Thread: 454 or 460?

Tweet

Ford got the distributor totalyy backwards. The look of the distributor in the front ruins the look of any ford engine. Thedistributor should always be in the back

Originally Posted by tigers83

Ford got the distributor totalyy backwards. The look of the distributor in the front ruins the look of any ford engine. Thedistributor should always be in the back

Well, I guess if your more concerned with the look then more accurate timing, and being able to set the engine back without a big unsightly notch for the distributor, and having the distributor where you can actually get at it for maintenance and adjustments, then the chebbie is better......

Originally Posted by 65ny

Who likes Pepsi?? Who likes Coke??

That about sums it up right there.

Paul

Originally Posted by falconvan

I think the bad part about 460s are the heads. I remember a 460 build that Car Craft did a while back and the differece between stock and aftermarket head was huge;100+ HP or something. Also I believe parts generally cost more.

Car Craft March 2006. You should also know then that once the magazine came out, they also got deluged with an BIG onslaught of angry letters from 460 engine builders crying foul.

The REAL truth:

• That article was not written by engine builders, it was written by magazine reporters that don't know engine building. Don't believe everything that you read, falconvan.
• Car Craft is driven by advertising, and one of there biggest advertisers is Edelbrock--yes, the same company that provided the heads used in the "iron versus ported aluminum" article. Hmmmmm.
• The iron head flow numbers were so dismal that they appeared virtually as bone stock, as-cast flow numbers. Whoever ported the factory 460 iron had their HEAD up their ASS. Also, they started with "smogger" D3VE passenger car heads, while the Edlebrock head is tailored after the Super Cobra Jet head. Talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight. Nevertheless, the portwork was little more than smoothing & blending, and incidentally even the lowly D3VE heads--ported correctly--have been able to hold their own in the performance world.

If I (or any of several other 460 iron head porters) supplied the heads to go up against the Edelbrocks, that "Edelbrock sales article" would have been debunked before it went to print.

Paul

Originally Posted by tigers83

Ford got the distributor totalyy backwards. The look of the distributor in the front ruins the look of any ford engine. Thedistributor should always be in the back

If the LOOK of an engine is all you concern yourself with, tigers83, then go ahead and keep your distibutor and oil pump in the back of the engine. Ford put them up front because they put FUNCTION before FORM (or as you refer to form, "looks"). You see, the camshaft is being tugged by the cam chain at the FRONT of the cam. So, why load the cam at the REAR? Yeah, T-W-I-S-T that cam, tigers83! It may not matter to you now (ie in a mild build), but when you start building really powerful engines, even the smallest power robbing details are taken into consideration because they all add up...and also because the more power you try to generate, the more something (such as cam chain up front/distributor and oil pump at rear) can affect peak power output.

Paul

Well Paul, you cited all the reasons I quit reading the car rags....he who spends the most gets the best article.... Never saw or care to see the article you referance, but it would seem that it would have been just a bit more accurate to at least start with a decent cast iron head....or compare aluminum to aluminum and match up that Edelbrock head to a Super Cobra Jet head......

Originally Posted by tigers83

Ford got the distributor totalyy backwards. The look of the distributor in the front ruins the look of any ford engine. Thedistributor should always be in the back

helps to if you want to run a blower any one making power runs a dry sump oil pump all long with a crank trig .i be happy with no distributor at all just crank trig and coil packs

....And the fight continues.

Great reading guys.

Pepsi please, you know, the one with the distributor in the back.

for some odd reason the 460 short block in my stang performed tremendiously better than the 429 with the very same bolt ons .. 460 revved higher and was 2 tenths faster in the 1/8th .. some packages just work better than others ..

Originally Posted by stovens

The late 60's early 70's heads including the dove heads did some pretty good stock horse power without any tweaking. I'm also willing to bet that after market 454 heads will easily increase horse power by 100 over stock too. It's why they are made aftermarket.
I'm not a more power nut, so I'm happy with my 460 with stock heads, that still is putting out a tremondous amount of power. I'm not baggin the 454, hell every kid in highschool seemed to be building them in the 70's, just saying, as Paul has above, the 460 seems seriously missunderstood engine. Ford also got the distributor placement right!

I have to agree on the distributor; I'd much rather have it right there in the front.

What a great thread. It seems like this one is as old as cars and Hot Roding itself. I remember my father having this conversation in the fifties as he and his buddies would extol the virtues’ of various flathead configurations and oh my stars, have you seen that, “Overhead valve junk? It’ll never catch on – too many movin’ parts and whataya gonna do when one of them spindly little ‘puss-rods’ bends and ya get valves a floating all over the place. Naw, for my money, nothin’ will ever beat a good flatie with three twos!” My father was a bit different in that he was not one to consume vast quantities of beer before, during, and after these sessions at the local Shady Oaks Garage and I can still see him smiling and telling me, “The future is the pushrod or maybe an overhead cam engine.” (He also told me to never refer to them as ‘puss-rods’ as that had some horrible satanic meaning and my God fearing Baptist mother would have a stroke at the very mention of any such thing in her house….)

It wasn’t too long after that he and I built a 312 Ford for a “dune buggy” that I somehow wangled from a neighbor. It was very loosely based on a ’49 Ford chassis with a three speed overdrive transmission. The frame had been cut down and we ended up with a drive shaft that was about two feet long. Wide rims (home-made, I might add) and balloon tires were also included. The reason I was able to horse trade for this was the “blown engine”. It seems that in one of its maiden outings, something had punched the oil pan and the 272 T-Bird’s engine didn’t fair too well without the required oil and it roasted the bearings. I drug it home and my father just smiled – it reminded him of a project he had growing up in Northern Florida that he had affectionately nicknamed “Skeeter”. We went junk yardin’ (I was in heaven) and pulled a 312 (who remembers mushroom tappets?) out of a pickup . Next was a complete “junior rebuild kit” (rings, bearings, cam, timing chain, etc) from Warshawsky’s (now J.C Whitney). I learned a lot with this one – about measuring with a micrometer and using a ring compressor and inside/outside calipers, the importance of keeping things clean, why we use the torque wrench and how important lubrication is. Mostly I learned that my father was the greatest man on earth and he knew so much about everything. I learned to drink coffee and listen to him tell me about a lot of other things as we built his engine. One especially vivid memory was that my father made a cardboard template of the exhaust flanges and then cut out new one from ¼” steel and then cobbled up a set of “zoomies” that were akin to what the top fuelers were running. The first time we started this engine was at night and let me tell you about the sound and light show we had. For the next few years we went to local drags and highlighted our year with the Winternationals at Pomona. We’d see all the big three jockey for top fuel and funny car honors as well as all the Mustangs, Camaros, and ‘Cudas that made the 60’s a great time to be fan of drag racing. Don’t even remember when I got rid of the buggy, but my first “real car” was a ’57 Vette and I think my father enjoyed that one nearly as much as I did…

From that time to now I’ve built dozens of motors – mostly Chevy SB with a few Fords and the occasional Mopar for a friend. While I prefer the Chevy from the convenience of readily available parts and deep inventory at local parts stores where ever I’ve lived, I certainly have naught but great memories of the first motor I built being a Ford. It really comes down to a personal preference. God only knows how much I miss my father but I’m sure that there’s a great local car shop in heaven where he drinks his coffee and we’ll take up where we left off some day. They’re probably still debating Ford versus Chevy, but maybe have decided that the pushrod engines weren’t so bad after all..

Thanks for letting me ramble on….
Glenn

Originally Posted by Paul Kane

If the LOOK of an engine is all you concern yourself with, tigers83, then go ahead and keep your distibutor and oil pump in the back of the engine. Ford put them up front because they put FUNCTION before FORM (or as you refer to form, "looks"). You see, the camshaft is being tugged by the cam chain at the FRONT of the cam. So, why load the cam at the REAR? Yeah, T-W-I-S-T that cam, tigers83! It may not matter to you now (ie in a mild build), but when you start building really powerful engines, even the smallest power robbing details are taken into consideration because they all add up...and also because the more power you try to generate, the more something (such as cam chain up front/distributor and oil pump at rear) can affect peak power output.

Paul

what about oil surge? on the street with a big torquey engine or especially anything on the drag strip wouldnt the g forces slam the oil backwards into the rear of the engine-like it does when you put your foot down and it slams you into the seat-coincidently where the dip down in the sump and oil pickup are on a chev away from where it is on a ford? which is why they woulda needed 'trap doors' and to keep the oil there sorta fixes to problems caused by putting the dissy at the front, is that a more functional reason for putting it at the rear? id tend to worry about that way before worrying about cams twisting or you could have bigger problems haha. i realise extreme engines would have dry sumps though but would this be a problem on the street and street strip cars? just throwin another theory out there

haha oh i love it, how often do you have to touch the dissy on fords to warrant having it at the front because its easier to get to for adjustments?? do they not hold their timing as well as chev or sumthing?

dead right about the access thing though, not much harder to get to than on an impala, leaning over it tryna reach around the bonnet hinge-or in my case on the guard sitting under the open bonnet in the engine bay foot above firewall and other foot on upper wishbone-to play with points haha, nuts to that! goin HEI sorted that problem for me, havnt needed to touch it since

i just like BBCs cos i have a chev

Originally Posted by chopped66impala

i just like BBCs cos i have a chev

there more to it then that for me

Originally Posted by pat mccarthy

there more to it then that for me

i know what youre sayin, like the fact they dont run on rice aye