Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods Caddy 472

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by pie pie, Nov 30, 2016.

  1. dan c
    Joined: Jan 30, 2012
    Posts: 2,148

    dan c
    Member

    gm made a big mistake going to that aluminum pos that replaced that line of engines.
     
  2. Earlier ones are definitely the traditional caddy engines and appearance is much better also. I think you are dead on with going with the pre emissions 472. They were the more powerful ones.

    Sent from my A520L using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    loudbang likes this.
  3. flatheadpete
    Joined: Oct 29, 2003
    Posts: 9,870

    flatheadpete
    Member
    from Burton, MI

    I had a '65 Coupe DeVille with a 429. Totally different engine but that thing made great power! Surprised a few guys with the burnouts that tank would do.
     
  4. khead47
    Joined: Mar 29, 2010
    Posts: 1,708

    khead47
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    A guy ran a 1970 Coupe DeVille over 200 mph at Wilmington!
     
  5. flyn schlosser
    Joined: Oct 13, 2014
    Posts: 250

    flyn schlosser
    Member
    from phelan, ca

    I have one in my 28 its a runner but there not the prettiest motor ..
     
  6. The single best change on any of the 472 and 500 Caddy engines is the intake. An aftermarket aluminum unit will take 30 lbs off the front at the same time it will change the intake runners from an uphill / flat flow into the heads to a downhill flow. Changes recommended after that would be a better cam and springs (torque) and headers. The header may have to be fabricated but that's not that hard either as The Cad Company offers a flange kit and you can modify headers to fit... Not the cheapest build but in the end you have something different and with an aluminum intake - almost 500 cubes in a a package just a touch heavier than a sbc - have fun !!

    Good site here:
    http://www.500cid.com/
     
    loudbang likes this.
  7. I have a 472 from 1969 to go into my 1954 Willys jeep:cool:
     
    Racer29 likes this.
  8. bobbytnm
    Joined: Dec 16, 2008
    Posts: 1,375

    bobbytnm
    Member

    To make engine swaps easy you can even get a rear sump oil pan. Just get an oil pan, oil pump pick up tube, and dipstick from a front wheel drive car. When scrounging for parts, besides the 472/500 engines you can also take parts from the later 425ci engines (1977-79) and the later 368ci (1980/81) engines and later commercial chassis.

    Bobby
     
    loudbang likes this.
  9. flynbrian48
    Joined: Mar 10, 2008
    Posts: 6,584

    flynbrian48
    Member

    IMG_1612.JPG
    472 in this, with a limited slip rear, was more than I could keep up with with the '35 Dodge steering. It liked to go sideways.
     
    Ron Funkhouser likes this.
  10. BrianInPa
    Joined: Mar 30, 2010
    Posts: 34

    BrianInPa
    Member
    from Milton

    I'm putting a 472 in a 65 chevy short fleetside. I still have a lot of work to do on the truck, but hoping to have it on the road in the spring.
     
  11. PKap
    Joined: Jan 5, 2011
    Posts: 593

    PKap
    Member
    from Alberta

    I have a 68 472 in my avatar truck. Love it and I think they can look pretty cool with some thought. The front mounted distributor helps with swaps for sure. Torque rules!


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  12. desotot
    Joined: Jan 29, 2008
    Posts: 1,809

    desotot
    Member

    I have a 73 500 with a steel flywheel and Lakewood bellhousing waiting for a project of some sort
     
  13. I called Cad company up to buy an intake and they talked me out of it because I wasn't doing the heads. My backup 472 is getting heads, cam, intake and valve train.

    Sent from my A520L using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    loudbang likes this.
  14. scotts52
    Joined: Apr 7, 2008
    Posts: 2,106

    scotts52
    Member


    I'd take it if it's free. I love all kinds of engines.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  15. MO_JUNK
    Joined: Jan 22, 2006
    Posts: 1,048

    MO_JUNK
    Member
    from Rolla, Mo.

    Well, after 8 months, I picked my short block up from the machine shop yesterday. I picked up the completed heads about 3 weeks back. All brackets and bolts have been sandblasted so it's finally time to start painting and assembly. It's a good Christmas gift.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  16. southcross2631
    Joined: Jan 20, 2013
    Posts: 3,995

    southcross2631
    Member

    Had one in a 78 Malibu . Was my daily driver,with a 2.29 gear it ran high 13's and got 18 mpg.
    Used a maximum Torque cam and 440 Chrysler valve springs with the guide bosses cut down.
    Ported the heads and exhaust manifolds,ran a Qjet carb with stock convertor.
    Also had one in a 72 1/2 ton Chev. p.u. It pulled our dirt track car and trailer great.
     
    loudbang and MO_JUNK like this.
  17. Won't try to argue the point too hard as they make a living doing caddy stuff and I don't. But you have to consider the advantages of dropping weight off the front end as well as a raised carb position vs. the flat and uphill intakes that came stock. I've always like the caddy stuff. big cubes for cheap. We did a few G body swaps over the years using a junk yard 472 or 500 with an intake and cam swap. These things ran low 13's high 12's depending on the weight.

    Your caddy adventures sound like fun...
     
    loudbang and MO_JUNK like this.
  18. This car/engine combo has been a hoot. Been running it for 13 years and never had engine apart since initial rebuild. It's such a deceiving combination. It's not loud and dramatic but hooks hard off the line and consistently lays down impressive times at the track. Yet I can hop in and drive it anywhere and that to me has to be part of the deal.

    I was a little confused also that he wouldn't advise buying the intake unless doing heads. I don't doubt the advantage of the new intake in the least. My sedan ran a best 13 flat with all stock parts. With an aluminum intake the weight of the Caddy is real close to the SBC. I am hoping to run 10.90s with my other engine. The car needs some safety items addressed first though.
     
    Jibs, loudbang and Saxxon like this.
  19. Jibs
    Joined: May 19, 2006
    Posts: 1,524

    Jibs
    Member

    Were you trying to buy their MTS intake? The MTS intake is better for a modified engine. Edelbrock intake is more for a street driven car, buy the Edelbrock you will not be disappointed. Edelbrock is part # 2115 Jegs for around $350.00.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  20. I was wanting to buy the Edelbrock. I am still going to when I start on my other 472. Do you have it on yours? What was the most noticeable improvement?
     
    loudbang likes this.
  21. bobbytnm
    Joined: Dec 16, 2008
    Posts: 1,375

    bobbytnm
    Member

    I've been toying with the Edelbrock intake and/or the intake camshaft combo. Anything has to be in improvement over the factory original. I'm also toying with fuel injection. I have an original factory port fuel injection set-up that just needs the adaptation of some modern electronics.

    Does anyone have any feedback on the Edelbrock set-up?

    Bobby
     
  22. Jibs
    Joined: May 19, 2006
    Posts: 1,524

    Jibs
    Member

    "I was wanting to buy the Edelbrock. I am still going to when I start on my other 472. Do you have it on yours? What was the most noticeable improvement?"

    I have the Edelbrock on my 47 Chevy with a 472 with a Lunati cam. I noticed an improvement in low rpm response. I have a MTS intake for my Essex with a 500 with a MTS cam it will be modified more than the 472.
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2016
    loudbang likes this.
  23. 472 in a 53 ford need lots of radiator DSCN0877.JPG DSCN0765.JPG

    500 in 50 buick IMG_0230.JPG IMG_0231.JPG

    but then I work a Cadillac in the 80 so I am partial to the big engines there surprising light to
     

    Attached Files:

    wsdad, MO_JUNK and loudbang like this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 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.