Am I searching in vain for Cadillac 429 Speed Parts?

Yes, I have indeed been doing some research!

My exhaust manifolds are fine, but I may get some headers from Chris at Cad Company http://www.cad500parts.com

~Jason

 

my dad and i made ours last year. Didn't know we could get em haha. We had a friend mill us individual exhaust ports out of 3/8 steel, then made our own headers from a generic kit from speedway or something. Works good. I did read that the stock manifolds are better for keeping engine bay heat down. I know the ol lincoln gets super hot because the engine is so hot. Thinking of louvering the hood, not only for looks, but function in this case as well!

 

That's true - the cast iron exhaust is great for lowering underhood temps!

~Jason

 

Check with the guys on the modified cadillac forum. They may know a source.

http://www.modifiedcadillac.org/forum/

 

<hearsay warning=""><hehe><hearsay>I am not the resident early Cad expert around the Cad Co, but I have picked up quite a bit, which I will happily share. There are holes and (obviously) info I have heard from others, but not verified. Those items are clearly identified…

OK – engine ID vs differences and oil pump issues
Since we are talking about the 429, I will mostly ignore the earlier (62 and older) engines. The intakes don’t bolt up, and I have been told (hearsay warning) that the easiest manifold to adapt is a 401/425 Nailhead, not a ’62-earlier Cad. Haven’t tried it, and don’t know myself. There is a place in Sweden that has tri-power for ’63-’67 Cads which appears to be a modified brand new casting for something. Since there are no new castings for the earlier Cads, it stands to reason that SOMETHING being currently manufactured can be modified within reason.

However – The ’67 429 intake will bolt up to all ’63-’67 engines. 2 pipe plugs and a ½” carb spacer is all you need to bolt up a ’74-up electric choke Q-jet. Since nothing beats the ’74-’79 795 CFM Cadillac Q-jet on the dyno until you get well past 450 HP, no truly streetable, normally aspirated 429 needs any other option, from a purely performance standpoint. Yes, tri powers look cool. If it were within my power to do so, I would have a batch of 429 tri-powers cast tomorrow. Probably not going to happen, so if you’re building a 429, you’ll either have to modify something to fit, or settle for better performance, but without ‘the look’. There WILL be multiple carbs on the 429 Cad going into my personal ’53 Riv. I haven’t decided if it will be an adapted tri-power, or 4 side drafts , but there will be 3 or more of them. A little more cam, some bigger valves, and a little port work will make up for it just fine. I am the student on this multi-carb stuff, cruising the archives for ideas and info, like everyone else &#61514;

The ’63 390 and the ’64-’67 429 are true sister engines, with few differences. The ’62-older engines are a very different architecture. In ’63, the engine was redesigned. Distributor moved to the front, oil pump moved to the timing cover, etc.
The ’49-’62 engines have oil pumps mounted on the rear main, rear mount dizzy, normal timing cover, etc. They also have a funky Hydramatic-only shape to the rear of the block, and no provision for mounting a starter to the engine (it mounted to the trans). For some reason, some ’63 390s had starter mounting holes (I’ve seen them), but I have never heard of anyone who saw a factory block-mounted starter on one.

’63-’65 and ’66-67 use a different timing cover and different oil pump. I am not sure, to be honest, if the ’63 shares the ’64-’65 front cover and pump architecture or not. The distributors are interchangeable ‘63-‘65 only and ’66-’67 only. The timing cover is physically different. The oil pump cover on one has an offset bolt pattern, and the other is almost square. The ’63-’65 oil pump shaft (which is factory installed to the gear) had a ‘D’ shaped end, and the bottom of the distributor shaft is flat, with the gear extending past the end of the shaft and having a ‘D’ shaped hole to engage the pump drive. The ’66-’67 have the more common round hole in the gear, with a shaft that has what looks like a screwdriver blade on the end, and the pump drive shaft is round with a slot in the end (also made on the gear at the factory). You can swap distributor, oil pump, and timing cover together. The oil pump gear set and the distributor must match, I have never tried swapping them without also changing the timing cover. I believe (conjecture here) that the water pumps are different, as well.

The timing covers all look like hell on the inside of the pump area. However, we have only had one that would not make at least 40 PSI hot idle with a new gear kit and regulator. We have never cracked one during installation. There are torque specs for everything – use them. Granted, if someone before you over-tightened and started a crack, and it failed while you were torqueing, you are stuck. A good used timing cover goes for about $350, but barring damage from someone before you, etc, they are 99% usable.
I have also heard of (but not seen) a timing cover corroded to the point of water leaking through into the oil.

New timing covers? The tooling for the 500 covers cost 10% of what the tooling for the 429 covers would cost, but there is way more than 10X the market, and we barely were able to justify making the 500 covers. I wouldn’t count on anyone who intends to stay in business long, doing new 429 covers.

Another difference to be aware of is that all ’49-’63 head bolts are ½” All ’68-up head bolts are ½”. ’64-’67 429 head bolts are some obnoxious size (13/32 or 15/32, I can’t recall). DON’T LOSE YOUR HEAD BOLTS! The best price we have gotten so far on new ones is about $80 each our cost, if we make a bunch. Not even.

’49-’66 engines all have full shaft rockers, oiled via a pressurized shaft, through a pressure galley from the block, through the head. The ’67 engine has T-Pedestal rockers (similar but not identical to ’68-up Cad rockers), oiled through the pushrods, and the blocks and heads do not have the oil passages. New rocker arms for the factory shafts are about $25 each, less in sets of 4. New rockers for the ’67 are unobtanium, but fresh rumors say there may be something available by next spring.
’49-’67 rocker assemblies are held on by bolts that are also head bolts. The ’67 bolts are shorter, as the T-ped is not as tall as the shaft support on the full shaft stuff. Aftermarket full shaft conversions for the ‘67s require a set of ’64-’66 head bolts. Ouch.
I have not verified, but have heard <hearsay warning=""> that some ’67 rocker parts are interchangeable with the ’68-up stuff, but not all parts.

Cams are easy – we actually have a full line of performance cams that work really nice in the 429, as well as cams for the 62-earlier stuff. We don’t have anything specifically ‘dyno proven’ for the ’63 390, but the 429 cams fit. Rockers can be done, better rods, forged pistons, solid cams, adjustable rockers, ported heads, sheet metal intakes, blowers, lions and tigers and bears, oh my. <hehe> Sinking that kind of money into the 429 doesn’t make much sense to me, but we do it when someone has an itch to scratch. You can buy a turn key 500 HP/ 600 Ft-Lbs 500, that will be drivable in front of a stock converter, pay someone (like Mike at Schrader’s) to install it (crossmember hack done right, and all), and still come out cheaper than hitting 500 HP and 500 Ft-Lbs with a barely drivable 429. You don’t always get what you pay for.

The ’63 390 and commercial chassis only ’64 429 (according several books, all of which have technical errors in various conspicuous places) have a 1.625 crank hub, and a ’63 only trans bolt pattern. To this bolt pattern is bolted an extension like what the earlier blocks had cast in, and a Hydramatic Trans was used. I have never personally had my hands on one of those.
The non commercial ’64, and all of the ’65-’67 have a ’64-’67 only trans bolt pattern, and came with a TH400. The hub is 1.7”. Not all were switch pitch. <hearsay>
I have no idea what the 1.625”vs 1.7” hub measurement is, but it is listed in the book.

A bent pan will do that leakin’ thing. The extra bits in the switch pitch pan make them –almost- impossible to straighten. Maybe call a Buick switch-pitch trans specialist (should be the same pan) to find out about pan interchanges or trick to get it to seal up. Or swap in a regular TH400.

We have adapters to put a 472/500 up to the original ’64-’67 TH400, and adapters to put a Chevy trans behind a 429 (assuming it originally had a TH400). We even have aftermarket billet steel flex plates (with both HD and light duty converter bolt patterns), and even flywheels for the TH400 version of the 429. The adapters even use 6 bolts on both sides, if you want to.

The early square valve covers fit and seal on the ’63-’67 engines just fine, as long as you use a 50s gasket. We have both Offy and no-name covers, and no-name valley covers (universal across ‘49-’67). The adapters mentioned are for putting the early valve covers on a 500, and only fit the square covers, not the trapezoidal ’63-’67 covers. We have used these adapters in reverse to mount the huge 500 covers on an early engine, to clear adjustable rockers for a solid cam (this is full race stuff – the vintage covers with the bubbles to clear the adjustable valve train seem to be made from unobtanium).
</hearsay></hehe></hearsay></hearsay></hehe></hearsay>

 

Awesome info. Thanks!

The lip isn't bent on the trans pan. In the front of the pan, on the lip, like where the bolts go through to mount to the trans, there is an "upward depression" if you will. Just say the lip is 3/4" wide, the lip is about 1/8", rounded on both ends, and between the first bolts right and left... it isn't a bend or anything like that, it's made into the pan. I am not going to switch trannys, since this one cost me 600 bucks to have rebuilt...i'll ask my tranny guy if he knows what that's all about. if i can't get any info i'll just go about making it flat.

Regarding the nailhead manifolds, i don't think this is true. though i don't own a 401/425, i've seen the intakes for these. (i do have a 322). The intakes on the 429, and earlier cads, have that center heat riser port. you know, the one where all the paint burns off . The nailheads don't have that. Please correct me if this is wrong!

That's awesome about the valve covers. Thanks so much. i'll have to borrow my friends and maybe forget to give them back
-ace

 

I'll look and see if I can find the web address of the place that sells the modified tri-powers, maybe someone on here can ID it by sight.

I can't really picture the bit you're talking about on the trans pan. What are the chances of a picture?

If the lip is supposed to be there, that is probably not causing the leak, unless the lip is supposed to be there only on a specific tranny that you don't have...
Before beating your head against the wall, though, call a vintage tranny shop like Fatsco and verify that you actually have the right pan for your trans - that lip you are fighting may be factory stamped, but it may match up to a recess your trans doesn't have, or some other weird obscure thing that a specialist would know about those early TH400s.

Sometimes the gasket rail gets a bit tweaked over the years (not the lip, just the whole thing being not quite straight). You can use a ball peen hammer to make the bolt holes pushed out away from the gasket a little (they are often pulled in), and/or drill out the bolt holes in those long-fingered washers for Chevy valve covers, and use them on the tranny pan bolts. Also, there is a supposedly 'better' trans pan gasket available from Mr Gasket, and I think Hughes has their own 'better' gasket also.

 

yeah, i've already reshaped the pan, it's about perfect. I was thinking the same thing, that the pan may not fit that specific trans. The "lip" thing is up against the pan. Logically if there's not a matching place for that to sit in, it can't make a good seal. The trans i had was no good. When i got it the pan was only on with a few bolts, the tailshaft was bolted on finger-tight, and something else was amiss,some other bolts elsewhere were only finger tight or missing. Didn't trust it to bolt together. So i took it to the tranny shop up the road (oooold guys, been in business since the late 50s or before). Had them look into it for a rebuild. Apparently the case was junk, cracks and whatnot. They said that in all their years they've only seen a handful of these. (then again, i do live in the middle of nowhere). Anyhow, they found me a new case a couple weeks later. I'm wondering if the case doesn't match the pan. I'd take a picture for you, but the car is tucked away, leaking for the winter and the pan is still on the tranny. if i can find a picture elsewhere i'll post it. Thanks for the input!
-ace

 

Once again Chris, you are the man. Thanks for stepping in and setting me right! Most of the info I have is either gathered off the 'net on various boards, and we all know how reliable that kind of thing can be sometimes.

You guys rock, and I still send you as much business as I can!

~Jason

 

If anybody can post pics for me I re-created the edelbrock log manifold for 49-67 cadillac engines. I casted it in aluminum and it is set up to fit four strombergs/rochesters. I will also be releasing a finned valley cover with optional mechanical fuel pump block off. Still working on a website to be designed so for those of you interested please pm me your e-mail and ill send pics and prices, THANKS!!!!

 

Here's that intake!

According to Jordan: "If I have a crowd for the 6 carbs i'll have those casted but as for now just a 4 carb set-up is being made."

BADASS! You can get a valley cover for a 429 folks... finned, no less!

~Jason

 

That's a cool intake. It would be really nice to have something besides stock and fabricated available.

Finned valve covers and valley covers like this?


Yeah, I know it's a crappy pic. Computer got wiped and I had to siphon the pic out of the catalog. The valve covers don't match the angled ends of the originals, but they fit and seal if you use the right gasket. It would be cool to have options, like a valve cover shaped more like the original 429 cover with the angled ends. It kinda sucks to have every engine look the same, even on an engine you don't see very often.

 

ok i also have a question regarding the 63 390 though not the 429 ive heard so many different stories that im jsut more confuesed than before is my 390 the same or different than a 429

 

Help Chris design some finned aluminum 429 valve covers that clear adjustable rockers here!: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=317841

~Jason

 

The 1963 390 is a one-year-only motor, much closer to the 429 than the previous 390. In fact, it's better to think of it in terms of being a smaller CID 429 than a 390.

~Jason

 

My opinion on the 429...run it as is. Fast, big TQ, revs pretty quick as well for a big motor, responds well to a good performance tune as in jetting, timing, etc. In my youth Dad n I put many a 429 in Ford 1/2 ton PUs. They all hauled ass. I wipped a few Camaros in their day (no, not Z28s and 396/375s). They like to breathe. Do some nice duals but don't over do the size of the pipes. Use a balance tube for a smoother tone.

This may be one of those "just fine as-is" motors. All were stompin' bitches even when worn out. The last one I recall used a qt of oil every 3-4 days and still whipped ass on a hopped up MEL motor in a 62 short bed Unibody Ford PU. That guy had us put a Caddy in his truck and we were no match for it after that. There's cheaper ways to make mega power, but the size and such are great for that one.

 

By the way, folks - the '63/'64 Cadillac MSN group has been moved to a Yahoo Group, as MSN was doing away with MSN groups altogether. They really know their shit with these engines - here's where you'll find them:
http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Cadillac_6364_club/

FYI. Join it. You won't be sorry.

~Jason

 

Headers are now available from Sanderson
http://www.sandersonheaders.com/product_info.php?products_id=206

Check here for the install (an alternator bracket was needed):
http://www.modifiedcadillac.org/forum/index.php/topic,5234.0.html

 

Nice thread for who don't think post '63 cad engines are boat anchor. I'm one of these people, I'm working on '38 ford 5W custom project with one year only '63 cadillac 390.

I'm in the way to adapt one T5 behind this beast. NOT easy, I think I should have the first 63 manual tranny in the world..

So what is definitly the list of speed parts for my '63? I need 3x2 intake old style valve covers before of all..

Thanks in advance
Luca

 

There are currently several styles of valve covers available, and a new one coming.
Parts to put a manual trans behind a '63 390 are readily available, as well. I've sold several kits in the last few years. Cams are readily available, as well (new cams, not regrinds). That's the easy part.
The intake is the hard part. There are no stock multi-carb intakes, and no aftermarket intakes that fit out of the box, unless you want a fabricated intake. You can get a vintage aftermarket intake for a '62-older Caddy at a swap meet or from the HAMB classifieds, and cut it up and TiG it back together so it fits the '63-'67 engines, but that's an expensive proposition if you can't do it yourself.

 

Did you and the dude from Gear Drive have some kind of intake deal going on at one time, Chris?

~Jason

 

Sort of - we worked out a deal to re-sell his intakes and headers, but I haven't actually sold any.

 

anybody looking to build a hot rod or build a racing 429 cadillac engine should contact us at vulcanracing.com or call us at 541-536-3802 we have a 50 ford bullet nose gasser 14 world records with a 429 cadillac engine. we have the parts and the know how that you need! we have been building cadillac engines since racing engines since 1948!

 

Show us your mill!

I for one, would love to see some pics, and would welcome you to tell the tales of your mods. Hell, some of us might follow suit!

Are you guys in contact with these folks?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cadillac_6364_club/

https://www.facebook.com/pages/1963-and-1964-Cadillac-Community/132322493447147

~Jason