Industrial 427 Blocks

[bw_kc]

The 428 in my Mach 1 is an industrial block out of Nebraska.  Purchased it about 15 years ago for $350 - standard bore.  Bored to .030 over and have been running it ever since.  Great way to go IMO.  Grab as many  as you can.

[Joey120373]

What a cool find, you mentioned you might sell one or more of these? I'm not looking for one at the moment, got a BBM block to build, but a co-worker and good freind of mine is a fellow FE frantic. He would love to get a good big bore block to replace the bored over 390 block he is running now.

So if you do end up grabbing some of these and want to part with one, I would love to have a chance at it.

Awesome find.

[mike7570]

Kevin mentioned the bolt might interfere with the cross bolt. I have wondered how that pan's pickup would work out on a crossbolt Industrial 427. That tab is present in all FE/FT blocks from (unverified 64) 65 forward to accommodate the "Bread Pan" full sump FT/Industrial oil pan's pickup. Thanks for posting pictures.

Picture of my 428 FT (not drilled)

[chris401]

Kevin mentioned the bolt might interfere with the cross bolt. I have wondered how that pan's pickup would work out on a crossbolt Industrial 427. That tab is present in all FE/FT blocks from (unverified 64) 65 forward to accommodate the "Bread Pan" full sump FT/Industrial oil pan's pickup. Thanks for posting pictures.

Picture of my 428 FT (not drilled)

Did your 428 FT come with this pan and a main stud mounted (common 4X4) oil pickup?
5 out of 5 brad pans I have seen had this pickup. Three were 352 crank 330 MD, one a 428I and the other a 4 barrel HD FT.

[bn69stang]

I have never seen the H either , very interesting that 428 industrial block i picked up came from S E New Mexico where it ran an irrigation pump . No markings at all on it .. Bud

[jayb]

The 428 industrial blocks that I picked up from this guy run the gamut from unmarked to one with the C scratch, one with an XJ scratch, one with a CX scratch, and a couple with a C1 scratch.  Most have the ribs on the outside, but two don't.  In all but a couple cylinders the sonic data shows that on the thrust sides of the block the walls are pretty thick, well over 0.125".   I'm beginning to think that despite all the external differences, the blocks are more alike than they are different in the key areas, despite the markings or sand scratches...

[mike7570]

[/quote] Did your 428 FT come with this pan and a main stud mounted (common 4X4) oil pickup?
5 out of 5 brad pans I have seen had this pickup. Three were 352 crank 330 MD, one a 428I and the other a 4 barrel HD FT.
[/quote]

I only got the bare block from Sol Stewart, I don't know what kind of pan or pick up it had. Also the block is void of markings.
 

[bn69stang]

My industrial block is at the machine shop now , and when i get it home  i will go over it again .. It s interesting to see all the different markings on these blocks ..

[jayb]

Mike, the picture of the block you posted showing the deck appears to have the 390 water jackets, not the 428 water jackets.  See the drawings posted below, courtesy of my friend Kevin (thatdarncat).  The water jacket opening in the deck, shown in the picture, extends down below the head bolt hole on the 428, but not on the 390.  Are you sure the block you have is a 428 block, and not an overbored 390 block?  I have never seen a 428 block with those water jacket holes on the deck...

[chris401]

I had an Industrial 428 cast in March 1974 without markings. It looked just like a common 1971-1972 360/390 block. I see Photobucket has deleted or lost a good number of random pictures in my folders labled FE. I think it had the 428 water jackets but no scratch on the back. It was 4.16 bore with a couple of non thrust .96 and a .103 walls.

[wsu0702]

Mike, the picture of the block you posted showing the deck appears to have the 390 water jackets, not the 428 water jackets.  See the drawings posted below, courtesy of my friend Kevin (thatdarncat).  The water jacket opening in the deck, shown in the picture, extends down below the head bolt hole on the 428, but not on the 390.  Are you sure the block you have is a 428 block, and not an overbored 390 block?  I have never seen a 428 block with those water jacket holes on the deck..."quote ]

You can thank Dennis K for bringing this alternate 428 block ID method to us. First proposed several years ago and only now gaining a following.

[wsu0702]

I grew up in an area where the local cherry orchards were protected by wind machines from the spring frost.  A large majority of these wind machines were Ford Industrial 428 powered in the '70s and early '80s.  My dad and I were first row and center when these wind machine companies were selling off their old equipment in the mid-80s.  Barely used complete engine assemblies we were able to get for $200-$300 at auction. The short blocks were basically the same as the factory 428CJ.  We kept a few and sold a bunch.       

[wsu0702]

I had an Industrial 428 cast in March 1974 without markings. It looked just like a common 1971-1972 360/390 block. I see Photobucket has deleted or lost a good number of random pictures in my folders labled FE. I think it had the 428 water jackets but no scratch on the back. It was 4.16 bore with a couple of non thrust .96 and a .103 walls.

I have had several early '74 casting date 428 blocks just as you describe and I still have one at the machine shop that has an April '74 casting date.  The DIF was on the road to closing in early '74 and Ford ramped up  428/427 service block production while they still could to meet the 10 yr service part demand requirement before the foundry shut down production forever.

[mike7570]

Mike, the picture of the block you posted showing the deck appears to have the 390 water jackets, not the 428 water jackets.  See the drawings posted below, courtesy of my friend Kevin (thatdarncat).  The water jacket opening in the deck, shown in the picture, extends down below the head bolt hole on the 428, but not on the 390.  Are you sure the block you have is a 428 block, and not an overbored 390 block?  I have never seen a 428 block with those water jacket holes on the deck...

I measured the bore a while back and it was either 4.13 or 4.16, I'll check it again. I plan to have it sonic checked soon as I may be selling it if the new BBM iron blocks are available soon.
I remember Sol telling me it was a 428, he didn't say anything about it being a bored 390.

[jayb]

I think a sonic check is a good idea.  Hopefully it is plenty thick - Jay