Hello,
i recently purchased two Ford 429's from a guy who had an old Thunderbird salvage yard. both engines and info i have are as follows:
Engine 1) 1971 Ford 429 4bl. block casting is (best i can see) DIVE 6015 AA, heads are D2VEAA. complete motor which i already broke down and took crank, block, pistons/rods in to the shop for cleaning and check for cracks. this motor turned over freely while complete.
Engine 2) 1969 Ford 429 4bl. block casting is C9VE-B, heads are C8VE-E. complete motor which i am in process of breaking down. its bone dry inside and tight. very obvious difference difference in the rockers and heads themselves.

The plan is engine 1 will get stock rebuild with a little bit of a cam and go into a 78 F150 4x4 4 spd - this is a project truck my son and i are working on. He's 16, so doesnt need anything too crazy lol. He would beg to differ
The plan for engine 2 is still a toss up. contemplating an older mustang but not sure.

its hard to get much information other then most say the D2VEE heads are better off as boat anchors. but if its pretty much going to be stock with the exception of a nice cam, should still be a solid engine for that truck in my book. Any thoughts anyone can share on any of the above would be greatly appreciated. trying to get a better handle on what exactly i have. Thanks for sharing!

Anyone know what the stamping numbers on these rockers are for? 69 429 (C8VE-E heads)

 

Not much but as OEM they would have been 11.3:1 compression ratio which will be hard to feed these days.

Stand by for more....... There are a couple guys here with lots of experience with these.

 

I have a DOVE
I do not think the compression is quite 11.3:1
More like 10.5 or so, I will check one of my books
You will love both motors
Just tell your son to be responsible with the power under his foot
He could die or kill someone else
My grandson wants to go drifting with his ricer
Adding turbos and all that. Had the same conversation with him
Post a few pictures of that engine build
Building 2 427 Chevs now myself for a 68 Camaro I aqquired
Main thing is to have fun and stay safe

 

Ditch the D2VE heads. They are open chamber and prone to pinging (detonation). Ford only used them for the '72 model year. Get yourself a pair of D3s, used from '73-88, and grind out the thermactor bump in the exhaust ports. They'll serve you well for street duty.

Blocks - the '69 block will have a 10.300 (nominal) deck height. Late '71-up use a 10.322 deck height. Just something to be aware of when buying pistons, and figuring compression ratios...

 

I don't know what the "stamping' number is but that style rocker can be a little hard to find. I don't think that they are available through aftermarket sources. Just recently a customer was looking for a few of those for his 1968 460 because some of his original rockers had the little foot where it contacts the valve stem worn quite a bit. I think he found a set off of an old engine and got some good ones. What's interesting is when I looked in my 1970 Ford shop manual they say that the rocker arm ratio is 1.75 but they don't give a part number.

 

Those are rail-type rocker arms. The 'ears' on the valve tip end of the rocker arms keep them aligned on the valve tip and used positive-stop rocker pivot studs with a ball-type pivot, without the need for pushrod guide plates. Earlier Mechanical cam applications used rocker studs with pushrod guideplates, Later non-adjustable rockers used bolt-down rocker fulcrums that indexed into square cuts in the fulcrum boss.

 

The early mechanical cam as well as the hydraulic cam engines with guide plates also used hardened pushrods. The rail rocker style engines didn't have hardened pushrods otherwise the conversion would be a bolt on installation.

 

My one buddy has a '70 Torino GT N-code 429/4spd. Those rail-type arms in the stock positive-stop non-guideplate heads did not like his initial cam swap... That engine now has FMS CJ aluminum heads on it, roller rockers/guideplates...

 

They're are some engines that came with the rail type rocker arms on studs that were adjustable and not the bottle neck non adjustable type but they must not be very common. The 1968 460 heads that I recently worked on for a customer had the non adjustable type and it was a really early engine so who knows. Oddly the engine shown in the Ford shop manual shows the rail type rocker arms on the adjustable type studs.

 

I have the non-adjustable rail-type on the 460 I just went through again.

I much prefer Ford's all around use of non-adjustable stuff; just bolt it down and go!

 

The bolt down stuff is probably more trouble free overall when compared to a system with lock nuts that can wear out or get loose over time.

 

Way more time-friendly too.

I've always likened GM's SB/BB adjustable valve train with hydraulic lifters to their need of starter shims. Are their manufacturing tolerances THAT bad?

 

I guess it really just comes down to the design of the engine and who knows how those decisions are made for production. There are lots of GM engines that pretty much always used non adjustable valvetrain, Buicks used shaft rockers similar to a Chrysler, Pontiac did it sort of like Ford did on the early 385 series with some engines having a non adjustable screw in stud and some adjustable. Olds engine use a setup that's pretty similar to what Ford used on the later Windsor and the Cleveland engines.

When Ford came out with their 90 degree Fairlane V8 in 1962 it used a valvetrain that was remarkably similar to what GM used on the small block Chevy right down to the pressed in studs and ball pivot rockers all guided by a slot in the head. That engine design was in vogue around that time just like having a skirted block is right now.