Welcome to Club Hot Rod!  The premier site for everything to do with Hot Rod, Customs, Low Riders, Rat Rods, and more. 

  •  » Members from all over the US and the world!
  •  » Help from all over the world for your questions
  •  » Build logs for you and all members
  •  » Blogs
  •  » Image Gallery
  •  » Many thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of posts! 

YES! I want to register an account for free right now!  p.s.: For registered members this ad will NOT show

 

Thread: Bagging The 429 Back To The Ol' Fe.
          
   
   

Results 1 to 12 of 12

Threaded View

  1. #8
    Don Shillady's Avatar
    Don Shillady is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Ashland
    Car Year, Make, Model: 29 fendered roadster
    Posts
    2,160

    SCSTRANSPORT, after I asked the question I looked up some information on 390s and got some answers. First the longer stroke compared to SBC of the same years did provide a lot more torque for the Ford motor and second, the mpg was comparable. The reason the 390s did not catch on more with the Hot Rod folks seems to me to be due to the fact that Ford kept changing their designs and did not stay with the 332 development in large volume through the years while the SBC maintained the same bolt patterns for many years. In fact, it may be that the development of the Ford flathead was due to WWII and the many years which continued the same basic block design from '32 to '53, although the 21 stud block became the 24 stud block in 1938 (?). Also while the 221, 289, 302, 351 Ford small block emerged it was on the other extreme of a short stroke high rpm motor. I suppose you could say that Ford had a small block and a big block series the same as the GM folks, but I still have memories of confusion over how Ford could go from king of the road in 1952 (Mercury) to the dramatic dominance of the GM engines of the later '50s. I guess I am still miffed that Ford did not adopt the ARDUN heads and build a Ford hemi in the '50s, but I don't recall anyone at Ford calling and asking my opinion then either so I am just chatting now. Well with dual 4-barrel carbs I guess increasing the size of your valves should give more power but the mpg will go down more. I have a neighbor up the road in Ashland who has a 428/429 (I'm sorry I don't know which) with a big blower on it in a F150 and it just sits in his shop. He told me he just fires it up once in a while but he can't afford to drive it because it averages only 7 mpg. I guess he could trailer it to a track for racing but it's not a daily driver. Well maybe the longevity of the SBC is due to the many years the same block patterns have been maintained, but if GM gets wiped out the SBC may become a nostalgia engine?? Just chatting.

    Don Shillady
    Retired Scientist/teen rodder
    Last edited by Don Shillady; 12-07-2005 at 08:00 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Links monetized by VigLink