Trust me Dave,as someone who grew up in the SF bay area,Oregons libs are SO much less uptight than ours,its like night and day! We especially noticed it in Portland...we hardly ever heard a horn honking,and didnt see anyone driving like an idiot,in a big hurry to get somewhere.

 

Well,i better get going for this evening, i need to be well rested for what hopefully will be a busy day at the gun store tomorrow.....Nite,all!

 

I imagine coming from SF, it seems pretty tame as far as libs here.But we blame ours for the destruction of the timber industry and all our family wage jobs. You will find that rural OR is a red state, very conservative......Portland, Salem, Eugene have all the libs/population and all the political clout.........we just have to weather the BS.

 

sorry laddies and gentlemen i have re looked at my posts and facts and i am for the most part totally wrong i just got entirely pissed when i saw a ford lovers forever site trashing the 454 and ill ignore the hay cutting and sheep coments....i was cutting hay for 3 hours and then i had to bale another field till 3 in the morning so i could get it before morning dew and these last few days i been hiting shrine bowl,tractor pulls and what not as for the 460 like i said its alright but i would still take my 400 over any 460...unless it had a bird catcher on it.....like i said 400 re-built like she is now cant go wrong...hasnt yet anyways

 

o and about your 454 that seems under powered for its time....when i received my 400 it was in poor condition since the previous owners used it to haul a **** load of stuff....was owned by a gas company many moons ago also....but when they came out of the factory it was rated at 265 horse my version was anyways.....i have a 350 4 bolt that came out of a old straight truck in the back of my shed that used too pull around 370 horse although that is a older version of a 454 so who knows....

 

Okay,6.6liter,i just got done looking at a 1971-1978 Chilton's truck repair manual,as well as a book entitled "Standard Catalog of 4x4's,1945-1993" and BOTH of them list the 400 SBC as being first introduced in 1975 for pick-up applications,ive got no idea if they had car applications before that,but that's immaterial since were talking trucks here! By 1981 the 400 was GONE from the 1ton and under line up......PER BOTH books,depending on whether the engine was for light duty or heavy duty emissions(depending on the year,the light duty was classified as either under 6000 lbs,or under 8500 lbs) or Federal Vs. California specs....Net HP for the 400 was from 170HP to a MAXIMUM of 185 HP.....NO version of the truck 400SB came anywhere near 265 net hp from the factory......The last year that HP ratings were listed at Gross HP rather than Net HP was 1971,and for truck app's,the best rated 350 4bbl 9.0 compression ratio version was listed at 255 gross hp,while a year later,the closest equivalent,8.5 to 1,4bbl 350 was listed at 175 net hp......moving up the ladder to the 454,325 max gross hp for 1971,270 net for 1972......low point for the 454 was 1975 at 215 net hp.......
the closest number that i see to your claimed 265 rated hp,was from a 1971 402 big block which was rated at 260 gross hp.........
Regarding our trashing of the 454,i seem to recall you werent all that fond of the 454 either,preferring the 400 sb........

 

To compare the 460BBF to the 400SBC is pretty insane, the 460 in its worst mid 70s smog configuration would annihilate the 400SBC........With the 400SBC reputation for overheating leading to catastrophic failures, if I was a chevy guy I would feel better running a 350 any day.......The 400SBC is something GM would love to forget.

 

454 may only still be good for cars but its still in the chevy family :P and i have the chevy manuals for the 400 also for my specific truck ect (cause i needed to know the numbers to torque my bolts back on right when i re-built it) and my basic gm 400 6.6l book tells me built 1970-1981 150 hp 112 Kw-265 hp 198 Kw the bore/stroke is 4.125 in × 3.75 in when it was first introduced the initial output was the 265 only available with a 2 barrel carb in '74 a 4 bbl was introduced while the 2 bbl was stopped in '75 origonally used in cars with A and B body lines but that stopped in '76 and was used for trucks(hence my truck is a '76) the 2 bolt main blocks where stronger than the 4 bolt main blocks so they are better to use to bore out and ect....oh yes and someone posted about cooling troubles 400's where prone to cooling troubles if they didnt have cylinder heads with steam holes.....the engine was popular with racers i have heard....and about that 350 its the 1970 LT-1 origonally used in a camaro till it wrecked so i guess my dad put it in a grain truck after it was wrecked those years ago(now grain truck in the junk yard and engine in back of the shed probly going to be a pivot engine)so yes it does put out 370 hp with 380 lb-ft torque anyways off to check pipe gates...

 

okay,6.6liter,where to start..........NO,NONE,NADA,ZILCH, of the 400sbc's in light truck applications WERE ever rated at more than 185hp,most were at either 170 or 175 net hp,nothing even approaching 265 HP......All the applications i can find list 4bbl only,no 2bbl in trucks......2 bolt mains stronger than 4 bolt, that certainly doesnt jibe with what conventional wisdom says......Regarding HP,are you aware of the different rating methods utilized before and after 1971,gross hp vs. net hp? Sure,the LT1 was a hot motor,but when you factor in the change of rating methods,it wasnt nearly as big a difference as the numbers would make it seem........To put those over-inflated gross HP ratings in perspective,my 07 Dodge Cummins(with its 6 cylinder firing three cylinders at a time) makes 325 net HP,and 610 net ft/lbs torque.....In a same weight vehicle,this would absolutely destroy that LT1 motor,considering that its 370 gross hp/380 net torque probably translates into maybe 260 net hp/270 net ft/lbs torque....and all this in an engine that only has 10 more cubic inches,or 1/5 of a liter more displacement........Hope those pipe gates are in good order!

 

I am looking at my Chev. book......last year 400SBC offered was 78', hp was a awesome 175hp and 270ft lbs of ground pounding torque.........I would bet my wifes 4.0v6 explorer would leave it in the weeds.

 

I show it listed until 1980,and depending on Light/Heavy duty emissions,and 49 state/California emissions,it shows up at anywhere from 170-185 THUNDERING HP.....And then by the time you factor in drivetrain loss,especially from an automatic tranny and the legendary full-time Np203 chain driven transfer case........ WOO-HOO,im nearly drunk with power!
I'd really like to see what literature 6.6 is getting his facts and figures from,perhaps after his gates and hay chores are done,he will be so kind as to enlighten us.....

 

Wow, Bob!......you got one listed at 185hp!!!.........I know a 302 with one dead cylinder that can most likely beat that figure!

 

Yeah,one version for 1979 was listed at 185........Im looking forward to 6.6's source for a factory figure of 265 Hp,especially in a truck in the mid 1970's.......

 

I think we will be waiting a while, Bob.

 

Id seriously doubt if the performance cars of that era were rated at 265 Net Hp.....I wonder what a 1976 Corvette was rated at,or perhaps a Ferrari or Lamborghini? I would almost wager that you would need to find an over the road tractor,probably Cat,Detroit,or Cummins powered to get an honest 265 net hp back then.........After those chores,6.6 please come on back into this debate,your input is requested!