428 versus 460

[blykins]

For those that say the 385 heads were not copied from the BBC, where were you between 1965, when the BBC came out  and 1968, when the 429 cam out? I suppose you think Ford never looked under a 396 or 427, BBC valve cover? They didn't come out in the same year, like the slant block, MEL and 348 did. If so, I wouldn't say that it was copied.

Excuse me, my horse needs mouth to mouth 

Frank - Are you familiar with the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)?  Automotive design trends are pretty well documented in SAE papers that everybody can see.  Long before a BBC valve cover existed, there were numerous papers published on canted valve layouts for internal combustion engines.  I have engine design books issued to me when I joined Ford Engineering, that go into great detail on the subject.  The first revision dates on these books go back as far as World War II.

"Advanced" designs are really quite old.  Did you know that the first DOHC 4-valve engine was built by Peugeot in 1912?  The canted valve BBC head was around for a long time before its introduction.  As mentioned above, Chrysler used canted valves for its Polyspherical engine starting in 1958.

No, Ford didn't copy the BBC head for the 385 series.  They certainly knew about the performance and emissions potential of canted valve heads, and made a decision to pursue this well-known technology.

Aw Bill, we are only concerned about opinions in this thread.....

[WConley]

For those that say the 385 heads were not copied from the BBC, where were you between 1965, when the BBC came out  and 1968, when the 429 cam out? I suppose you think Ford never looked under a 396 or 427, BBC valve cover? They didn't come out in the same year, like the slant block, MEL and 348 did. If so, I wouldn't say that it was copied.

Excuse me, my horse needs mouth to mouth 

Frank - Are you familiar with the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)?  Automotive design trends are pretty well documented in SAE papers that everybody can see.  Long before a BBC valve cover existed, there were numerous papers published on canted valve layouts for internal combustion engines.  I have engine design books issued to me when I joined Ford Engineering, that go into great detail on the subject.  The first revision dates on these books go back as far as World War II.

"Advanced" designs are really quite old.  Did you know that the first DOHC 4-valve engine was built by Peugeot in 1912?  The canted valve BBC head was around for a long time before its introduction.  As mentioned above, Chrysler used canted valves for its Polyspherical engine starting in 1958.

No, Ford didn't copy the BBC head for the 385 series.  They certainly knew about the performance and emissions potential of canted valve heads, and made a decision to pursue this well-known technology.

Aw Bill, we are only concerned about opinions in this thread.....

My bad, Brent.  Sometimes I don't listen so good.

[blykins]

For those that say the 385 heads were not copied from the BBC, where were you between 1965, when the BBC came out  and 1968, when the 429 cam out? I suppose you think Ford never looked under a 396 or 427, BBC valve cover? They didn't come out in the same year, like the slant block, MEL and 348 did. If so, I wouldn't say that it was copied.

Excuse me, my horse needs mouth to mouth 

Frank - Are you familiar with the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)?  Automotive design trends are pretty well documented in SAE papers that everybody can see.  Long before a BBC valve cover existed, there were numerous papers published on canted valve layouts for internal combustion engines.  I have engine design books issued to me when I joined Ford Engineering, that go into great detail on the subject.  The first revision dates on these books go back as far as World War II.

"Advanced" designs are really quite old.  Did you know that the first DOHC 4-valve engine was built by Peugeot in 1912?  The canted valve BBC head was around for a long time before its introduction.  As mentioned above, Chrysler used canted valves for its Polyspherical engine starting in 1958.

No, Ford didn't copy the BBC head for the 385 series.  They certainly knew about the performance and emissions potential of canted valve heads, and made a decision to pursue this well-known technology.

Aw Bill, we are only concerned about opinions in this thread.....

My bad, Brent.  Sometimes I don't listen so good.

I’m glad you don’t listen so good. 

[frnkeore]

Continuing on with the BBC vs 385 argument. When a manufacturer releases something, under their name, that design is generally "owned" by them and many in fact, be owned by them, if they purchase the patent rights.

Like I said, the 1958 slant block (MEL/348) is up for grab's and they used different valve arrangements. But, I don't think the canted valve engine is. GM, came out with it first.

How many of you would give GM a pass, if they came out with a inline valve engine, that had the push rods running through the intake?

Yes, I am familiar with the huge, 4 cylinder, 1912 Peugeot, it ran at Indy and I would say they weren't the first to use it. All kinds of manufacturers have used it and still do, to this day. No other design has bettered it, for all out HP.

Push rods have been around a long time, too and there are many push rod designs. It's how they are package, that makes them unique to the manufacture, such as the nail head Buick, Chrysler hemi and many more. Again, if Ford would have came out with a nail head engine, after the Buick, would it be considered "original" in it's design?

You have to use a little common since, guy's.

[RJP]

My own personal feeling are "who wants a 385 when you can have a FE". Cost has never been much of a issue on this forum. I'd sure rather have a FE 460, in my F350. But, then, I'd also have to change out the front springs, to get the nose back down.

If you really don't want to build a FE, Don't. Why not build a 4 cam modular? They are also cheap.  Who's up for that challenge? $10K will get you a long way there, too (the OP said he was open to that). And at least it's a real Ford design!

For those that say the 385 heads were not copied from the BBC, where were you between 1965, when the BBC came out  and 1968, when the 429 cam out? I suppose you think Ford never looked under a 396 or 427, BBC valve cover? They didn't come out in the same year, like the slant block, MEL and 348 did. If so, I wouldn't say that it was copied.

Excuse me, my horse needs mouth to mouth 

You are entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong you may be... If you want to cite history then you should know the canted valve Chevy came out in early 1963 when the heads were first seen publicly at the Daytona 500 in Feb of 63. This Chevy engine produced lap speeds in the 166 -167 MPH range whereas the early lowriser 427 Fords were only lapping at 161-162. Ford cried fowl as these heads were not available to the general public as per NASCAR rules and after much bickering back and forth Chevy provided a sample of this new engine to NASCAR and Ford... When it was disassembled it was clear this engine could not run as the internal parts were obviously rejects and would have failed within 5 or 10 laps at speed. It was so phony the Chevy orange paint on the engine was still tacky. Chevy developing canted valve heads as something new?...Pure hogwash. It is obvious you have never been into a 385 series BBF as the only thing similar is the valve angles. Port arraignment is totally different, Ford being symmetrical intake ports and BBC is simesed[sp] ports.

[frnkeore]

As you say, "You are entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong you may be...

 I invented that saying, even though you said it first

[blykins]

As you say, "You are entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong you may be...

 I invented that saying, even though you said it first

I think you also wrote the book, “How to win friends and influence people.”, is that correct?

Frank, if I didn’t know any better I would think that you’re trying to be a forum troll.

[RJP]

Continuing on with the BBC vs 385 argument. When a manufacturer releases something, under their name, that design is generally "owned" by them and many in fact, be owned by them, if they purchase the patent rights.

Like I said, the 1958 slant block (MEL/348) is up for grab's and they used different valve arrangements. But, I don't think the canted valve engine is. GM, came out with it first.

How many of you would give GM a pass, if they came out with a inline valve engine, that had the push rods running through the intake?

Yes, I am familiar with the huge, 4 cylinder, 1912 Peugeot, it ran at Indy and I would say they weren't the first to use it. All kinds of manufacturers have used it and still do, to this day. No other design has bettered it, for all out HP.

Push rods have been around a long time, too and there are many push rod designs. It's how they are package, that makes them unique to the manufacture, such as the nail head Buick, Chrysler hemi and many more. Again, if Ford would have came out with a nail head engine, after the Buick, would it be considered "original" in it's design?

You have to use a little common since, guy's.

Although I am not a GM guy I do believe there is a GM engine with the pushrods in the intake manifold. It is a 2.6L or 2.8L V6 used in the 80s small Blazers...I could be wrong but if fact I don't think Ford would be demanding royalties or claiming patent infringements by copying the Tunnelport design.   

[RJP]

Continuing on with the BBC vs 385 argument. When a manufacturer releases something, under their name, that design is generally "owned" by them and many in fact, be owned by them, if they purchase the patent rights.

Like I said, the 1958 slant block (MEL/348) is up for grab's and they used different valve arrangements. But, I don't think the canted valve engine is. GM, came out with it first.

How many of you would give GM a pass, if they came out with a inline valve engine, that had the push rods running through the intake?

Yes, I am familiar with the huge, 4 cylinder, 1912 Peugeot, it ran at Indy and I would say they weren't the first to use it. All kinds of manufacturers have used it and still do, to this day. No other design has bettered it, for all out HP.

Push rods have been around a long time, too and there are many push rod designs. It's how they are package, that makes them unique to the manufacture, such as the nail head Buick, Chrysler hemi and many more. Again, if Ford would have came out with a nail head engine, after the Buick, would it be considered "original" in it's design?

You have to use a little common since, guy's.

How did the "plank head" arraignment get into this conversation? I thought we were discussing the differences between the FE and the 385. But since you brought it up the plank head design is nothing new...Ford didn't design it nor did GM. If you want to split that hair 28 different ways then it can be said that design can be traced back to diesel technology with the combustion chamber in the block, not the head. 1st diesel that come to my mind using this common design is the Detroit Diesel 71 series engine introduced in 1938. There are others but that is the one I'm familiar with.  BTW, That is not to say that GM "owns" this design, they don't.

[WConley]

I think Frank is assuming that if it's new to production, it must be state-of-the-art.  The canted valve BBC head wasn't state-of-the art in 1968 (or 1963, when the "Mystery Motor" came out).

The canted calve head wasn't even state-of-the art in 1938.  If GM could have patented the canted valve head design, they WOULD have.  Auto companies are very aggressive about patenting their new technology.  I know because I watched it happen with stuff I worked on inside Ford.  The patent lawyers were very busy!

[67xr7cat]

385 ford a copy of a BBC? No not really. Perhaps you can say they fixed all the stupid in the BBC.  If you knew about both engines you would not say it is a copy.  There are a lot of differences between them and the 385 overall is a better design, even GM knew that if you look at the last street BBC re-design.

FE = Freaking expensive, always has. Most of the good stuff holds its value or goes up in price.  385 most stuff goes down and that added to all the advantages it already has makes it a clear winner if all you want is make power and that is the case even when same cube inches.  Years ago a lot of guys did not know how to make them run. It just did not have the time back them to get fully developed like the FE and a lot of racers stuck to what they knew worked.  These days is well known how to make them run and everything is available to do so. 

I can put together an A-head 547 for less than $10k and make 900 hp easily and reliably. 

[Thumperbird]

Ok, to the redundant question piece, note a piece of my original ask, "if one were to utilize that $10k well in terms of maximizing cubes"...  spend the $10k however you want including adding cubes.

To summarize, streetable end game, cheap junk yard block to start with, which one gets the nod for HP and torque for $10k? And I suppose something close to period available, no Godzilla's.

I must say though, never been a fan of mixing brand hardware, will not bother to look at a f100 with a chevy front end or a 350 or what ever.  Why someone builds a Cobra replica and throws a chevy motor in it I'll never know, but that's just me, to each his own.  I do find some appeal to modern engine tech in a classic, the old/new edgy look if done right is kind of neat.

[Joe-JDC]

How many times must it be said, and in how many ways?  According to Jon Kaase the two bolt 460 block will withstand 750 hp all day long.  They can be bored to 4.420 usually, and a CJ or SCJ block can go to 4.440" easy.  You can throw a 4.500" crankshaft into the two bolt block with aluminum heads and have a 514, 521, 547, or 557 CI BBF that will not weigh much more than a FE, and be up as much as 150 hp over the same amount of money spent on the FE.  The difference between a 462FE and 521 BBF is 59 cubic inches and the FE with a good build will be around 1.2 hp/ci, and the BBF will only get better everywhere.  This is an FE forum, and I have 2-427s, 2-428 CJs, and I raced FEs for more than 35 years.  I like the FE, but if I were to start fresh with cubic inches and horsepower in mind with a 10K budget, the BBF 460 would get the nod without a second thought.  There are transmissions that will fit either, and each other with bellhousing adapters, so that is not an issue.  Anywhere a FE will fit, the 460 will fit with the proper water pumps, headers, etc.  Joe-JDC

[gt350hr]

   GM copied Ford's Tunnel port . Pontiac ram Air V and there was a lesser known Olds experimental head with tunnel ports too.
    Short blocks are dependent on cylinder heads to make power and "for the moment'' the 460 has a clear advantage over FE offerings in that department.

[babybolt]

Always thought that the 427 Cammer dual quad was the best looking engine ever made, with day 2 or 3 Boss in close second place. (day 2 means de-smogged and day 2 Nascar intake and headers). 

However for some reason there seems to be have been little development on Cammer intake ports and they don't flow near the current Boss 9 head out of the box offerings, which are around 400 cfm for Kaase heads and about 440 cfm for Todd Miller heads.