Muscle Cars - Chevy vs Ford

[72chevelleOhio]

I've been following this thread, watching you girls argue about "facts" for my own amusement. I'm not afraid to learn something, or be proven my "facts" are wrong. From what I've seen, Jim isn't either.

I have a problem with this..

Originally Posted by kens67mustang

he's a REAL engine builder.

I hope that was meant as a crack on Chevy. As in "Fords are better" kinda thing. Then its all good. I don't mind. I have different feelings, but okay.
However, if that was a crack at Jim. As in, since his "facts" may or may not be correct, your saying he cant build an engine. We then have a problem. I will no longer be amused. Please clarify that!

[MrPbody]

Okay. I'll stand corrected on the Fairlane thing, though I DO remember several NEW cars with Torino Cobra badging. You say I should know more about the history. This isn't a classroom, and I don't read magazines. I race cars and build engines. It's not about "history", it's about being there. I've read so many articles by journalists that have no bearing on reality, I gave it up long ago.

However, implying that I'm not a "real engine builder" because my experiences don't match your magazine articles is both insulting and childish. NIASE and hundreds of customers (including many FE owners) see me as a "real engine builder".

Take your small block Mustang to a race track and face off with a 400 Pontiac anywhere NEAR the same level of tune (apples to apples), and see what happens. I'm done with this one.

Jim

[kens67mustang]

Originally Posted by 72chevelleOhio

I've been following this thread, watching you girls argue about "facts" for my own amusement. I'm not afraid to learn something, or be proven my "facts" are wrong. From what I've seen, Jim isn't either.

I have a problem with this..

I hope that was meant as a crack on Chevy. As in "Fords are better" kinda thing. Then its all good. I don't mind. I have different feelings, but okay.
However, if that was a crack at Jim. As in, since his "facts" may or may not be correct, your saying he cant build an engine. We then have a problem. I will no longer be amused. Please clarify that!

actually.......it's none of your business, is it............not being ignorant.....the guy claims some bogus stuff..........no 428CJ's installed in Mustangs in 1968? a 390 that revs like a 427? the 390 is NOT a revver the 427 was.not even close........i think he's mistaking the pass car 428 for the CJ428.thats all.and Bob Tasca built engines for TOP LEVEL DRAG RACING TEAMS through the 60's & 70,s for FORD racing teams.........i'm saying he may build Pontiac motors, but doesn't seem to know much about 428's..........427's or the 390s.i really don't care if you're amused, lread the posts & learn something.then post.ok?stock for stock,the 428CJ was much stronger than the 390 could ever hope to be.13's stock, thats mighty impressive for ANY motor.

[kens67mustang]

Mr? magazine articles? thats your defense? That info came from the guys who BUILT the motors themselves, back in the 60's& 70's,much like yourself.

Thats good enough for me.

[kens67mustang]

yeah,and a 351C (small block) in excellent tune will show your Pontiac how it's REALLY done.

[kens67mustang]

Remember,the 427 had 3 head types, low,medium& high risers.........

[kens67mustang]

The 428 Cobra Jet, launched in April 1968, was a version of the 428 FE engine built for performance rather than cruising smoothness. The 428 Cobra Jet could be made on a regular production line, not requiring the exacting tolerances required by the 427. The 428SCJ used special cylinder head casting # C8OE-6090-N. This casting had larger intake ports and valves than production FE. The Cobra Jet used a strengthened version of the 428 block with an extra main bearing webbing and thicker main caps than the standard block[citation needed]. The CJ used heavier connecting rods with a 13/32 rod bolt and a nodular iron crankshaft casting # 1UB. The engine was underrated[citation needed] at 335 hp (250 kW) at 5200 rpm. The 428 Cobra Jet actually produced 400 to 410 hp (299-306 kW)[

[kens67mustang]

The 390 in³, with 389.6 in³ or 6.4 L true displacement, had a bore of 4.05 in (103 mm) and stroke of 3.78 in (96 mm). It was the most common FE engine in later applications, used in many Ford cars as the standard engine as well as in many trucks. It was a popular high-performance engine[1]; although not as powerful as the 427 and 428 models, it provided good performance, particularly in the lighter weight vehicles, and was in much greater supply[citation needed]. The 390cid 2v is rated at 265 bhp (198 kW) @ 4,100 rpm.

[hotrod_chevyz]

6 posts in a row...nice.

Originally Posted by kens67mustang

yeah,and a 351C (small block) in excellent tune will show your Pontiac how it's REALLY done.

All im going to say is, 351 isnt a motor to brag about (IMhO). 265-400 cube SBC is cheaper, and has proven its ability to "take down" the likes of a 351 over and over again for many years. Not to say a 351 isnt a good motor, im simply stating a fact that many already know at places like the State Fair Speedway or Thunder Valley (wich see both motors daily).

Both companies have made good cars that perform well on or off the track. Making comments like "a 351 will show a 400 how its done" is in my opinion senseless simply because its a $$$ thing, not a "who made the better stuff back in the day" trip.

This thread is nothing more than a pot for the stirring...

[Jessetorino]

the 351 cleveland has alot to proud about. It has put many cars well into the 9 second bracket using many ford parts. It has a very good racing history and is now getting a repo block,in iron and aluminum. You are right ,its all about how much money you have. but remember as many times as a chevy has beat a ford,a ford has done it right back.


Jesse

[hotrod_chevyz]

Originally Posted by Jessetorino

You are right ,its all about how much money you have. but remember as many times as a chevy has beat a ford,a ford has done it right back.


Jesse

Exactly, so whats the point in agruing about it? Good stuff can be had on both sides, all you got to do is pull out your wallet and start shoveling it under a hood.

[72chevelleOhio]

Originally Posted by kens67mustang

actually.......it's none of your business, is it............not being ignorant......

Actually, its EVERYONES business. Its a PUBLIC forum.
Resorting to name calling is VERY ignorant...

I did come off sounding like an @$$hole. That was because I thought that was a cheap shot and in poor taste. I was mad for MrPbody. He can admit when he is wrong, and he has. I never said anything about your info being right or wrong. The first line I wrote (last post) was meant to lighten the mood. I can see that didn't work, what a pity.......

I vote to shut this one down....

[MagicRat]

Okay folks, let's all settle down a bit. This is a very worthwhile discussion, so let's not call anyone by any names and keep things on topic here.

All participants here are obviously bright, well-informed people and all of you are capable of making your arguments without getting personal.

Flame jobs belong on the fender of my low rider Caddy, not on this forum. It's Oldsmobile 455 powered because they made the best muscle cars!!

[sbcjr]

Man, I missed this poll. *Disgust*

I own nothing but Fords, but I have to say that in my opinion, Chevy muscle cars have almost always been a step ahead.

[Jessetorino]

step ahead of what........the pinto?