85lebaront2 Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 Ok, I'll upload the files again tomorrow for the 400. Really strange that it works on my phone but not my Windows devices. As for the 400's power, or lack thereof, when you saddle it with the same size 2bbl as the 351W and M had, there's no way it can perform. Then consider the 8.0 compression ratio. Even the 351W had 8.3. Brandon's friend James has an '80 F350 w/a 400. He was replacing the timing set on it and added an Eddy intake and just a 600 CFM carb. Said it fully doubled the power. But I'm not sure I agree with you on the 351M. Instead of a pig I think Dad's was more like a dead toad. When you step on a pig at least you'll get a squeal. But if you step on a dead toad nothing happens. I was used to Dad's engine and then I bought Rusty. Forged pistons with more like 9:1 compression and some RV cam. Huge difference, both in power as well as economy. Dad's truck got 10.5 MPG with the C6, and Rusty got about 12.5 MPG. Essentially same truck, exactly the same tranny (I swapped it), but a well built engine. Try a 1971 Mercury 429 with a 2 barrel, I think it was the 1.21" Autolite. The desirable one was the 1966 Mercury 410 2 barrel, 1.33" Autolite, close to 500 CFM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted October 18, 2018 Author Share Posted October 18, 2018 Try a 1971 Mercury 429 with a 2 barrel, I think it was the 1.21" Autolite. The desirable one was the 1966 Mercury 410 2 barrel, 1.33" Autolite, close to 500 CFM. I hesitate to continue this conversation because I REALLY NEED INPUT ON THE Y2Y PAGE! But I can't resist - Olds put a 2bbl on the 455. I'll guess it was a 2GC, but you will know. Nor do I know how big it was. But I know that there wasn't much performance - my '58 Impala w/a 348 was too much for it. However, in a 442 w/a 4bbl was something entirely different. I'll bet the carb was the 800 CFM QJet. Anyway, my '69 Bee wasn't even rolling good before the 442 was across the intersection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85lebaront2 Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 I hesitate to continue this conversation because I REALLY NEED INPUT ON THE Y2Y PAGE! But I can't resist - Olds put a 2bbl on the 455. I'll guess it was a 2GC, but you will know. Nor do I know how big it was. But I know that there wasn't much performance - my '58 Impala w/a 348 was too much for it. However, in a 442 w/a 4bbl was something entirely different. I'll bet the carb was the 800 CFM QJet. Anyway, my '69 Bee wasn't even rolling good before the 442 was across the intersection. Then I will refrain from mentioning 383 MOPARs with a Stromberg WWC, or Pontiac 420E (421 with 2 barrel) or Lincoln 430s with Carter BBD 2 barrels. Some bean counter's in Detroit decided a 2 barrel was great for fuel economy, sure if the engine was around 300 ci or less, how about the 1969 390s that only came with a 2 barrel, but would deliver 17-19 mpg in a 4000+ lb car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted October 18, 2018 Author Share Posted October 18, 2018 Then I will refrain from mentioning 383 MOPARs with a Stromberg WWC, or Pontiac 420E (421 with 2 barrel) or Lincoln 430s with Carter BBD 2 barrels. Some bean counter's in Detroit decided a 2 barrel was great for fuel economy, sure if the engine was around 300 ci or less, how about the 1969 390s that only came with a 2 barrel, but would deliver 17-19 mpg in a 4000+ lb car. Glad you didn't mention them. Had a '72 F250 w/a 2100 on it. With the camper on it there was no acceleration until the PV opened. But a 4bbl intake, ported to take a spreadbore, and a QJet solved that problem. Better MPG, better driveability, and better power. Personally, 2bbls aren't the right config, unless it is a progressive 2bbl. A 4bbl is a much better arrangement with the small primaries and large secondaries - even if the secondaries have gross metering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpin Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 Glad you didn't mention them. Had a '72 F250 w/a 2100 on it. With the camper on it there was no acceleration until the PV opened. But a 4bbl intake, ported to take a spreadbore, and a QJet solved that problem. Better MPG, better driveability, and better power. Personally, 2bbls aren't the right config, unless it is a progressive 2bbl. A 4bbl is a much better arrangement with the small primaries and large secondaries - even if the secondaries have gross metering. I'll assume you fixed it. The 400 came up slow, but it came up after I scrolled down then back up, don't know if that's significant. I won't mention that I had a 1972 Hurst/Olds 442, 455 and loaded, man I wish I had that car... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85lebaront2 Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 I'll assume you fixed it. The 400 came up slow, but it came up after I scrolled down then back up, don't know if that's significant. I won't mention that I had a 1972 Hurst/Olds 442, 455 and loaded, man I wish I had that car... Gary, I was thinking about something this morning. The change date for the 460 exhaust, 2-85, might that also be the date for the EFI 302 introduction? Possibly some other changes effective 2-85 since Ford seemed to enjoy doing mid year changes. Side note, saw a Bullnose at Pete's Used Parts yesterday, and due to information on this site, knew it was a 1980 or 1981 as it had F O R D on the hood and the early style grille (no emblem). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted October 18, 2018 Author Share Posted October 18, 2018 Gary, I was thinking about something this morning. The change date for the 460 exhaust, 2-85, might that also be the date for the EFI 302 introduction? Possibly some other changes effective 2-85 since Ford seemed to enjoy doing mid year changes. Side note, saw a Bullnose at Pete's Used Parts yesterday, and due to information on this site, knew it was a 1980 or 1981 as it had F O R D on the hood and the early style grille (no emblem). Bill - I can confirm that the change date for 460 exhausts was 2/85, although I seriously doubt it was that finite. See below. And it is entirely possible that 2/85 was used for other changeovers. I'll watch for that. As for the FORD lettering on the 80/81 hoods, I'm glad the site is helpful. And as we get the Y2Y differences page(s) fleshed out we may be able to tell the difference between an 80 and an 81 at first blush. I doubt it, but you never know. "First blush" can't include instrument printed circuits. But at least we can look at the turn signal lenses and say if it is an early or late 81. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85lebaront2 Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 Bill - I can confirm that the change date for 460 exhausts was 2/85, although I seriously doubt it was that finite. See below. And it is entirely possible that 2/85 was used for other changeovers. I'll watch for that. As for the FORD lettering on the 80/81 hoods, I'm glad the site is helpful. And as we get the Y2Y differences page(s) fleshed out we may be able to tell the difference between an 80 and an 81 at first blush. I doubt it, but you never know. "First blush" can't include instrument printed circuits. But at least we can look at the turn signal lenses and say if it is an early or late 81. Gee, based on that chart Darth doesn't exist, no crew cabs listed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted October 18, 2018 Author Share Posted October 18, 2018 Gee, based on that chart Darth doesn't exist, no crew cabs listed. Bill - You missed the F250 label. Here are the F350 2wd charts. Unfortunately I don't have these on the website yet, but if I watch the baseball game tonight maybe I can get it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85lebaront2 Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 Bill - You missed the F250 label. Here are the F350 2wd charts. Unfortunately I don't have these on the website yet, but if I watch the baseball game tonight maybe I can get it on. Ahh, ok. When you do get a chance I notice that there are some 88-89 listed W/O converter, I would love to see those parts lists. I had to have mine built non-catalyst for the EFI engine. BTW, it got a good workout yesterday, hauled the Konvertible back here on the tow dolly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts