Thread: Different Idea

Tweet

I AM LOOKING AT BUYING A 1996 AND OLDER FORD PICKUP THAT HAS A 460 IN IT. MY QUESTION IS THIS IF I BUILD A 1969 429 LONG BLOCK CAN PUT THE TOP END FROM THE 460 AND THE ELECTRONICS ON THE 429?? WOULD THERE BE ANY KNOWN COMPLICATIONS WITH THIS THOUGHT??

The obvious question is, why not do the 460? I think all the pieces will fit the 429, but "you can't beat cubic inches!"

I concure. Why not go with the 460? There is no substitution for cubic inches.

Originally posted by SCSTRANSPORT
I AM LOOKING AT BUYING A 1996 AND OLDER FORD PICKUP THAT HAS A 460 IN IT. MY QUESTION IS THIS IF I BUILD A 1969 429 LONG BLOCK CAN PUT THE TOP END FROM THE 460 AND THE ELECTRONICS ON THE 429?? WOULD THERE BE ANY KNOWN COMPLICATIONS WITH THIS THOUGHT??

To answer your question: The fuel injected motor (1987-up) 460 parts will indeed bolt to the 1969 429 shortblock.

Please note: There are some complications that can possibly arise from mixing the carbed & EFI'd motor components. The EFI heads and intake are diffenret from the carbed heads and intake, and so the EFI intake manifold must stay with the EFI heads, etc. Noone I know of makes an aluminum intake for the EFI heads. Also, there are different versions of the EFI heads (E7TE & F3TE) and they have different flow characteristics, etc. Same with the intake manifolds (E7TE & F2TE, the latter being better). The crank from a carbureted motor will not fit into the crankcase of an EFI block (D9TE-AB).

There is more, such as pistons, etc, but I think you get the idea. Personally, unless I wanted EFI componenets for some reason, I would probably not buy the EFI motor but instead keep an eye out for earlier 429/460 stuff from carbureted engines. As you know, I have plenty of this stuff if you need it.

Paul

THE ONLY REASON I WOULD PUT THE 429 IN INSTEAD OF DOING THE 460 OVER IS BECAUSE I WOULD BE BUILDING THE 429 WHILE I WAS STILL USING THE 460 AS A DAILY DRIVER. AND AFTER TALKING TO PAUL KANE ABOUT THE 429 THAT I HAVE, I REALLY WANT TO BUILD IT UP MODERATELY SINCE ITS ALREADY GOT 10.5:1 COMPRESSION. ANY WAYS THANKS AGAIN PAUL KANE I APPRECIATE IT. I THINK ILL JUST SCRAP THAT IDEA INTO THE TRASH. SCS