Register now to get rid of these ads!

460 Ford???

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by ShortyLaVen, Nov 14, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ShortyLaVen
    Joined: Oct 13, 2008
    Posts: 651


    I've done some searches, but nothing that exactly answers my question..

    I am going to check out a 460 as a potential motor for my A sedan. First off, are these decent engines in their stock form (obviously it depends on what year/what its out of)? What should I be looking for specifically, as in head numbers, block numbers, etc? I've been told it runs, but needs valve guide seals...
  2. Scumdog
    Joined: Mar 3, 2010
    Posts: 627


    IF you can score one built from '68 to '71 you will be good for grunt.
    From '72 onwards compression dropped, motors were smogged-up and horsepower was down

    Generally a grunty reliable motor in fairly stock form.

    But they are quite bulky compared to a sbc.
    j-jock likes this.
  3. Edsel58a
    Joined: Jan 17, 2008
    Posts: 757


    A very good choice no matter what year. '68-'71 are the best as Scumdog says. The D0VE heads are the best and give the most compression and have screw in studs but premium fuel is a must.
    The later engines are fine and run well on todays pump gas. On a '72 and later engine, you want to install a '71 and earlier timing chain because the originals retard the cam timing. Remove the smog stuff, plug the EGR ports in the rear of the heads with small freeze plugs. Ditch the spread bore intake for an aftermarket aluminum or early square bore intake at minimum. These little things will give you a very good running engine. It takes little to make a good powerhouse
    They are easy to come by, parts prices are getting better, aftermarket covers everything from heads to stroker kits.
    Trans can be a C4 or C6, but not a Lincoln Trans or 73-76 Thunderbird, the tail shaft is longer and has a unique mount.
    Good choice for budget torque, but tires get pricey
  4. Grumbler
    Joined: Mar 2, 2009
    Posts: 358


    Strong engine, my buddy had one in his Cougar race car. One drawback is they are the heaviest of all the modern era big blocks, over 700 pounds

  5. moefuzz
    Joined: Jul 16, 2005
    Posts: 4,950


    Unlike a bbc, The Ford 429 can be stroked to major proportions all the while making Very strong numbers.

    How about 521 cubes and 600-700 Easy Horse Power? -With no block relieving required to that point. ..
    Or 570+ cubes with a wee bit of die grinding to the oil pump mount boss.

    429/460 Stroker Crank:

    :521 cu. in. displacement with .030" overbore block
    Cast nodular iron, stronger than an offset ground production cast iron crankshaft
    Crankshaft used in the M-6013-521 stroker kit
    4.30" stroke
    3.000" main journal diameter (same as stock 429/460)
    2.500" rod journal diameter, 2.000" rod journal width
    For use in 1969-1996 460 blocks
    Requires custom pistons, rods and balancing

    While you can buy this basic crank for less than $400, it is advisable to buy as a balanced assembly which would include your choice or cr pistons, rods, bearings and rings.

    Last edited: May 25, 2013
  6. moefuzz
    Joined: Jul 16, 2005
    Posts: 4,950


    BBF advantages over BBC:

    We evaluated two factory production passenger car cylinder blocks side by side. One was the 1968 Ford 429/460 block (casting C8VE-B) and the other was the 1966 Chevy 396/427 block (casting 3855961). Both blocks are representative of what each manufacturer offered in their production line-up for the era. The differences are appalling and the advantages of the Ford are indisputable.


    All production Ford 385 Series blocks have a 10.300+" deck height. We don't need to search high & low for a production tall deck block like the chevy guys do. All Ford blocks are "tall" deck and can be found anywhere. Further, the Ford's 10.300" deck height is still higher than the chevy tall deck's 10.200" deck height.


    The Ford's lifter valley has oil drainback galleries (the holes at the far back corner)
    --->>at the rear so as to direct oil straight to the pan while also diverting it away from the rotating assembly (where oil can rob horsepower). Also, note that the center section of the valley is raised so as to bring the crankcase ventilation holes above the oil level and also creates a "trench" between the cylinder banks and lifter bores which channels oil to the drainback galleries.


    The cam-to-crank centerline is higher in the Ford (6.078"). This enables us to run cams as big as necessary for our huge stroker motors (or our 9000+ rpm screamer motors) and breathe easily. Also, Ford lifters have a greater diameter (0.875") which makes for a more "friendly" cam profile for flat tappet cams. The higher cam centerline also makes for shorter (and effectively stiffer) pushrods.


    The production Ford blocks can handle enough stroke to conceivably create a 572 cubic inch engine without the need to clearance the block to accomodate the stroker crank. The stroker kits for the Ford fit like a glove.


    The Ford has a 4.900" bore spacing. This allows for bigger cylinder bores and pistons, better cooling between cylinders, and larger engine displacement capability from the oem block.


    The Ford's head bolt holes are blind and stay nice and clean for decades of faithful service. The countersunk threads are more protected and chasing is not needed after block decking.


    The symmetrically spaced massive 9/16" head bolts support a 140 foot-pound clamping force and do it with a minumum of bore distortion, thanks to the head bolt holes being anchored directly into the block material and not only into the deck. With head bolts of this size and capability, Ford's don't need any more bolts in almost every application.


    All passenger car chevy blocks have a 9.800" deck height. Chevy guys need to look high & low for their elusive 10.200" tall deck truck block, and the enthusiasts want big bucks for them. In the end, their 10.200" tall deck truck block still comes up short when compared to Ford's standard issue 10.300" block.


    The chevy's lifter valley (above) has no oil drainback galleries. And due to the raised, single ventilation hole
    --->>at the front of the block, most of the oil in the lifter valley has no choice but to drain through the middle of the lifter valley and directly onto the rotating assembly (where the oil robs horsepower). This is a notorious problem with the production chevy's and there are aftermarket kits attempting to address this poor block characteristic.


    The cam-to-crank centerline in the chevy is too close in a performance application (5.152"; Gen 2 blocks raised to 5.552"), as it effectively restricts the maximum cam lobe the early blocks, the cam lobes will actually hit the rotating assembly if the cam is too big. Such an aggressive cam would wreak havoc on the chevy's smaller (0.842") flat tappet lifters anyway. Longer pushrods are more prone to fail, too.


    Not only is the production chevy block incapable of accommodating a stroker engine package as big as the Ford, but it also requires major grinding / clearancing of the crankcase for even the most basic stroker/motor.


    The chev is stuck with a 4.840" bore spacing. This restricts the extent of oversize pistons compared to the Ford. Ford's stock boresize is bigger than the 427/454 by over .100".


    The Chevy head bolt holes go into the water jackets, which corrodes the bolt threads. Headbolt threads often strip--both on the bolt and in the block.


    The chevy's irregularly spaced wimpy 7/16" head bolts limit head clamping to only 65-75 foot-pounds (almost half that of Ford). Even at this low spec, a torque plate is highly advisable because of bore distortion; the head bolt's anchor into threads in the cylinder deck and so the deck easily gets pulled out of shape (it's not much thicker than the small block chevy deck) .
    (for comparison, a sbc deck strength/anchor/thickness is substandard even when compared to a sbf)

    Other Advantages of Ford Over Chevy:

    Ford 429/460 Rod Ratio: 1.84/1.72

    chev 396/427/454 Rod Ratio: 1.63/1.63/1.53

    Last edited: Jul 5, 2015
    57 300 likes this.
  7. moefuzz
    Joined: Jul 16, 2005
    Posts: 4,950


    Good heads have part numbers starting with prefix C9VE, DOVE, DIVE, D3VE (1969 thru to 1973).
    D1VE is the head of choice with D0VE a close second.
    (Edit: As Relic Stew pointed out, avoid the 1972 D2VE heads)

    Depending on your choice of stroke and components.....
    ....The factory D0VE heads with a professional porting are capable of over 700 horse on pump gas
    which is not to shabby for original Ford iron heads.
    -If I recall, early 1968 heads are not so desirable due to rocker/stud mounting but don't quote me on that.

    Best bets are to buy a 69 to 72/3 T Bird as you will get a set of the above heads and a factory rated 375 hp engine to start your build with. (actual hp was reported to be closer to 425 but don't tell your insurance company that)

    Best camshaft going is a Ford motorsport

    Substantial horsepower increase at high RPM. Production cylinder heads require machining of valve spring seats to prevent coil bind with stock length valves.

    PART NUMBER M-6250-C460
    For 429/460 Wedge Hydraulic Flat Tappet


    This is an aggressive cam suitable for serious cubic build.

    Price is very reasonable at around $150.

    While available at your local Ford dealership under part number M-6250-C460 it is also available on the bay

    Last edited: Jul 5, 2015
  8. Edsel58a
    Joined: Jan 17, 2008
    Posts: 757


    great info... Thanks.....
  9. moefuzz
    Joined: Jul 16, 2005
    Posts: 4,950



    Useful block info.

    Welcome to the High Flow Dynamics Technical Pages. Below is a brief overview of 429/460 block characteristics. Please note that all 429/460 blocks are suitable for performance usage notably beyond their passenger car applications. Further, over the entire block production the engineering revisions were of little consequence in regards to parts interchange.

    To view various block mods and more, use the page links on the left of your screen.

    Ford Production 429/460 Block Differences[/FONT]

    The most common available production cast iron block casting numbers are C8VE-B, C9VE-B, D0VE-A, D1VE-(various suffix) and D9TE-AB.

    We refer to all but the D9TE-AB as the "early-style" blocks. The D9TE casting arrived in the 1979 model year and was utilized until the end of 460 production.

    For the most part, all production blocks and rotating assemblies are interchangeable between all the early style blocks and except for the D9TE. A D9TE block's rotating assembly will fit into an early-style block, but the opposite is not true (some clearancing is required).

    All 429/460 Fords are internally balanced engines except for the D9TE 460, which has an externally balanced rotating assembly (1979 & up 460's are externally balanced).

    These block identifying marks (C9VE, D1VE, etc.) are not actual casting numbers but are engineering revisions that are cast into the block castings themselves. And they are what we enthusiasts refer to when identifying our factory iron, as they give not so much the year that the block was made but rather the revision of the block as specified by said engineering revision. (Actual date code is in the lifter valley.)

    Early-Style Blocks: For the most part (and with small exception), the C8VE, C9VE and D1VE blocks are all essentially the same configuration casting with the thinner main webs. The thicker main web block is the D0VE block, which may or may not have 4-bolt main caps on 2,3 & 4. (Very few D1VE blocks may be thick webbed.) All Ford production 385 blocks can be decked as needed, so the slight variation in deck height (give or take .020" over the years) is a negligible detail.

    D9TE Blocks: The externally balanced rotating assembly utilizes a crankshaft that has slightly smaller counterweights. This apparently was done to so that the cylinders of the D9TE block could be extended about .200" deeper towards the crankcase. It is believed that the cylinders were lengthened in the D9TE block because this block was revised to double as a big equipment truck block, and the dump truck rotating assemblies consisted of a very deep skirt piston that benefited from the newly extended cylinder walls for support.

    The deeper cylinders of the D9TE blocks are the reason that the early-style, internally balanced rotating assemblies will not fit (internal balance crank throws will not clear D9TE cylinders).

    Since most prefer to use internally balanced rotating assemblies in the performance application, enthusiasts have usually opted for any block except the D9TE. There are also advantages to specific blocks within the group of early-style blocks, such as the D0VE-A's thick main webs, a slightly shorter deck height without decking, etc.

    Further, for years the D9TE block was presumed to be a lightweight ("late model") casting and therefore not very strong and also limited in it's overbore capability. But this belief is currently being re-evaluated for a couple of reasons:

    No-one had yet evaluated D9TE cylinder wall thickness with a sonic checker, and preliminary testing suggests the block may not be so bad after all.
    Strokers have become popular and the D9TE's deeper cylinders offer more support for the increased-stroke rotating assemblies.

    Most all aftermarket stroker kits use a crank with the dimensions of the externally balanced crank and so they fit the D9TE block as well as the early blocks.

    Last edited: Jul 5, 2015
  10. wide34
    Joined: Mar 2, 2006
    Posts: 538

    from Texas

    I used the 460 block and it is a strong block, the performance additions cited above are accurate and it should last you a long time but a couple of words of caution from my own experience:
    1. 700 lbs. on any early frame without power steering will help build your muscles quickly when trying to turn at idle.
    2. I get 12 MPG, searched and other boards for help and got the "that's about as good as it's going to get" response so my experience is apparently pretty normal. When gas reached $4.60/gallon I really considered swapping for a 5.0 liter.
    Good luck to you.
  11. chevyfordman
    Joined: Oct 4, 2008
    Posts: 1,098


    These guys have sure gave you some great information, I have a lowly 360 in my 71 ford truck and it is the best running engine even if it doesn't have a lot of horsepower but it is sure reliable. After two mile drives to work for many years I decided to freshen the motor up and the block still had the factory crosshatch in the cylinders. But if you plan on driving a lot, they do use a lot of gas. I have a 351w in my 32 with a B&M blower and it has tons of power and a lot better gas mileage with a 3:50 rear and no overdrive. You have a tough choice, but you are in the right family. good luck
  12. CutawayAl
    Joined: Aug 3, 2009
    Posts: 2,144

    from MI

    The engines are reliable. Should you want to go that way, upgrade and race parts are available. Four bolt but 429 Super Cobra Jet blocks were made. Even stronger aftermarket blocks are available. But, the standard two bolt blocks, and standard crank and rods, will easily tolerate what most would build as a street engine.

    Although not overweight for a big block, the engine is on the heavy side for a car like yours. Off the shelf aluminum heads and aluminum intake save a lot of weight, and at the same time provide a worthwhile increase in power.
  13. sololobo
    Joined: Aug 23, 2006
    Posts: 8,254


    Ask a little question and get a big time answer. Nice info on these big ol Ford mills guys, Thanx. I have a 79 Ford van with a 460 that will scald them ol tires. Thanx for all the help for our pal fory! ~sololobo~
  14. ShortyLaVen
    Joined: Oct 13, 2008
    Posts: 651


    Hey thanks for the info guys!!!! I think this will be a pretty good way to go now. I'd like to make some power from this thing later on down the road, so its good to know its relatively cheap and easy for these things. I'll post some info on the one I'm looking at this weekend...
  15. Wolfman1
    Joined: Jul 8, 2010
    Posts: 265


    Some great info here, thanks
    I'm about to build a 429 from a 68 T-bird to put in my 63 F100 unibody
  16. Relic Stew
    Joined: Apr 17, 2005
    Posts: 1,152

    Relic Stew
    from Wisconsin

    I have to argue about the D2VE heads. Those are the big open chamber, no quench, detonation prone heads. Nobody wants them, as all the other options are better.

    The D3 has a large chamber, but went back to a quench area so it can run some compression without detonation. D3 is most common, as they were used from '73 until the "fuelie" heads came out in '87. The larger chamber resulted in a raised short side floor in the exhaust port, restricting the throat compared to the '69-'71 heads.

    The D2OE heads are good, but were police car issue, so not too common. Basically CJ valves and exhaust port with a big quench chamber. And of course the D0OE CJ heads, which are also not common.

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
  17. moefuzz
    Joined: Jul 16, 2005
    Posts: 4,950


    As others have mentioned, upgrading the timing chain and gears on a 74 and up 460 will revert the cam timing back to the good old days for an easy 30+ hp gain. Ask for a 429 timing chain and gear set for a 70'
    T-Bird and you will get what you need to wake up a later block.

    Addition of Ford Motorsport SCJ-A Aluminum Heads along with an Aluminum intake will shed enough weight to put you into the small block zone.
    The heads are part # M-6049-SCJA and available thru your local Ford store as well as any performance outlet.
    These heads have the ability to flow close to 900 naturally aspirated hp depending on crank/cam/wobbly bits.


    Price is very reasonable at about $900 complete.

    Ford Racing M-6049-SCJA - Ford Racing Small Block & Big Block Cylinder Heads Details

    Big Block

    • Fits 429 and 460 ci engines (except BOSS 429)
    • Valve angles and locations designed to reduce cylinder wall shrouding and improve flow
    • Combustion chambers designed to accommodate the centrally located valves
    • Standard Cobra Jet intake and exhaust manifolds bolt on
    • Current valve covers fit
    • 2.200" intake valve, 1.76" exhaust valve
    • Flows approximately 330 CFM intake and 225 CFM exhaust
    • 72cc combustion chambers
    • 290cc intake runner, 148cc exhaust runner
    • Uses rocker arm part numbers M-6564-A460
    • Assembled with M-6513-A351 hydraulic roller valve springs: Closed seat pressure 135# @ 1.850"; Open seat pressure 365# @ 1.250"; Max lift .700"
    • Machined 7-degree locks and retainers, premium valve seals
    • Uses Motorcraft AGSP series spark plugs
    • NOTE: If replacing Ford Racing or production Cobra Jet heads, new intake valve notches are required
    • NOTE: Uses Felpro® exhaust gasket part number 1420, and intake gasket part number 1231
  18. BootleggerMatt
    Joined: Aug 17, 2011
    Posts: 258


    I 2nd that. The 72 are an oddball and the police heads are so rare you probably won't come accross.

    Just a note on stock performance. I had a nicely tuned stock high compression 352 in my Galaxie, and replaced it with a stock smogged out 1977 460 from an F-150 and seat of the pants feeling is totally different. Burnouts on tap, and 60mph to 100mph very quickly... sorry I don't have any actual performance numbers.
  19. junkyardjeff
    Joined: Jul 23, 2005
    Posts: 8,142


    I installed a pre 79 460 in my 66 F250 and very happy with it,it was rebuilt and probably has the earlier timing chain set since it ran circles around the stock 77 460 I had in another truck.If I keep my foot from going to the floor it gets better gas mileage then the original 352.
  20. Lots of potential in a 460.
  21. Relic Stew
    Joined: Apr 17, 2005
    Posts: 1,152

    Relic Stew
    from Wisconsin

    They are heavy, but I think the actual weight tends to be exaggerated.

    I attached some weight reports made from Ford data. The 429 isn't that much heavier than the 427. Although you have to adjust for the 427 having an aluminum intake, but manual flywheel and huge iron exhaust manifolds.

    I think the "over 700" comes from the 460 report at 730 lbs, that includes radiator and 5 gallons of coolant, but no starter or carb.

    Attached Files:

  22. TR Waters
    Joined: Nov 18, 2006
    Posts: 1,439

    TR Waters
    from Vermont
    1. Early Hemi Tech

    Too new. Not traditional...sorry.

  23. HP is traditional.
  24. derbydad276
    Joined: May 29, 2011
    Posts: 1,328


    you had me at .... grunty!!!

    2 cents worth
  25. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    from BC

    If that were true, we'd all be building Gen III sbc's.:rolleyes:
  26. The 429/460's are great engines, I run them from stock to a stroked 521 pump gas engine to a 545 with A-heads and nitrous.

    I had a friend CNC me some valve cover adapters that allow me to run classic style big block Chevy valve covers on my 521, there was never anything made for the 385 series (429/460) engines.

    Tons of great info on them here:

    My 521 with BBC valve covers

    The Adapters
  27. BLASPHEMY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! is nothing sacred anymore.
    OahuEli likes this.
  28. k-member
    Joined: May 25, 2002
    Posts: 2,114


    Moefuzz that is good stuff.
    I had a coupe with a LIMA motor in it and it ran as good as 12.30's

    Attached Files:

  29. junkyardjeff
    Joined: Jul 23, 2005
    Posts: 8,142


    Yes they are technically too new,since this place is supposed to be for 64 and older the 396 to 454 BBCs are also too new but since there are plenty of posts about them post away on the 460.
  30. 58custom
    Joined: Jan 1, 2009
    Posts: 398


    Moefuzz, good stuff.

    Here are the flow numbers of my Scott Johnston-prepped D0VE-C heads:

    Lift"....intake/exhaust / (CFM with victor manifold attached)
    Intake figures are with a clay radius on the intake port during testing. Intake flow with manifold attached is with a radius around carb pad inlet.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!


Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.