anyone ever ran this type of engine? i heard anything over 71' has no balls. i got a 429 66 cad big block engine but i dont wanna hack up my 52 chev truck trying to fit it in there. i can get the whole 76 cadillac for $300. they say it has a 350 v8. im guessing its a stock cad engine. just wondering if any of you ever messed with such a thing.
Actually, it probably has a 350 Olds in it...which would be a weak-**** smog machine. stuff the 429 in it. all the cool kids are doing it these days.
UnIOnViLLEHauNT: no no i'm only asking because i really like cad engines. been pondering how to fit the 429 in there but i dont want to start chopping **** just to make room. thats why i was looking into this car, just to rip the engine out. richard: thast what i thought but i guess not, depending on the model they came with 500's or 350 engines. dont think its a chev 350 in the cad.
i know that the 71 500 caddy motor is a torque monster around 450ft lbs if you put this in you truck your going to need a BOP trans buick olds pontiac the chevy trans wont bolt up
I ran a 472 cad out of a 73 cadillac. it didnt rev real high but would pull the **** hole out of a bear! That was in a 50 f-1, it fit real nice
Nah. the Caddies got various engines due to where they were built. (just like the pontiacs. You've seen a 403 olds powered Trans Am, right? California car.) But yes, they for sure made the 500 up until I think 79. and yeah, They will pull Your house out into the street. Stay tuned on the brute we have been building.
yea i think everything else besides the seville came with a 500, im doing research but cant find anywhere what make it is. its probably a 350 olds like Lux Blue said. sephgato: you fit a 472 in a little f-1? hmmmm. this 429 i got is fresh haha along with the turbo 400 ******. hmmmmm maybe i'll just sit it between the frame just to see what it'll take.
If it's a seville, it's an Olds 350 that had (advertised) 180hp @ 4400 rpms. If it's anything else, it's a caddy 500 that had (advertised) 190hp @ 3600 & 360 ft lbs of torque @ 2000 rpms. Also, one must also take into consideration that the advertised power claims can be very misleading. Why? Because in 72 they changed the advertised power from gross to net. So in 71 the 500 had an advertised hp rating of 345, whereas the 72 was only 235. A lot of people think that means that the 72-76 500's are gutless because they lost over 100 horses in one year. Simply a misunderstanding due to the power system changing. From what I understand, the only real significant power loss occurred in 71 when they dropped the compression from 10.0:1 to 8.5:1, which lost about 35 horses and about 15 pounds of torque. All of the 500's have ridiculous performance potential.
1975 and 1976 Cadillacs all had the 500. Exception was the Seville, which had an injected Oldsmobile 350. Easy-peasy to tell difference: distributor in front = 500, distributor in back = 350. 1977 through 1980 Cadillacs had either a 425 or a 368, both variations on the 472-500 of previous years. Neither any good, really. Though both are good for the rear-sump pan (grab the pump intake, too, you'll need shorten the attaching brace to use in a 472-500). Sevilles stayed with the Olds until turning FWD (1981). After 1980, some Cadillacs had a V8-6-4 (1981 for full line, to '83 for commercial line, 368ci, all), some had a HT4100 (stay far away, very far away), some had a Buick V6 (delete/credit option) I've personally seen a Brougham with this engine. Was it ssssslllllloooooooowwwwww, and some had an Oldsmobile-based diesel, both 350ci and 260ci (latter is rare). All of these are ****. Utter ****. Well, the Buick is just on OK, but needs help. Hope this helps, Cosmo
man you guys are awesome, i'll skip on it. for some reason i keep saving this 429, its like one day i'll find the perfect car and stick it in. maybe now is the time. or perhaps the ohh so popular 350/350 combo just to make sure i make the 150mile round trip to work every day
I went with the '71-73 caddy motor. They tend to run fine on this gas we have now. It is in my '60 Caddy, 12 mpg. Might be better if I worked with it. ------DO NOT BOTHER WITH THE 425 OIL PUMP! ONE DAY YOU WILL GO OUT AND START YOUR CAR AND DISCOVER IT HAS LOST PRIME! I only care to use a cast iron Melling pump for the 472-500. --------Oddly, my '73 472 which was worn out had a hell of a lot more performance than my rebuilt '71 500. --------Eldo pans are the way to go for rear sump, get the pickup tube while you're there.
I just sold my '75 cad with the rear wheel drive big block. For a while i was considering putting that engine in my '50 chevy but ended up selling the whole cad for like 400 bucks... 350sb's just a whole lot easier to deal with.
The 429 is a pretty bad-*** engine. Dad and I put one in a 67 Ford PU and it flat out rocked. Freaked out many a would-be street racer. We had a 500 in a 1980 Ford PU. No RPMs like was said above, but for an 1/8 mile it was almost legendary. My favorite happening with that one was going up a pretty stout grade on the 'pike in PA. We had a Packard woody on an open trailer and all the spare and loose parts in the back. The look on ppls faces as we p***ed em goin up without slowin down. It didn't even feel strained. Just kept a nice steady 70+mph with a bunch more go pedal left. Empty that 500 would knock down mid to upper teens in mpg. I wanna say the truck had a 3.08 gear and Dad was always fond of L78 15 tires. Might of had a bit to do with the mpg. The 429 was an animal even at the end when it was using 2qts of oil a week. Then there was the 62 SWB unibody PU. That one had a late 390 from a 63. We had a 3.90 gear in that one and it stomped many a local street racer. My favorite was when I was out to the coin wash to clean it (yeah right) one of my cl***mates had recently rec'd a 73 Z28 with a 4spd and was touted as the fastest car in our school. I was severly ridiculed for wanting a shot at it with our truck. I got 2 shots at it. The 1st one was no contest as I smoked him by 2-3 cars easy in less than a 1/4 mile. Then came the obligatory "race from a roll" for a chance at redemption. I rolled in drive so as to be in 2nd gear for the launch, which instantly netted a 1st gear downshift and quite a bit of spin for a few ft. He lost by 5 or more cars on that one claiming to miss a gear etc, I cheated, blah, blah. Every time I see talk of Caddy motors in trucks I get a lil nostalgic about em. Always was our 1st choice. Sorry to ramble on but I hope ya liked the stories.
Just FWIW, Eldo pans are more accurately MID-sump, and the 425 pan will give more room, esp. if installing into a GM truck, like a Suburban. And there's no need to use the 425 oil pump, though I've never heard of this 'lost prime' aspect. And the 425s are easier to find than Eldo pans. The 425s do have thinner metal in all areas of the engine, including the main caps, which are radically thinner compared to the 472-500. That's why you need shorted the 425 oil pickup brace - the 500 caps are bigger. Cosmo
Back in the late 80s I had 76 coupe deville I recurved the dis. added duals with gl*** packs, shift kit and removed the ac. ran 15.20s crossing the line in second gear. with a 100 hp nitrous hit ran 13.90s. needless to say that rusted pos. embarr***ed all of people. G***hole.
I have a 73 caddy he**** with a 472 and with the right gearing that thing can be a great hauler. I use it as my junkyard runner and parts hauler. It just runs forever. I know a guy who runs a caddy 500 in his tow truck. He swears that theres no better engine made for pulling. He runs the **** outta it! "Bear to ****hole ratio" I think you're talking about the "new" powertrain rating method just ins***uted this week. Lol. The "B.2.B." ratio. Will your ride pull the ****hole out of a bear? No? Then your engine is ****! HAHAHA!!! I love your quote! Thank you Sephgato, I needed that. -GothY-
The Jalopy Journal
