When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Hey gents, I've got a 400 with 2 barrel carb/intake/heads.
i was thinking that about putting 351c 4 barrel carb/intake/heads on it would it be compatible ? Would I run into any issues ? If so what would they be ? Would I gainany hp ? Cr ?
Last edited by Mechanicman101; 11-24-2018 at 09:42 PM.
Reason: Additional information
As stated you will have to use adaptor plates and a 351C manifold. The 400 manifold won't cover those big ports on a Cleveland. The best dual plane manifold for a Cleveland is the Blue Thunder if you can find one and afford it. I don't know about the 400 since it used different engine mounts than a Cleveland but the stock cast 4V exhaust manifolds won't work in a truck with a 351C. Sanderson is the only company that I'm aware of that makes a header for the 4V heads in a truck and they are also for a 351C and they are shorty's. If you want long tubes you will have to build your own, as far as I know. This is a picture of the headers in my truck I had to build them myself and have them coated. All the parts and pieces plus the coating was about $500. Plus a weeks work on my part.
Yes it is. But since the engines are offset to the passenger side and there is an engine perch directly below #1 cyl. that was the best option. It enabled me to get that 1 7/8 tube through there and still be able to remove the starter without having to remove the header and it kept the tubes far enough away from the starter so as to not cook it. There was even more to it on that side. In order to keep all the exhaust above the bottom of the frame rails the center crossmember had to be notched and a heat shield added to protect the servo on the transmission. The drivers side is easy, plenty of room over there.
Had a 72 LTD, a early year with the 9 to 1cr. 400. That thing was a monster. Could fit 8 of us teenagers in the car and another 3-4 in the trunk, if sneaking them into the drive thru movie theatre. Got that car from my grandad when I was 17 and delivered pizza's with it. Lots of customers felt sorry for me and gave me extra tips for gas. It got around 10mpg, but it strait got it on for such a large boat. Stick the throttle too the floor, it would hit passing gear and start pulling. Drove that thing faster then it probably ever been driven by my grandad. Speeding on the highway, it would feel like you where just floating along. But yeah, I agree with Baddad, the 1971 400's where a totally different animal than the later years.
Also the pinging that was acerbated with flat tops was because of the lack of squish/quench due to the large deck height clearance . Stock pistons and pretty much any piston other than the ones from TMI, sit somewhere around .060 down in the hole. Add another .040 for the head gasket and your at .100 deck clearance, way to much!
Finally, as early and late model heads are different, so are early and late blocks. Got this block out of a 71 Ltd wagon or some thing like that. Look at the markings in the lifter galley, I always mused that it meant 400ci, 4v carb, 4V open chamber heads, and the X being experimental, but ford never got past casting the block. Sure would have been nice if they did!
Had a 72 LTD, a early year with the 9 to 1cr. 400. That thing was a monster. Could fit 8 of us teenagers in the car and another 3-4 in the trunk, if sneaking them into the drive thru movie theatre. Got that car from my grandad when I was 17 and delivered pizza's with it. Lots of customers felt sorry for me and gave me extra tips for gas. It got around 10mpg, but it strait got it on for such a large boat. Stick the throttle too the floor, it would hit passing gear and start pulling. Drove that thing faster then it probably ever been driven by my grandad. Speeding on the highway, it would feel like you where just floating along. But yeah, I agree with Baddad, the 1971 400's where a totally different animal than the later years.
Also the pinging that was acerbated with flat tops was because of the lack of squish/quench due to the large deck height clearance . Stock pistons and pretty much any piston other than the ones from TMI, sit somewhere around .060 down in the hole. Add another .040 for the head gasket and your at .100 deck clearance, way to much!
Finally, as early and late model heads are different, so are early and late blocks. Got this block out of a 71 Ltd wagon or some thing like that. Look at the markings in the lifter galley, I always mused that it meant 400ci, 4v carb, 4V open chamber heads, and the X being experimental, but ford never got past casting the block. Sure would have been nice if they did!
You think, but they did make a 400-4V. I saw one sitting in a junkyard's engine storage room in the mid 70's. Only reason I remember it was because of my friend's dad's car with it's 400 2V. We were there looking for something else and I recall seeing that Ford 400-4V aircleaner top on it and telling him that's what he needed in his Dad's car.
I've heard the rumors, but have never seen one. These early block markings make me want to believe it, and If you say you have seen one I will take your word for it.
I've also heard that adding to the 400's woes as far as quench was the placement of the spark plug in the head....it physically was in a bad place to get a complete burn every time. True??
Nope never heard of plug placement being bad. I would say that's BS. Same as saying the open chambers ping more. They don't when the engine is properly built.
11-24-2018, 09:40 PM
