Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online!
Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! 
-
Latest | 0 Rplys
Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Engineering/Technical
Engineering/Technical Ask technical questions about cars. Do you know how a car engine works?
View Poll Results: Who makes the best Muscle Cars???
Chevrolet 11 78.57%
Ford 3 21.43%
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Show Printable Version Show Printable Version | Email this Page Email this Page | Subscription Subscribe to this Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-23-2008, 10:01 PM   #46
kens67mustang
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPbody
Ken,

Are you trying to "call me out", or are you just good at reading magazines and "history"?

You should know, I've been buillding engines for over 30 years (as a professional, not a hobbyist). I've built them all at one time or another. I raced my GTO at the track and on the street, relentlessy from '72 through '78 when grown-up responsibilities began. I got beat occasionally, but a LOT less than I gave the beating. Not once, did a 428-powered (Ford) ANYTHING beat my 400 GTO, and I raced many. A couple of 390-powered pony cars (Mach 1 and Cougar, one each) gave me among the best runs I ever got from an FE. 427s were MUCH stronger, but simply too rare to consider. Most of them were in more expensive "race" cars and at the track every weekend. Us "poor folks" did street racing. The 429, on the other hand, is a GREAT engine.

It's true, in A and B/SS at the '68 Winternationals, the 428 Mustangs did well. Today, they're in "C/SS" because the developements of the "Hemi" made all others obsolete at the "A" level. We see one here and there, but not a popular racer. Too valuable as a collector car, I suspect, not unlike the Chevelle SSs (REAL ones) and GTOs. The Hemi cars that remain "unmolested" are also too valuable to race anymore. The ones that still do are older cars "kept up". There was one GT-500 running in B/SA at Indy last year. Went out in the first round.

My point here is to be sure the ground you're on. While it got rave reviews, the 428CJ never lived up to the "hype". The stroke was too long for the head design and the rod bearings are too big to really rev it. The relatively short stroke in the 390 and 427 made them MUCH better for performance (rod/stroke ratio and rod "angle"). 428 was originally developed as a "big car" engine. High in low-end torque, it made the better T-bird engine of the late '60s.

We've done one as recently as last Summer. It's in a '69 Torino GT, and is VERY nice. It's still a sled, though. We also did a 454 (427 block, 428 crank) about two years ago. It was a MAJOR torque monster, but the owner couldn't let go of the "rev" thing. He blew it up in short fashion. Large rod bearing, cast crank, 7,000 RPM... NOT a good combination. 428s are best left stock and geared "up" like Pontiacs, to take fullest advantage of all the torque (like the Pontiac...).

This is not to dispute anything, just to clarify with some "real world" experience.

Jim
The 428 CJ did INDEED live up to it's reputation at the track& on the street.the 390 was NOT a performance engine............The GTO a handling car? yeah, but NOT stock,sorry................seen plenty of them & the body rool is just like every other 70's car out there
ponticans 400 was a strong runner, but not quite as you put it.
Pontiac's 428 was a step up from the 400.
The 428CJ stuff i refer to is NOT from reading.or from websites
magazines? Like hot rod,road& track, sportscar review, gave the CJ glowing reviews................and the cars spke for themselves
.the lemans/GTO was a nice car, but please, take it off that pedistal, it doesn't belong up there.

and where are you getting 454 CI from a427 w/ 428 crank?
when ,if you drop a 428 crank into a 390, you get a 410?

i know my CJ's......................thew '68 1'2 CJ Cleaned house in the Winternationals,running SS/E,SS/EP &SS/EA............
the 390 was origionally developed for TRUCKS!! thats NOT a performance engine by any stretch..........the 427 was an exotic engine, costly to build.......the 428 PI was built from the start as a performance motor.Look up Tasca.in stock form, the 429Thunderjet was a large passenger car motor..........nothing there either.
kens67mustang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2008, 02:43 PM   #47
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Ken,

Thanks. As I suspected... We don't race magazines. We don't race dynos. We race CARS. I was simply expressing my real-world experiences regarding street racing in the early '70s. No matter what a magazine writer says or said, no 428-powered (Ford, that is) ever beat my 400 GTO. Fact, not fiction. If 428 was the killer combo, it would be readily available in today's aftermarket. The Lima engines put the FEs (with the exception of 427) to shame.

390 "GT" was rated at 335 HP, but made closer to 370 in good "tune". I had a '66 Fairlane GT that went low 14s in '71, completely stock. Not too bad for such a "truck". My '70 Judge went 13.63 @ 101, STOCK AS A ROCK, including G70-14 tires, 3.55 gear "one-legged" and the original Q-jet and cast iron exhaust manifolds, full exhaust, driven from San Bernardino to Orange County, raced and driven home with no changes. Every magazine test I read, and even some of the more recent "comparisons" never put a Ram Air III car better than 13.80s. Those same recent "comparisons" rate the '69 GTO a "close second" to the '70 Buick GS in handling. The '70 GTO is avoided purposefully, as it would out-handle ALL of them. The "goodies" available on the '70 were not offered on the '69. Not a Ford or Dodge in sight when it comes to the twisties...

It was not I that put GTO "on a pedestal". No American "family" car has the mystique around it GTO has. GTO did NOT earn a reputation for losing. If you could beat one in a straight line, you weren't going to beat it around the corners. If you could beat it around the corners, you weren't going to beat it in a straight line. It was the best balanced of all the muscle cars. I'm simply one of the lucky ones to have recognized it when I was a young man and had one to drive before they became such high-valued collector cars. Please, don't include LeMans and Tempest, as they were separate models for most years of production, including the year in "question", '70.

A 454 Chevy is a 4.250" bore and a 4" stroke. If you "do the math", you'll see the 427 Ford, bored .030" (4.262") with the stock 3.980" stroke of the 428 makes exactly 453.82 CID. The "454" FE is actually a popular combination among those either affluent enough to buy all the 427s they want, or those lucky enough to have stashed a few in the past. "Custom" steel cranks make a big difference in durability. Using BBC-sized rod journals make them even MORE reliable.

A 390 standard bore is 4.050". Stroking it with the 3.980" stroke makes 410.15 CID.

Math, used in my shop on a daily basis... Pai x R(squared) x H x no. of cylinders, where "pai" = 3 1/7 or 3.14159, R = 1/2 the bore and H = height or stroke. Actually, it's basic geometry, the volume of a cylinder.

428 Pontiac is a whole different animal (and I DO MEAN "animal"). We (CVMS) have many examples of 428-based engines (4" stroke) in cars weighing over 3,500 lbs., running low 11s/high 10s in street "trim" on 93 octane gas without power adders. Too bad Pontiac never used the engine in muscle cars (only available in full-size cars). Glad it "bolts right in"... It was basically a 421 bored .030", but had MUCH better cylinder heads.

Let it be from here, okay? You're dealing with an old fart with a good memory, and 30 years experience. I'm glad you like the 428. Somebody has to.

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2008, 12:55 PM   #48
kens67mustang
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Talking Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPbody
Ken,

Thanks. As I suspected... We don't race magazines. We don't race dynos. We race CARS. I was simply expressing my real-world experiences regarding street racing in the early '70s. No matter what a magazine writer says or said, no 428-powered (Ford, that is) ever beat my 400 GTO. Fact, not fiction. If 428 was the killer combo, it would be readily available in today's aftermarket. The Lima engines put the FEs (with the exception of 427) to shame.

390 "GT" was rated at 335 HP, but made closer to 370 in good "tune". I had a '66 Fairlane GT that went low 14s in '71, completely stock. Not too bad for such a "truck". My '70 Judge went 13.63 @ 101, STOCK AS A ROCK, including G70-14 tires, 3.55 gear "one-legged" and the original Q-jet and cast iron exhaust manifolds, full exhaust, driven from San Bernardino to Orange County, raced and driven home with no changes. Every magazine test I read, and even some of the more recent "comparisons" never put a Ram Air III car better than 13.80s. Those same recent "comparisons" rate the '69 GTO a "close second" to the '70 Buick GS in handling. The '70 GTO is avoided purposefully, as it would out-handle ALL of them. The "goodies" available on the '70 were not offered on the '69. Not a Ford or Dodge in sight when it comes to the twisties...

It was not I that put GTO "on a pedestal". No American "family" car has the mystique around it GTO has. GTO did NOT earn a reputation for losing. If you could beat one in a straight line, you weren't going to beat it around the corners. If you could beat it around the corners, you weren't going to beat it in a straight line. It was the best balanced of all the muscle cars. I'm simply one of the lucky ones to have recognized it when I was a young man and had one to drive before they became such high-valued collector cars. Please, don't include LeMans and Tempest, as they were separate models for most years of production, including the year in "question", '70.

A 454 Chevy is a 4.250" bore and a 4" stroke. If you "do the math", you'll see the 427 Ford, bored .030" (4.262") with the stock 3.980" stroke of the 428 makes exactly 453.82 CID. The "454" FE is actually a popular combination among those either affluent enough to buy all the 427s they want, or those lucky enough to have stashed a few in the past. "Custom" steel cranks make a big difference in durability. Using BBC-sized rod journals make them even MORE reliable.

A 390 standard bore is 4.050". Stroking it with the 3.980" stroke makes 410.15 CID.

Math, used in my shop on a daily basis... Pai x R(squared) x H x no. of cylinders, where "pai" = 3 1/7 or 3.14159, R = 1/2 the bore and H = height or stroke. Actually, it's basic geometry, the volume of a cylinder.

428 Pontiac is a whole different animal (and I DO MEAN "animal"). We (CVMS) have many examples of 428-based engines (4" stroke) in cars weighing over 3,500 lbs., running low 11s/high 10s in street "trim" on 93 octane gas without power adders. Too bad Pontiac never used the engine in muscle cars (only available in full-size cars). Glad it "bolts right in"... It was basically a 421 bored .030", but had MUCH better cylinder heads.

Let it be from here, okay? You're dealing with an old fart with a good memory, and 30 years experience. I'm glad you like the 428. Somebody has to.

Jim
Jim, thats cool, but the 390GT was rated at only 300hp, while the 428CJ was the one rated at 335hp................way under rated,By Ford.And don't forget,the passenger 428 was no where close to the Cobra Jet 428,a car that would easily run hi 13's.The 428CJ basically is priceless right now.meaning you can't buy them,unless you have some severe cash.And the fe's have a HUGE following.
kens67mustang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2008, 07:06 PM   #49
Jessetorino
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

As for the twisties,there is no GTO or Buick GS that will stay with the boss 302 mustangs. And the 428 fords ruled the track,not the GTO,s. You also forgot another badass ford from 1970, 70 torino cobra. It was also a 13 second car that was said to run 14,s. 71 boss 351 13,s off of the showroom,and will run with a GTO anyday,straight and though the twisties,and thats a smallblock.
Jessetorino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2008, 08:34 AM   #50
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Comparing Mustangs to intermediate cars regarding handling is not apples-to-apples. Throw TransAm and Z/28 in there and see what happens to the Fords. How does that Torino "stack up" to the Buick and Pontiac? THAT'S a fair comparison.

Torino GT/Cobra and Cyclone GT are virtually identical cars. 429-powered ones are a force to reckon with.

According to "Motors" (repair manual of choice in the late '60s), in '66 & 7, 390 GT" was rated at 335 HP. The "big" engine was 427, rated at 390 HP in the intermediate and "compacts" (including Mustang). 428 wasn't available in those cars until '69, where it WAS rated at 335 HP. the "big car" version was rated at 345 in '68. The '68 and '69 390 "GT" was rated at 325. The "big car" version of 427 was rated at 425. I recall seeing at least one late-production '68 Mustang with 428 CJ "markings". Whether or not it was "real", I can't say. The absolute quickest streetable '69 Mustang I ever saw had a '66 427 from a Galaxie in it. That was in "olden times". I haven't done ANY street racing in over 25 years. I HAVE, however, built LOTS of engines for those that do! A 514 CID Lima block went out of here last month, for a Fox-body. Should go in the 8s. Not on the track yet, though.

FE engines DO have a huge following. There were but two engines more "prolific" during the muscle car "era", one of which wasn't IN muscle cars. 350 Chevy and 400 Pontiac. Unfortunately for the FE "crowd", developement slowed WAY down after the Lima family was introduced. You can't FIND a 428 to build, mainly because they're like the Ram Air Pontiacs, in restorations where they're worth the most money. Someone should "man up" and start reproducing 427 blocks, like they have among the Pontiac and Buick racers. Eagle offers a stock-relpacement 428 crank (cast) as well as two "stroker" versions (same crank, using BBC rod journals and offset-grinding). I know of no forged cranks available aftermarket for FE. I DO have a couple 391 cranks stashed... (based on the same forging as 427)

If there ARE more aftermarket offerings, I would be VERY interested in knowing where to find them. Please PM me on that!

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2008, 05:20 PM   #51
kens67mustang
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPbody
Comparing Mustangs to intermediate cars regarding handling is not apples-to-apples. Throw TransAm and Z/28 in there and see what happens to the Fords. How does that Torino "stack up" to the Buick and Pontiac? THAT'S a fair comparison.

Torino GT/Cobra and Cyclone GT are virtually identical cars. 429-powered ones are a force to reckon with.

According to "Motors" (repair manual of choice in the late '60s), in '66 & 7, 390 GT" was rated at 335 HP. The "big" engine was 427, rated at 390 HP in the intermediate and "compacts" (including Mustang). 428 wasn't available in those cars until '69, where it WAS rated at 335 HP. the "big car" version was rated at 345 in '68. The '68 and '69 390 "GT" was rated at 325. The "big car" version of 427 was rated at 425. I recall seeing at least one late-production '68 Mustang with 428 CJ "markings". Whether or not it was "real", I can't say. The absolute quickest streetable '69 Mustang I ever saw had a '66 427 from a Galaxie in it. That was in "olden times". I haven't done ANY street racing in over 25 years. I HAVE, however, built LOTS of engines for those that do! A 514 CID Lima block went out of here last month, for a Fox-body. Should go in the 8s. Not on the track yet, though.

FE engines DO have a huge following. There were but two engines more "prolific" during the muscle car "era", one of which wasn't IN muscle cars. 350 Chevy and 400 Pontiac. Unfortunately for the FE "crowd", developement slowed WAY down after the Lima family was introduced. You can't FIND a 428 to build, mainly because they're like the Ram Air Pontiacs, in restorations where they're worth the most money. Someone should "man up" and start reproducing 427 blocks, like they have among the Pontiac and Buick racers. Eagle offers a stock-relpacement 428 crank (cast) as well as two "stroker" versions (same crank, using BBC rod journals and offset-grinding). I know of no forged cranks available aftermarket for FE. I DO have a couple 391 cranks stashed... (based on the same forging as 427)

If there ARE more aftermarket offerings, I would be VERY interested in knowing where to find them. Please PM me on that!

Jim
try this................Ford Stroker Kits 390 to 416 from RPM Machines.
kens67mustang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2008, 06:12 PM   #52
Jessetorino
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

the only 427 rated at 390 hp was the one in the 68 cougar gte,s. the fairlane and comet/cyclone had a single 4 410 hp and 425 hp with 2 4,s. and as for putting the z28 up against the boss302,s the boss wins. the 428 started in 1968 in the mustang and the torino then in 69 the fairlane cobra. and there are a few company,s that make 427 blocks and heads. there is more fe stuff being made then most people know about. I do agree I like the 385 engines better then fe,s.


Jesse
Jessetorino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2008, 10:21 PM   #53
hotrod_chevyz
AF Enthusiast
 
hotrod_chevyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: okc, Oklahoma
Posts: 1,726
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessetorino
as for putting the z28 up against the boss302,s the boss wins.
Nope.
hotrod_chevyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2008, 08:54 AM   #54
MrPbody
AF -Advisor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Jesse,

"Fairlane Cobra"? Come on guy. You're now just talking about things you "heard" and not based on anything real. No such animal. It was TORINO COBRA. And they should never have used the name "Cobra". The cars were pigs. I raced too many to convince me otherwise. Not one ever came close. Fairlane GT was extended through '68, but I don't know about '69.

I believe I pointed out the 390-horse 427 was in intermediates. The 425-horse was NOT in intermdeiates OR pony cars, with the exception of the Thunderbolts, which, like the Dodge Dart SS "Special", are far too rare to consider in a conversaton about "everyday" muscle cars or pony cars. I can find no factory literature or aftermarket service information on a 428 in '68 model Mustangs, but as I said in earlier, I recall seeing ONE (count 'em). There were zero '68s at the Nashville 40th birthday "party" (out of over 5,000 cars) with 428. There were several '69 Mach 1s there with them. There was one '68 with an SOHC 427 in it, claiming to be "factory installed". I would guess that to be true, as the Ford afficianados were out "in force" and no one disputed the claim.

And no, Boss 302 won't beat Z/28. Neither will TOUCH TransAm. In all fairness, though, TransAm had more than a tiny engine in it. The 303 Pontiac was never released in production cars. T/A didn't do well in Trans Am until factory backing ended in '74, and after that, the early T/A pretty much dominated for the last years it was eligible. Jerry Titus DID bring home a championship before his untimely demise.

Jim
MrPbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2008, 04:22 PM   #55
Jessetorino
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

there was a fairlane cobra in 69 not a torino cobra. the torino cobra started in 1970. the 428cj started in 1968 in the mustangs and the torino gt. the 68 mustang won everything on the quarter mile for years after that. and in 1966 and 67 the fairlane had a w code 410 hp 427 with 1 4. the r code 427 fairlane was a 425 hp with 2 4,s. these are all facts not something someone told me. so you come on guy! and ford almost won the trans am in 1969 then in 1970 ford took it all. the trans am was a sled, the mustang and the camaros were the cars to beat after the cougars were done in 1968. and the only 427 ever to have 390 hp was the 1968 cougar GTE with hyd. cam. and that was only half the year,mercury replaced the 427 with a 428 cj midyear. both engines in the fairlane were solid lifter cams. and there was no fairlane gt after 1967, me and my father have had 26 66-67 fairlanes,I know my fairlanes and torino,s. so if there is any other ford history you would like to know,just ask.


Jesse
Jessetorino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2008, 04:29 PM   #56
Jessetorino
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

also forgot to add,the 427 sohc was never installed by ford at all. they were put in dragcars for ford by companys ford used to build stuff like that. companys like dearborn tubing and karkraft. they were also sold as a crate engine way back in the early 60,s. people try to say gm started the cratemotor,wrong ford did in 1963 when the cammer was made. also the reason it,s hard to find lit on the 68 428 mustang is because they came out late april 1 1968,first 50 fastbacks went into nhra racing. then anyone could buy one in any of the mustang body,s of 1968. the talledega and the 68 torino both got the 428cj also.

Jesse

Last edited by Jessetorino; 05-28-2008 at 07:34 PM.
Jessetorino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2008, 07:36 PM   #57
Jessetorino
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

hotrod chevyz............................YEP!
Jessetorino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2008, 08:36 PM   #58
kens67mustang
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPbody
Jesse,

"Fairlane Cobra"? Come on guy. You're now just talking about things you "heard" and not based on anything real. No such animal. It was TORINO COBRA. And they should never have used the name "Cobra". The cars were pigs. I raced too many to convince me otherwise. Not one ever came close. Fairlane GT was extended through '68, but I don't know about '69.

I believe I pointed out the 390-horse 427 was in intermediates. The 425-horse was NOT in intermdeiates OR pony cars, with the exception of the Thunderbolts, which, like the Dodge Dart SS "Special", are far too rare to consider in a conversaton about "everyday" muscle cars or pony cars. I can find no factory literature or aftermarket service information on a 428 in '68 model Mustangs, but as I said in earlier, I recall seeing ONE (count 'em). There were zero '68s at the Nashville 40th birthday "party" (out of over 5,000 cars) with 428. There were several '69 Mach 1s there with them. There was one '68 with an SOHC 427 in it, claiming to be "factory installed". I would guess that to be true, as the Ford afficianados were out "in force" and no one disputed the claim.

And no, Boss 302 won't beat Z/28. Neither will TOUCH TransAm. In all fairness, though, TransAm had more than a tiny engine in it. The 303 Pontiac was never released in production cars. T/A didn't do well in Trans Am until factory backing ended in '74, and after that, the early T/A pretty much dominated for the last years it was eligible. Jerry Titus DID bring home a championship before his untimely demise.

Jim
Mustang 428 Cobra Jet Registry

and a Trans Am had no chance against the Boss 302.....faster& handled way better.thought you knew your history on cars?
There's your proof,there WERE Mustangs with FACTORY 428CJ in 1968, NOT the passenger 428s.the ONLY time pontiac ever did DECENT was AFTER Trans Am series started to die off.Even being named after the race its-self, Trans Am was a has been.Like i said,look up Bob Tasca,he's a REAL engine builder.
kens67mustang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2008, 08:41 PM   #59
kens67mustang
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: altoona, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

kens67mustang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2008, 10:22 PM   #60
429SCJguy
AF Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Syracuse, New York
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

That is what I always thought too, that the 428CJ was introduced in mid year '68 in Mustangs, Torinos and Cyclones and that 410 and 425 hp 427s were available in '66, and '67 Fairlanes. The 428SCJ was introduced in '69. The '66 and '67 427s were equipped with medium riser heads, steel cranks and side oiler blocks. The '68 427/390 was equipped with low riser heads and a hydraulic cam.

The 428 CJ/SCJ was replaced with the 429TJ/CJ/SCJ in Ford/Mercury intermediates in '70 and in Mustangs/Cougars in '71.
429SCJguy is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD

Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Engineering/Technical

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:39 PM.

Community Participation Guidelines | How to use your User Control Panel

Powered by: vBulletin | Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
 
 
no new posts