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.
i heard a 400 was a crappy motor because they are bad about blowing up. Is this true? if so, then why? im thinking of buying a 69 with a 400 and a c-6 but i need to know a little about it first.
Everyone has their own series of engines that they favor more than the other. Take jowilker and stockman around here they are all for the FE series engines, and Im kinda partial to a few out of every series so it depends on the person. A 400 is not really a "bad" engine as you put it. These engines can be made into a fire breathing bad ##### motor if you want but few people choose to do it because of the availability of parts is kinda low. They make great torque because of their long stroke and seem to last a long time from what I have seen. One downfall of them is the oiling process in them. The cam for some reason got fed much more oil than it needed and therefore kinda starved the mains which may be why you heard they are bad. Thats my opinion on it.
I had a 400 in my 79 4wd.It had alot of miles on it and ran very good.One day on the way to work it broke a wrist pin and sent the rod thru the block.I have heard from others not to rebuild the upper end [cam,lifters ,timing chain] only because the bottom end will chunk a bearing.
I was reading an artical on a web site about the 400 becouse I am going to rebuild one for my truck. Here is the web site: www.projectbronco.com
Has some good ideas and is a work in progress.
I have had a couple of 400s. It would not be my first choice to use for building a hot rod because of high performance parts availability, but for a daily driver it is a good, strong, long lasting engine. Be sure that the "C6" is really a "C6". A lot of 400s came with "FMX" (cast iron case) transmissions behind them.
Never "blew up" one, did spin a rod (my fault, rod cap on backwards), and the original was on 7 cylinders, the pushrods got twisted upo and fell out of the # 7 cylinder, but i towed a full size chevy about 70 miles like that WOT in 2nd gear on the freeway. It had no oil pressure, but it never stopped going.
And now I just picked up a F250 with a strong stock 400 in it.
All,
If we are talking about the 400M I do not believe that motor is original in a 69 is it?
The 400 m is a stroked 351M which is a kissing cousin to the 351C. These motor have racing blood in them and I've seen them win endurance races at the track. Stock! I am a strong believer in modifying factory product to perform to my standards and this is the motor I would choose. I've got alot of experience at doing it and cannot guarantee you'll get what you want. But good luck if you do choose that route.
My Way is the Highway
KingFisher
I bought a 78' 150 from a rancher. Got it running good. Oil pressure dropped to nothing after she heated up. Was told probally worn mains. Had a rear main leak to boot. Upon replacing the rear main seal. checked main bearings to find them worn out. Even though I was told " It won't last by just replacing the mains." I've gotten 5,000 out of her since and she still hold a constant 30-35 psi at idle. Sweet motor.
Both of them hold the M-block designation because the 400 and 351M share a common block. the reason for the M is to keep it seperate from the Windsors and Clevelands. the M-blocks were first developed in the early 70's
KF, they are very good engines but they were hurt a lot by emissions regulations that came on in the late 70's which is why stock they were looked over as possible high preformance options. When actually comparing a 72 400 with a 460, then the numbers are closer than you would think, a 460 with a 4v carb was at a 8.5:1 compression ratio in 72. a 400 with a 2v carb had an 8.4:1 compression ratio. Also keep in mind that the 400 has the longest stroke of any Ford V-8 which produces a massive amount of torque.