Clouds, it says in the same link that the 290 horsepower then, equals 240 sae net. Who's wrong? Where did you come up with 207.5? Read your own link? Besides that, it wasn't me that's wrong. I just quoted Ford numbers. LOL. It clearly states, that you subtract 17%. To do that, you multiply .17 times 290, and you get 240.7. That is still more then 200.

 

funny how you jump all over other people, but when you are wrong you blame ford or some site....

I'd watch the tone you use to other users

We reserve the right to remove any user or post from our forums for
any reason, with or without prior warning.

 

Funny how it seems you cant read it, it says multiply by .83 and 17% of 250 is 42.5, 250 subtract 42.5 is 207.5.LOL

 

Whatever you say. Below is the copy and pasted paragraph, word for word. I see where it says in parenthesis, "actually subtracting 17%". When you multiply 290 by .17, you get 49.3. Subtract 49.3 from 290, and you have 240.7. It isn't actually worth arguing about, is it? It's the exact same thing as multiplying by .83.

Your engine is rated at 290 HP SAE according to the Mustang black book.
That would be equivalent to 240 DIN or SAE NET HP. The formula used,
(as it was told to me), is that you take your old SAE HP and multiply by
.83 (actually subtracting 17 %). This is based on an "average" loss of
HP used by engine accessories. Old SAE only measured "engine only" HP,
whereas european DIN and the new SAE NET measures HP as the engine would
be in the car, accessories and all. Accordingly, to convert from SAE net
to SAE gross, divide by .83

 

FWIW, the 84-87 5.8L HO(4bbl truck motor) was rated at 215 HP and 305 ft/lbs
And, totally unrelated, and useless, for 86, the 460 was rated at 245 hp, and 385 FT/LB

 

If you're dead set on a swap go for the 460. With either motor you will need a different trans or bell housing.

As far as performance parts for the 360, it's an FE. Same family as the 427 side-oiler found in the Shelby AC Cobras. That engine family has an impressive performance history and there are definitely parts available. The parts may not be listed specifically for the 360 but there is no difference between a 360 and a 390 except crank, rods, and pistons. IOW, if an intake fits a 390 it will fit a 360. Same for cam, headers etc.

You might want to go down to the FE forum and check out some of the performance related threads. If you stay with the same engine family and don't need to swap out the trans, that's more money available for go-fast goodies.

 

There is a saying that i always go by. There is no replacement for displacement. If your going to do it go big. It may take a little more time and parts. But i have never regreted doing it. I am working on putting a 460 into my wifes 79 bronco and a 429 cj into my 79 bronco. I have made most of the brackets and stuff I needed. I.E. plates to mount the motor to my original mounts/post,

 

One thing you guys need to remember is that people still need to be able to actually drive these trucks. with gas prices the way they are here in British Coloumbia it just hit 96.9 cents per litre, a 460 uses way to much gas. But, If you are gonna try a 351 go with the 351M or the 351C, I have seen to many guys try making power with a windsor and have it come back and bite them in the ____, I won't finnish that. Otherwise the 460 with 429 heads and a few other mods will give you tons of power.

 

guess this all boils down to what you want and who to believe

my vote is for the 351 windsor.

also always use more than one resourse for info.

at least 5, and compare.

i know not everyone is right. but the good thing is everyone is trying to help

all have only good dreams

Michael

 

Going back to the original question, it looks like the major problem here was a lack of parts for the 360, leading to the search for 300 HP via the 460 or 351.

IMO, the best, from a cost, ease of doing, likelyhood of it really getting done, easy to live with, is to go down to the FE forums and check out the "360-390-410" posting, for example.

You should be able to build a 390 or 410 much easier--maybe not cheaper--than going for the 460.

 

Hey Stevef100,

I'm really glad you came back with those specs. I was reading, reading, and still reading these listings and was starting to wonder if anyone was going to correct Matt and put him in his place. The Windsor is a great engine and the 69 model was indeed pretty phenominal with the factory 290 horses with a 4V. Thanks again for setting it right. I wish people wouldn't add their input if they don't have an ounce of fact to go along with their opinions. Thanks again.