Register now to get rid of these ads!

Cad 472/500 Motor

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by MMM1693, Aug 1, 2010.

  1. MMM1693
    Joined: Feb 8, 2009
    Posts: 793

    MMM1693
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Building T Hotrod - thinking of using Cad 472/500 motor. Suggestions, good, bad or ugly on this idea. Size and weight should be comparable to cast iron BB Chev, but unfamiliar with the Cad motor. I know speed equipment is limited and expensive. Anybody know how to identify ? (casting numbers? ). Any information appreciated.
     
  2. hellcat666
    Joined: Sep 8, 2005
    Posts: 267

    hellcat666
    Member

    i use caddy motors in alot of stuff they are great engines with alot of torque, there are a few problems: if ur using in an open hood hotrod or they arnt the greatest thing to look at, they like to run on the warmer side so make sure your cooling system is solid, speedway has a bunch of stuuff for those motors its not really that expensive. i personaly sware by them you really dont need to do much hop up to them as they have alot of power stock. try to stay away from any of them after 1971 though they are sevierly de tuned after 1970. the 1970 HP rateing for the 500 is 400hp, 1971 its 365hp and by 1972 its down to 235hp. like i said iv put them in alot of cars iv had, iv never put any speed parts into one only checked over and cleaned up a little. and anything i put it in moves and moves fast haha. hope this helps a little if you have a motor ur questioning send me the casting numbers on the back and wel see if we can figure out wat its from
     
  3. George
    Joined: Jan 1, 2005
    Posts: 7,535

    George
    Member

    In '72 the rating system changed, resulting in a paper loss across the board on all engines. Doc Fromader had a Cad build in StreetRodder, don't know if it is posted @ www.webrodder.com or not.
     
  4. Country Gent
    Joined: Feb 22, 2010
    Posts: 562

    Country Gent
    BANNED

    Through the years, little by little there has been more after market "go fast stuff" offered. The 500 is a very popular engine for airboats here in FL. The extra weight is overcome by the torque these engines have. Hay, anybody can stuff a BBC into something. "Dare to be different" go caddy. Don't shy away from the 472 if you can't find a deal on a 500. Everything is interchangable. As far as detuned after 70, I think it was more on paper then realistic. A few bucks spent on a new bumpstick, will liven them right back up and sound cool to boot.
     

  5. hellcat666
    Joined: Sep 8, 2005
    Posts: 267

    hellcat666
    Member

    rating system changed? paper loss? not cross examineing you just curious care to explain?
     
  6. Ramblur
    Joined: Jun 15, 2005
    Posts: 2,101

    Ramblur
    Member

  7. 73RR
    Joined: Jan 29, 2007
    Posts: 6,739

    73RR
    Member

    In '72 all American auto makers changed the power rating system to reflect the net hp/tq rather than the gross. This was partially done to appease the insurance industry.
    Pick up any two motors manuals, perhaps one 71 and one 73 (ignore the changeover year) and compare any of the engines listed. My background is all Mopar so my reference is from that perspective, but almost all engines will show a loss of compression but that is virtually the only mechanical change. Cam profiles are mostly unchanged, cylinder heads are unchanged, etc. Yes, there may be changes in something like exhaust manifold designs but that is often due to the changes in body design, carbs get tuning changes, and ignition is usually improved.

    The big Cad is a mountain of power in stock form. The usual problem is getting the rest of the drivetrain to survive.

    http://www.cad500parts.com/
    http://caddy500.com/index.php?topic=12.0
    http://www.500cid.com/

    .
     
  8. langy
    Joined: Apr 27, 2006
    Posts: 5,735

    langy
    Member Emeritus

    Not much bigger (length) or heavier than a small block chevy, very underated engine, torque monsters :D
     
  9. George
    Joined: Jan 1, 2005
    Posts: 7,535

    George
    Member

    My understanding of it is...Pre 72 was an engine w/o acsessories on a stand. In 72 the engine was rated with acsessories, P/S ect, maybe with a tranny bolted on, resulting in a loss of rated HP. This afected ALL companies as it was an industry wide change. There may be specific engines that could have suffered a loss of tuning or other factors, but the change of ratings is the big culprit.
     
  10. hellcat666
    Joined: Sep 8, 2005
    Posts: 267

    hellcat666
    Member

    ohh i c that makes sence thanx for the info.
     
  11. Mr48chev
    Joined: Dec 28, 2007
    Posts: 31,282

    Mr48chev
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I've got one going in my 71 GMC and had one in an 82 Coupe Deville that was a bit scary when you nailed it. When you could get it to hook up it went.

    They are a bit wide for some applications but that won't be an issue in a T bucket.
     
  12. Str8tJacket
    Joined: Jul 28, 2010
    Posts: 6

    Str8tJacket
    Member

    One more thing,,,
    Don't turn your nose up at the smaller 368. They look almost identical to the 472 500. They also get better mileage and there are reports of them going half a million miles before they need anything done to them.
    I bought a running low mileage 1980 Caddy for $290.oo and it had the 368 with turbo 400 trans.
    Stay away from the computerized "8-6-4" crap, it was problematic from the getgo. I don't know anything about the interchangeablity on them to the other engines.
    The standard carburetor version is the one to keep. I would never have sought one out, but when I heard and drove this one I realized that I need to stay open minded.
    The intake on the 368 is raised aluminum as opposed to the sunken cast iron one on the 472 500.
    The way to wake up an older one is to change the intake and get rid of the low lift cam. The performance intake and cam is kinda pricey but worth it. From my looking around ,,,,about $700.oo would buy both the cam and intake new.
     
  13. pdq67
    Joined: Feb 12, 2007
    Posts: 787

    pdq67
    Member

    I want to say that the 500 Cad engine weigh's right at 625 pounds ready to run.

    And back then GM put their best cast-iron in their blocks because a lot of them would hardly hang a fingernail at the top of their cylinders after 100,000 miles on the speedometer!!

    The '68/'69 472 had 10.5 to 1 CR and the '70 500 had 10.25 to 1 CR, then all '71` and later 472/500 engines were down at 8.5 to 1 CR.

    Add a decent cam, valve springs and rocker perches and a better intake along with a set of reflanged BB Chevy and I think 460 Ford headers and go have more fun than John Law will allow!

    pdq67
     
  14. phat rat
    Joined: Mar 18, 2001
    Posts: 4,707

    phat rat
    Member

    Casting numbers tell you nothing as far as whether it's a 472 or 500. Same block and heads for 472 and 500. The only way to be sure is to pull a plug and measure the stroke. The 472 is 4.060 and the 500 is 4.304
     
  15. shihtzu11
    Joined: Aug 2, 2009
    Posts: 45

    shihtzu11
    Member
    from dacoma OK

    have a friend, -:) tom wingo--has a low milage 472, i think its a 70, or 71. complete with tranny--cheap price--contact him at caddy31a@yahoo.com speedway and egge are a good source for speed parts for these old beasts! good luck! mark
     
  16. I ran a 500 Caddy in our model A with a HP289 Mustang radiator with no overheating problems and built a bracket to run a generator on to disguise it as an oldie and also the valve covers a little trickery as well. Edelbrock makes a intake and again a little trickery to mount dual carbs. I ran an early point dizzy with a Pertronix kit for reliability. I drove this car a lot and ran smooth and never overheated. I biought a lake header kit for a BBC and flanges for the Cad as they are really close in location.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  17. Just so you can go looking with a bit of intelligence:
    All 368 (6 litre), 425, 472 and 500 engines share external dimensions.
    425 and 368 have lightened blocks, which means less meat to take the stress, but they are lighter.
    All 472 are front sump. 500 Eldorado (front drive) motors are mid-sump with two drain plugs on the pan.
    425 and 368 rear drive are rear sump with one drain plug. Not sure about 368 front drive, never seen one :)
    425 and 368 pans may be bolted on to the 472-500s to give a rear sump, but the pickup tube is NOT a bolt-on. Due to the lightened block (ie: main caps), the support strap for the pickup tube must be shortened about 1/2". Make sure enough space is left for oil to enter the pickup.

    Cosmo
     
  18. George
    Joined: Jan 1, 2005
    Posts: 7,535

    George
    Member

    In the area of trickery...429/460 Ford valve covers & intake, with a spacer, fits. Then paint it Ford Blue & let people figure it out!:)
     
  19. BulldawgMusclecars
    Joined: Jul 15, 2010
    Posts: 508

    BulldawgMusclecars
    Member

    Cad motor parts are out there, even hot rod stuff, but its still fairly expensive (comparable to a big block Chevy, maybe a little more for the exotic stuff). On an average trip to Pull-A-Part, I can find several 472s, and usually at least 1 500. The easy way to find a 500 is to find an Eldorado, 70-76. As long as no one has changed it, its a 500. All 76 Cads are 500s, but they are very low compression. You can put small chamber early heads on a late motor and get high compression, but the quench sucks.

    The biggest drawbacks to the Cad are:

    A lack of many off the shelf headers (though Sanderson makes some nice mid-lengths that should fit trucks and most larger cars pretty easily, and a set of flanges and some BBC headers are a good start for anything they won't fit)

    A weak rocker arm system (most that I have pulled had rocker issues; the stock rockers CLIP on. Most Cad vendors sell a nice shaft rocker system that eleiminates this, or you could go with screw in studs and conventional rockers)

    An extremely heavy, low rise intake manifold (buy an Edelbrock, or use an adapter to run big Ford intakes)

    The good points: with an aluminum intake, they are lighter than an iron SBC. The block is extremely heavy duty. I have heard some machinists say the tolerances on it are like an aftermarket block...much higher standard than a production Chevy block. The cranks are nodular iron, and practically bulletproof. The stock heads flow VERY well. I remember in the old Hot Rod Magazine article where Steve Magnante put one in a Chevette, it was mentioned that they flowed about as well as a Max Wedge race head. Aluminum heads, intakes, cams, stroker kits, etc are available from several sources (Cad Company, CMD, and others).
     
  20. 69fury
    Joined: Feb 24, 2009
    Posts: 1,419

    69fury
    Member

    i had a 70 472 in a Buick Regal (car's gone, kept the pan/pump/pickup). The compression dropped from around 10.5 to around 8:1 around '73 or '74 i think- they have high nickel heads that dont need the hardened valve seats unless a repair is being made.

    They are about a half inch wider than bbchevy and less weight (big, hollow block)- they dont need to rev to make stupid power, so a decent gear will give good cruise rpms and still get with the program...

    after '68 they used the BOP bell housing pattern so trans are plentiful.

    -rick
     
  21. I prefer the 1971-1973 472-500 engines . They are okay with todays gasoline.

    IMO 1974 and later make great boat anchors.
     

  22. Since henry Ford was first with Caddy, before Fomoco, ...........well, it's a loophole.
     
  23. I had more power in my 472 than my 500. Either is impressive.
     
  24. George
    Joined: Jan 1, 2005
    Posts: 7,535

    George
    Member

    Not too many know his 1st company became Cadillac!
     
  25. Eight433
    Joined: Mar 16, 2008
    Posts: 257

    Eight433
    Member

    my 67 caddy has a 429, and even though it runs like a raped ape, there are not many (any) dress up parts for it that i've found, such as valve covers or aftermarket headers or manifolds. It is rated at something like 340 HP and 480 ft lbs of torque if I remember right. The biggest bummer is the lack of external parts like intake manifolds and such. The internals are available (but expensive) and are similar to the 390 i've been told. The cool thing about the 64-67 cadillac motors is the "Switch pitch" TH-400 they were mated with.

    if you're not familiar with them, the "switch pitch" had a throttle switch that when tripped at WOT would activate the converter to make it fly, but when you let off, it would deactivate so you don't have to use two feet on the brake at a stop sign. You can wire a switch up to it to control it manually. This was popular amongst drag racers cause it would fly down the track but still comfortable to drive on the street. :D
     
  26. flynbrian48
    Joined: Mar 10, 2008
    Posts: 7,415

    flynbrian48
    Member

    All the above. The 472 in my '36, stock intake, mild cam from MTS, 10:1 comp. pistons from Egge, stock rockers, is SCARY fast. The E intake and some headers supposedly really wake one up, but I don't have room for the extra 2" of height the intake requires. It's a great engine.
     
  27. LilMo 56
    Joined: Nov 4, 2006
    Posts: 69

    LilMo 56
    Member
    from Cleveland

    Back to the original guy...all above are good indication it's a good way to go. The Cad500 and MTS sights are great source for build parts. For making HP, So is Frohmaders 'Big Block Cadillac' build book, Speedway carries it (just bought one). I have a '70 472 going in a 37 Nash. Grabbed an 'E' intake and carb, adding a Thumper cam, and that's all. With '70 spec's of 10:1 compression, 375 hp and 525 lbs/ft torque...what a way to start!
     

  28. Those big boats hauled ass! Either one dead stock will make a T Hotrod do things that'll have you peeing your pants. I don't see a need for much speed equipment. Maybe a manifold that'll get the carburetor up out of the valley just to make it look better.
     
  29. Scarebird
    Joined: Sep 26, 2006
    Posts: 915

    Scarebird
    Alliance Vendor
    from ABQ, USA

    I put one in a 81 Regal w/2.41 gears: very tight squeeze. Not anything great off the line but once past 20mph would roar to 100 in a blink. Made custom adapter brackets to mount to SBC mounts, works well. If you have one laying around use it, but wouldn't go out of my way...
     
  30. ironpile
    Joined: Jul 3, 2005
    Posts: 915

    ironpile
    Member

    I had one in 3 different vehicles,performed great "stock" even in a 6000 lb Ford truck.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

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.