534 vs Everyone else
 

In the Posts in this forum I havent seen any direct comparisons between the 534 and other engines with similar dispalcement and purpose.This could also be a reply to those who ask about dropping a 534 on top of the frame/fenders of your F350(cause thats about what'll happen if you try) or alternatives to the 534.All engines here use pump gas and a 4 barrel carb. won't mention Forced induction or alternate fuel in this comparison because thats a different kettle of spiders alltogether(ie the twin turbo Seamaster 534 or that other propane piyast of junk Ford made for busses or something).

The 534 fuel converter itself is a tough engine with a reputation for long life,bad gas mileage and chunking connecting rods.Appearently Fords answer to the 302 V6 GM stuck in its 5 ton and up trucks.While it could move any load you want for a long as you want.Just make sure you aren't in a hurry and your wallet is deeper than the gas tank.With 277 hp@3400 and 490 lbft over a broad 1800-2300,It is kind of a dog.It seems to me It gives little in return for such a beast of a motor and the amount of dino juice you have to pump at it.(2-3 mpg)Being designed for heavy service it can bolt up to truck trannies easily,7,10 and 13 speed Fullers and what have you(maybe derived from the GAA in the sherman tank?not certain)

My first comparison is a 533 inch Ford This is a stroked 460.Similar cubes and better power in a smaaler lighter package are already advantages.4 wheeler built one up for a Big Bronco With 9.8-1 compression it made 454 hp@4500 and 551lbft @3000.This is a pretty sweet one with aluminum heads intake and water pump.A 460 is just as hard on gas as any other big block.10 mpg up or down hill,head or tail wind empty or loaded.Not sure how this will hold true in an F1000 or some old fire truck loaded up with 10 tons of yunk.

Another tourque monster is the vereable 500 inch Caddy.This motor was in their lead sleds from 68-ish to 76'.There is a kit to stroke these to 537 cubes and with other help these can make serious power.Street rodder built such a motor.A proper intake to raise the carb so it no longer sits below the heads (as per factory),some head porting and compression(9.5-1) yeild 430 hp and 610 lbft .These Cads have a reputation for mileage comprable to a small block Chevy (17+mpg) and loong lifeSo I would expect decent mileage and reliability for a 537.

Since I know of no Chevy built fot hauling that can run with this crowd,we'll toss in a 'no code' 502 for sheeyats & giggles Cranking 502 hp@5200 and 567 lbft@ 4200. As you can see inpressive,but not exactly set up for hauling and I Imagine they are quite pricey.

Not aware of any good gas engines that Dodge built for Heavy Duty Service.I guess you don't see Dodge school busses or dumptrucks for a reason... }>

I know international made some gas engines (478 or something) but I know little about them so If anyone would care to enlighten..

There are also a multitude of diesel engine that fall into our category as well:3208 Cat and 8v 53 and 71 series detroit not forgetting the 7.3 diesls the Duramax,and the 360 I6 Cummins having found their way into medium duty trucks.North American Diesel Performance have built examples of the latter three with up to 800Hp and 1500 lbft,capable of launching a 1 ton 4x4 crew cab down the.1320 in around 12 seconds but as mentioned,a whole other thread on these computerized turbo diesels could be started.

These are my observations.

I think the Dodge 413 and 440 were used when Dodge had Medium and Heavy duty trucks, back in the 60's and early 70's. I remember seeing Dodge 800s used as gas powered, city bus tow trucks and city tractors hauling around 40 foot trailers. I remember unloading 40 lb. boxes of lard from the Dodge Tractor's trailer into a cold storage, during my Univ. days. These tandem axle Dodges were the size of gasser Louisvilles L800s.

I also remember seeing Chevy C70's (medium to heavy duty) equipped with 366 and 427 big blocks. Around 1970 the local newspaper used one of these (C70) 427s to haul newspapers from my city to small towns in the country. That 427 would move with a full load, and the noise it made was a glorious V8 sound. The chevy big block, truck engine I believe has some differences compared to those used in light truck and car applications.

GMCs used variations on their 305 V6, which was a well cooled, heavy nickel content block used in P/Us to MDT. You could get bigger V6s in the GMC line in displacement up to about 470 something.

International, back in the 60's used 304, 345 and 392 gasser V8s, all using the same high nickel content block, just with variations on bore and stroke.

I used to drive a 460 V8 in an E350 dually , cube van and although I thought the world of the 460, I'm pretty sure this engine was just set up for light trucks, up to the E350 and F350.

The built Caddy, bow tie 502 and blue oval 460 you refer to, I don't think would be heavy duty enough for Medium duty and Heavy duty service.

I think the MDT and HDT, Ford 534s, Internationals, GMC and Chevy big block truck engines met different specifications than did the car/light duty truck engines. They were for the most heavy engines,with lots of meat. Not quite built to Diesel standards, but beefier than car/light truck standards. In a MDT/HDT, these engines are having their comparatively low revving necks wrung, and have to be built to withstand this kind of severe service.

Just my speculation for the most part.

I think the Ford Super Duty engines compared well with the competition for the most part. They were among the first big-inch gassers that had become popular in the late 1950's. The story is that moonlighting engineers from International helped design it, and based the design off of the big Lincoln V-8. The competitors to the Super Duty was as follows: International had the V-401, V-477, and V-549. These were pretty good performers, maybe not quite as reliable as the SD's. Some 549's had dual ignition, with twin distributors and 2 plugs per cylinder. The Internationals suffered from cracked heads and oil leaks, and International tried to make a diesel out of the 549. About as good as the Olds 350 diesel! Dodge used heavy duty versions of the 361 and 413 to power their heavy trucks. These were great engines, but more in the league of the Ford 361 and 391 FT V-8's. Dodge offered the International 549 as a special order option in the late 60's. GMC had their V-6's. These went all the way from a 305 inch job for the small truck to 351, 379, 401, 432, and a 478 for the large trucks. I think these were about as good as a large truck gas engine ever got, and the 478 was equal to the 534 Ford in performance. Very short stroke for their displacement allowed them to build torque fast at low R.P.M.'s. Way overbuilt, the larger versions were 900+ pounds, and the crank was very short and fat. The 305 didn't do much in the pickups but eat a lot of fuel. GMC made diesel versions of the 351 and 478, and they didn't need to beef up the block. From 1960-65, GMC offered a 702 cube V-12, which was basically 2 351's end to end with a common block, crank, and cam. Monster had 4 cylinder heads. Pretty rare, usually only found them in large fire trucks and Air Force mobile missile launchers. In 1966, the V-12 was dropped, and GMC added 2 more cylinders to the 478 creating a 637 V-8. This was built as a gas or a diesel. 600+ ft. lbs.. Chevy had the 348, 366, 409, and 427. They were all pretty tough, but again more like the FT Ford V-8's. Chevy used some of the GMC 478 V-6's in the larger trucks. There was another large gas V-8, the REO. I don't remember the displacement, but I heard tell it was quite an engine. White used it in later years after they bought REO out.

Here is your GMC V6 / V12 site.

http://www.6066gmcguy.org/

Find the repowered Ford on the site for extra giggles.

Hall Scott engines were the serious gas guzzler of the '50s.
The sound clips are slow to load and not that great, at least the one I tried.
http://www.northern.edu/diasr/hallscott/Products.html

I remember the old man bringing home a pamphlet on the Chrysler 413 being sold as a repower unit for trucks. They bragged about how the main bearings were "designed to take twice the rpm" you could expect from the repower version, which, I think, peaked at 4000 rpm. My brother and I pointed out that this must be true, as Don Garlits was running his to 8000 rpm.....(or so we thought, not sure Garlits ever ran a 413 and it would have been a Hemi, not the wedge in the pamphlet, but details details.....)

Anyway, based on the previous postings about various HP and torque ratings, and how different engines run, I'd say it's true that it's not how big you make it, it's how you make it big.

Chrysler used what they called "modified torque" and "full modified torque" depending upon the truck size, say D400 or D600. They were available in 361 (low big block) and the 413 (tall big block) good for a maximum RPM of approx 3300 (varied upon the exact engine / torque profile) They also produced a "premium" 440 for the motorhome and medium truck usage (400-600 series) with modified heads for increased exhaust valve/port cooling (which is why Chrysler never had the exhaust manifold problems on it's big block compared to the 460 ford or 454 chev)

Chevrolet had 366 and 427 tall (1/4" taller) block big block, why you might ask, well they used 4 rings on the pistons! These were also available in the medium duty trucks. These engine blocks were also the basis for the racing engines of the 70's that were larger than the 427/454 as the taller block couold accomodate a longer stroke with normal pistons.

Don't forget INTERNATONAL!!! They had large displacement gas engine up to and including a 549 ci beast! (AS noted in the above post)

And if you go a little further back to the 40's and fifties --- well there were very large (1000 ci or bigger) gasoline enignes made by makers such as Hall-Scott and used in specialty rigs such as fire trucks.

Makes event he 534 Ford engine seem SMALL by comparison :)

D~

I know of the 366 and 427 BBCs GM used in their medium duties,but I am kinda disgusted with them. I suppose they run ok but,like the 6.2 diesel were dogs.Sure they would move the load but be prepared to get out and
push or drop it into the crawler gear to go up a hill.Can't imagine one in a gravel truck.

I never knew that GM had so many variants on the V6.Besides the 305 and the twin 6 v12,I knew of nothing else.

I still would like to know more about the aluminum GAA tank engine if anyone has info

The comapny I work for had a few GMC C-6500 5 yd. dumps with 427's in them, backed by a 5 speed and a 2 speed rear axle. They ran very well, even pulling a backhoe on a trailer. Very thisty! It's all in how they are geared. As for the Ford GAA tank engine, I don't know too much about them, but I read where they weren't really a Ford design. They were a cut down Rolls-Royce Merlin aircraft engine.

I recently read about GM having 637 cubic inch V8 engines used in both large Chevy and GMC trucks. I'm not familiar with them. I wonder if anyone knows how they compared to the other big gassers from Ford, International, etc?

The GMC 637 gas V-8 made 275 h.p. @ 2800 r.p.m., and 600 ft. lbs. @ 1600 r.p.m., according to an old manual I have. 534's were around 260 h.p. and 480 ft. lbs.. 637's were very rare, but I know of a man that has one in an old fire truck. I seem to remember the 637's gave a bit of trouble with vibration (they had a balance shaft in the crankcase) and ran hot (big surprise, huh?).

the 534 made 260 hp and 480 ft pounds in its final years. pre smog it was close to 570 ft pounds and 290 hp. but these were giant beasts

http://www.michellesfords.com/534_SuperDuty.jpg

Thanks for the info. I'm starting to develop a fascination for these old, over large engines.

I have been a car buff for decades and it is only, lately that I have become aware of these old dinosaurs like the Ford 534, GM 637 and Internationals.

I imagine as they were all so large, heavy and slow revving that none were ever considered for hot rodding.

I wonder how many miles one of these gassers could put on, before a rebuild?

I also wonder how they would of developed if they had kept building them? Would they have eventually been supercharged/turbocharged, three valve headed, etc? Interesting to speculate.

I just found my 1962 Motor's truck manual. The 534 is listed as having 270 h.p. @ 3200 r.p.m., and 481 ft. lbs. @ 1900. The GMC 702 V-12 is listed at 275 h.p. @ 2400 r.p.m., and 630 ft. lbs. @ 1600 r.p.m.. The International 549 V-8 is listed at 256 h.p. @ 3200 r.p.m., and 505 ft. lbs. @ 2000 r.p.m.. Kind of fun looking at the spec.'s of those old monsters!

Louisville Joe,

It is interesting to find out about the hp/torque figures, uses, purposes and hearing some of the old stories, of those rugged, old monsters. You know, there are books out, extolling the virtues and faults, on just about every domestic, gas V8, except on these old, jumbo , MDT/HDT truck engines.

I for one, would find it fascinating reading, and a great reference book, to boot! Too bad there is nothing out there. Or is there?

If there isn't, it probably has to do a lot with market demand. There are probably only a few older, (I'm not that old yet) coots who would buy such a book.

Les

And just to add a little more information on this subject the FORD 534 was available in the SCOTT truck built in Nova Scotia back in the 70's.

There are some SCOTTs used as fire trucks in my town. Didn't know they were Canadian trucks.

back in the 60's a lot of coal trucks where gas jobs.the 534's and 549's would out pull the big deisel of that time,the 238 detroit and the 673 macks.

ever 366 and 427 i have drove will pull its ass off we have a 79 chevy c70 gravel truck it has the 366 in it and it goes just fine 5speed 2speed rearend. a friend of mine has a newer gmc dump truck with a diesel in it and mine will pass his on a up hill pull both loaded.

Ford GAA Tank Engine
 

To: Admiral Turbo. In one of your posts, you were looking for some info on the Ford GAA Tank Engine. I have a lot of good info on them, in fact I have enough parts to build two of them at present, plus "mucho" spare parts. My ultimate goal is to put one of them into a 1984 Ford F350 truck street machine. The first engine is just about all together, with 3 Demon 4-bbls and dual MSD distributors. The engine is all aluminum, DOHC, 32valve, has a 5.4" bore and 6.0" stroke. It is built on a 60-degree V, thus is only 33.25" wide overall including headers. It will fit into my '84 F-350 without even having to relocate the vacuum tank, but will require taking out the heater. And the firewal will have to be recessed somewhat. I have all the manuals, one of which includes the dyno sheet. In 1945, using 80-octane gas, two Stromberg 2-bbl carbs and 7.5 compression, it put out about 1000 lbs of torque at 1000 rpms, peaked at 1050 lbs torque at 2200 rpms, and ended up at 975 lbs torque @ 2800 rpms. Peak power in 1945 was 525 HP. It had dual ignition, one magneto for each cylinder bank due to the fact that it is a 60-degree V with a 180-degree (flat) crank and thus an uneven firing pattern. It was originally designed as a V-12 liquid cooled aircraft engine to compete with the Allison V12. Hence the 60-degree V and being all aluminum. After Henry Ford ordered all the machinery and foundry cores to make a 12, the Army told him that they didn't need an aircraft V12, but they did need a tank V8. Since all the tooling, etc was for an aluminum 12, they kept it as-is and made it into an 8. This is probably the biggest aluminum water cooled V8 ever made. Some people say it is a derivitive of the Merlin V-12, but I don't think so. For one, it uses a one-piece block, said to be the largest ever made to that time. The Merlin and the Allison use split blocks. The block is of short-skirt design, like a modern V8, side-oiler and with 4-bolt mains with a double splay bolt layout. Sound familiar? There is a heavy reinforcing rail at the bottom of the block. What else..? I don't know. If you would like more info, let me know. I live for the day when I go to a car show or a drive-in on some friday night and the guy in the truck next to me says that he's got a GM 502 crate motor in his Chevy, and I can tell him, "good...if you had 48 more cubic inches you'd be half as big as my Ford." Or the Dodge guy with his V-10...my GAA is as big as two V-10s plus an additional PT Cruiser 4.
Have A Day

...Welcome to Ford Truck Enthusiasts!

See you on the boards.:-X22 ….

To: Bobsok
 

Bobsok, This sounds like it would be a real interesting topic in the general auto forum? It's interesting just readin bout that huge thing. I think we would all agree that we need pictures of your creation. Also, since you opened your mouth, well nto really your mouth but..., a write-up of this beast would be awsome.:-X04

TO: JGC2521.
If you could give me an address, I have a number of pics that I could send you. I'm at: bobsaok@yahoo.com. One frustrating thing about working on this engine is that it already has so much torque that there's almost nothing else worth doing to hop it up, you couldn't apply the power. In 1945 it had more torque from 1000-1200 rpm than the biggest factory Cummins 855 turbodiesel has today. Already, there's almost no Allison transmission that can handle the power other than the 3000-series 6-speed with a loose converter and then a lockup. A manual trans is out of the question for street use, you couldn't control the torque. Its going to be a hell of a lot of fun to drive. I'm projecting that the changeover from (2) 2-bbl Strombergs to (3) 4-bbl Demons, plus going from two low-output magnetos to 2-MSD distributors, plus 9-11 points more octane of gas will add at least 150 lbs torque, or to more than 1200 lbs all the way from 1000 to 3000 rpms. That will give me 750 hp minimum, all at the low end, and really no stress on the motor.
Anyway, send me an address, and if you have some more thoughts, let me know.

The 366 an 427 chevys are tall deck motors that were designed for truck service with small valves and low compression. other than the taller deck they are the same as there light duty bretheren.

Bobsok, Why not create a gallery here and post your pictures of this beast :)

Hi All
 

I have a C850 Fire Truck with a 534 in it I would like to know if anyone has a manual for the beast that maybe I could get a copy of
Thanks

I keep thinking of a 534, a bunch of nitrous, and an aftermarket ignition box with a rev limiter set really low to keep from overevving it. I wonder how much torque that would make? You know, put it in something not tremendously heavy, with the numerically lowest gear you can get...

Keep thinking.....

You guys are also forgetting of the 429 and 460 industrial motors as well, we have a 429 in a f700 grain truck on our farm and its a lot nicer of a motor than the 534 we have in our f800 tandem grain truck, but the 534 has the torque for the heavy load in the soft fields that the 429 doesn't, more or less the 429/460 industrial motors are better on the road than the 534 (of which we have a fresh rebuilt 534 monster sitting in our shop, broke the oil pump shaft and the resulting carnage 2 rods seazed on the crank and snapped it in half, we'll be putting the motor back in the truck pretty soon, i'll snap a couple pictures next time i go down).

As far as the chev 427-366's go they aren't a bad motor for the highway compared to the other big gassers (we have a c70 grain truck with a 366, but our 429 pulls better though), but again if i had a choice i'd go with the ford motors.

I know dodge also used the early hemis (the 354 or whatever they were desoto's i believe they were) in the medium duty trucks, as our neighbor had one in a grain truck, it wasn't the greatest of motors, lol.

Was the monster ford engine (1000+ cube)you're talking about a side valve or overhead valve? I know that domestically, ford kept the side valve in smaller trucks until 1953. As for the tank engine, this is all of the second post that I've ever read on it. I too would love to hear more about it.

I Googled that Ford GAA and god a decent picture;that thing is awesome.It certainly would be neat to own one.One of these low revving tow motors would be excellent in some kind of tracked skidder that uses hydraulic motors to drive the tracks.All the engine would have to do is run a pump/would last forever.

TO: Mo52Merc
 

Regarding the GAA engine, it is a 32-valve, double overhead cam engine, 4 valves per cylinder. Bore is 5.402" and stroke is 6.0". The engine is all aluminum (block and heads) and is a 60-degree V (as opposed to most V8s, which are 90-degree V-s). The engine is 33.25" wide, which is only 3.25" wider than the 4.6 litre V8s in Mustangs. The engine is 41" long, which is only 3" longer than a 300" straight 6. It fits in pre-97 Ford trucks with only a mild rework of the firewall. Regarding weight, "light" is relative. "Light" equals about 900 lbs ready to go including 24-v starter and 100-lb flywheel, which is not "light" in the way of thinking of most auto enthusiasts. This is why its only practical for trucks, not cars. In 1945, with only 2 2-bbl Stromberg carbs, low output distributors and 80-octane gas it had (according to Ford's dyno sheets) a little less than 1000 lbs of torque @ 1000 rpms, went over 1000 lbs @ 1050 rpm, maintained over 1000 lbs throughout the rpm range to 2800 rpms, where it dropped to 975 lbs torque. Now I've got 3 Demon 4-bbls, 89 octane ethanol and dual MSD distributors. The army governed the engine at 2800. However many tank crews disconnected the governor and its reported to have gone up to 3800 rpms. The limiting factor is the valve springs, which have only an outer and a damper, and are relatively light. I've been told by those using the engine in tractor pulling that they can get 48-5200 rpms with stiffer springs. The pistons are 2280 grams and the rods are another 2800 grams, total of 5000+ grams per cylinder reciprocating weight. So it ain't gonna rev too much higher than that. So what the engine is, is a truck engine. When the stoplight turns green and you goose the throttle you've immediately got enough torque to rip the living guts out of just about anybody's transmission and drivetrain if you're not careful. Which is the whole purpose of hot rodding, isn't it?

TO: Admiral Turbo, Mo52Merc
 

If you will send your e-mail address to me at: bobsaok@yahoo.com I will e-mail you back some pics of my #1 engine. Its definitely not what the GAA looked like back in '45, but its what it looks like now. Also, some time ago I visited with a man in the LasVegas area that ran a GAA in a 30' offshore racing boat. He used one engine to run two outdrives, a stock GAA except for (3) 750 Holleys and two VW electronic distributors, and was able to keep up with boats running two big block Chevys that had been leaned on pretty hard. He never dyno'd his engine, but if you think about how much power it would take to keep up with a race boat with two Chevy big blocks, his GAA was definitely getting with the program.

This from http://www.enginehistory.org/featured_engines.htm

Ford Motor Company thought it would be easier to produce an aircraft engine of its own design than to license-build the Rolls-Royce Merlin. A revolutionary and innovative 60° V-12 was designed and built, but before it could be fully developed, the US became involved in World War II. Ford removed four of the cylinders, resulting in a 60° V-8 for tank use that developed 450 hp @ 2,600 rpm. Several variants were produced.

The Ford GAA was used in the M4A3 (1,690), M4A3(75)W (3,071), M4A3(76)W (1,400), M4A3 (105) (500), M4A3E5 (254), M4A3(76)W (3,142), M4A3(105) HVSS (2,539), M10A1 (1,413), and M7B1 (826).

The Ford GAF powered the M26 (2,222), M26A1, and M45 (185).

The Ford GAN, powered the T23 (248) and M4A3E5 (254).

In order to meet the need for a larger engine, Ford resurrected the V-12 as the GAC, which produced 770 hp and powered the T29 (6).




I'd love to see one of the 6 GAC V-12s.

Ford GAA
 

Actually, there were 10 GACs built and installed in tanks. There were 6 M29 prototype tanks and 4 M32 prototype tanks. One was an up-armored version of a Pershing tank, and the other was a standard Pershing tank with a more powerful engine, because the V8 just didn't have enough power for the Pershing, which weighed 10+ tons more than a Sherman. So there were 10 prototype tanks with the 12. There's no record of how many spare 12-cyl engines were built. I know of two military parts wholesalers who have NOS carburetors for the 12s, so apparently there were some spares made. The Army overhaul manual for the GAA has a copy of the Ford dyno sheet, and it shows 500 hp @ 2600 rpm and 525 hp @ 2800 rpm. The overhaul manual instructs the depots to reject any rebuilt engines which do not dyno out to 475 hp.

I did talk to the military equipment collector who at one time had GAC engine #001. He had it on display with his collection. However, a fellow collector had one of the tank prototypes with the V-12, grenaded it, and prevailed on this collector to sell it to him for retrofit into his tank. I recently made a few inquiries with people who restore tanks to see if they knew of any of the GACs floating around, but nothing came of the inquiries.

In looking at the GAA cylinder heads, you can see the heritage of Ford's policy of putting severe doglegs in the exhaust. There would be a substantial power increase with raised ports. The intakes, as well, could have been much better designed. For no particular reason Ford elected to put one carburetor at each far end of the engine. Then they enclosed the intake passageways in the form of a cast-in, integral manifold. To minimize separation of the air and fuel particles, they used exhaust heat under the carbs, and cast in the hot water returns on top of the intake passageways. Despite this, the end cylinders ran very rich and the center cylinders ran lean. Nearly all used heads that I've seen have heavy carbonization in the end cylinders and valves, etc. The plugs that were used were inadequate, and often fouled. The plugs themselves were recessed in little preignition chambers which further restricted the weak spark. I'm told that each tank carried 100 spare plugs for when fouling occured. In my engine, as in all other modified engines that I've seen, the intakes are entirely revised to a contemporary design, opening the air passageways in the middle of the engine, plugging the ends, and putting the carbs (or blowers) right in the middle where they belong. It is my firm belief that there is 150 hp or more in just revising the intake side of the engine. I also think there is 50-100 hp in the ignition system, using MSDs with 6AL controllers. Opening up the precombustion area and using 14mm x .750 reach plugs now puts the spark right where it needs to be. You have to see the before and after to see where the HP improvement numbers come from. I think I'm realistic in projecting 250+ HP to be gained in updating to a modern standard, including using 89 octane ethanol instead of the 80 octane rotgut available in 1945. Far future plans include building a #2 engine with dual 460 throttle body EFI, (2) 30 or 36-lb injectors per cylinder and a Ford EEC-IV controller.

That will be an interesting projet, witha 460 FI and EEC-IV on board.

534 Head Bolt torque specs
 

Hi all, new here.

Changing the head gasket on our 1978 Ford grain truck with a 534. The head gasket was cracked from the front water jacket to the front of the head/block. Does anyone know the head bolt torque specs and the recommended valve lash on the 401/477/534 super duty engines?

Thanks!

366 and 427 Chev's were "tall deck" engines. The cylinder block was o.400 inches taller than the 9.8" LT and car big blocks. The tall deck was 10.2 inches. The 427 tall was a good engine and made a lot of power. The 366 was very powerful, but only hit about 4000 RPM. It can just sit at that all day.

FT and SuperDuty warrenty...
 

I worked for Duthler Ford (car and truck), in Grand Rapids MI, from 1969 to 1976. We bought new (FT) 391 and 534's from the local Cat. dealer, and delivered them to (mostly) West Michigan county road "commissions". They were probably (mostly) replacements for dump trucks, and came with a 100,000 mile warrenty from Ford.

They were industrial versions, on skids, and complete with bellhousing and double disc clutches (on the 534 for sure).

For some reason, we could buy them cheaper from the Cat. dealer than directly from Ford (probably a volume purchase thing).

Gee, somebody seems to have forgotten the Continental built (I think, but it may have been IHC) RD602 602ci inline 6. We had them in our M54 trucks (Truck, Cargo, 5Ton, 6X6 was the official nomenclature) They had a Holley 885JJSG 2 barrel that gave us roughly 3 mpg. The wrecker was a Holmes 850 twin boom on an M40 chassis (same chassis, but no bed or box, just the cab) It got 2 mpg empty and 1 mpg towing. I seem to recall the redline was 3500 rpm, but there was a warning label not to exceed 3200 or the clutch could explode. I don't have the HP/Torque ratings handy, but it was a stump puller from what I remember.

Caterpillar offered a series of medium duty diesel v8 engines in the mid 60's. They were the 3000 series. (later 3208) Ford was the first to use these diesel engines (exclusively for a year or more) and were called the 1100 series in the Ford trucks. Some people said that they were a modification of the 534 block, but this was not true . They were designed and built by Caterpillar.They had no sleeves but were of parent bore like the 534 and overall were about the same size as the 534. The earlier models were naturally aspirated, ratings were in the 225 horsepower range.
Later Caterpillar made turbocharged marine versions of these engines with ratings close to 500 horsepower.

royce
 

The Ford GAA was a Ford designed V8 engine. Ford was asked by the US government to manufacture the V12 Rolls Royce Merlin engine, but instead decided to design their own engine. The confusion might be because it was the same 5.4 inch bore as the RR, but was a completely different engine. It is all aluminum with steel sleeves , gear driven dual overhead cam design. 4 valves per cylinder .THe V12 version came first therefore it is a 60 degree engine. It was only built in small numbers ,The V8 version came later known as the GAA engine. It was built in large numbers and powered many US army tanks, The GAA had 1100 cubic inches and developed 500 horsepower.