn a new curve, just yet.
Gene

 

I like the combination of power and driveability offered by the new Ford and GM engines. For me, taking new technology/design and making it look like it belongs in an old-style rod is a fun challenge. I'm partial to the new Ford OHC motors and with some imagination and fabrication you can dress them up to look cool and run great w/o the stock FI junking up the appearance. Same w/ the new GM LSx motors. Aftermarket ignitions and intakes, blower conversions etc. can give the new motors a great look. They're more expensive, yes, but if you're looking for something completely different, well, then they might fit the bill.

Here's a pic of a Ford 4.6L SOHC/T45 combo that we mocked up in the shoebox this week. We're working on the motor mounts and trans mounts, then will start on the mandrel-bent header and exhaust package. We're tossing the ugly factory FI intake and fabbing up a log-style multi-carb intake next.

Hank