The manifold spacers are NO trouble. Those bolt on like an intake and then you bolt the intake to the spacers. I run a set and there is no reason anyone shouuld have any difficulty with them unless they try to "improve" them or muck around with milling them, then they may have some sealing problems. But these are an out of the box, bolt on.

BTW, I have pics of a 1969-70 Ford-AU XW Falcon GT that had a 351C with Windsor heads and what looks like a facotry cast iron intake. If I can find them, I'll post them. It was thought the car was a "what-if" by Ford-AU for getting around some of the CAMS racing regs but no one knows for sure.

 

Here we go again

Some of you are dancing all around the question. Dan, the factory "wheezer" windsors are not what I was even remotely thinking of. Although for an OEM street motor for mustangs, they have been immensely successful and have put the mustang in contention with the 50 something chebbys. The gt40's have put the "lightening" truck, on the map. Yes, they arent great breathers out of that context.

There are some great breathing W aftermarket heads. In fact, most of them, particularly the better ones have considerably better flow figures than either 2 or 4 C heads and certainly greatly better balance. I have both sets of C--actually all 3 sets of them, 4/2/400-351M heads. I have also had a set of CJ/SCJ 429 heads on a 460 I built. For that midrange street/performance use that most folks need, bigger "aint" necessarily better! Dont misunderstand me, I would love to have the engine out of a certain old ford truck---, so this is not knocking the CHI's (or Edel's/aussies alum). It is just that I see a great other in-between use for these tall deck clevelands. The bigger CHI's (I have drooled at their website) require an intake that seems to add lots of height to the already tall 400 block. So heres my "what if" senario--.

A set of mid range alum W heads with a dual plane carb intake, adapters w/injector bungs, power elbow for the TB/MAF. I think the W heads would be several hundred $ cheeper than the C styles. Certainly would bring power down, but might also be more useable rpm range for daily drivers.

Also a tremendous amount of aftermarket stuff for W heads---why not try to take advantage. C stuff is also available, but not like the W stuff. The SVO catalogs refer to putting W heads on C blocks, just like they do the reverse, the clevors.

Rowdy78--Windsor heads are not generally thought of as 4 bbl or 2 bbl like the C's are.
73XAFalcon--sure would like to see that picture.

Please dont take this idea of mine as a question/complaint of the C heads or that I think W heads are better. It is simply a possible good alternative (maybe not in terms or raw HP/TQ) for a lightweight semi-replacement for the 385 swaps. I certainly dont want a pizzin contest over "which is better"!!

 

Yes, CHI intakes on a 400 are tall, but since you need spacer plates anyway, why not just use an Edelbrock or Weiand dual plane for a 400, or use a 351C dual plane intake with spacer plates and injector bungs.
There is no reason to go to W heads, unless they are better or a lot cheaper.

 

Sure thats a great possibility, I like that idea as well. Been a few days since I looked at the CHI site, so I may have misunderstood something, give me a hand here. I was thinking that to use the Weiand/edelbrock 400 intakes would be restrictive even for the 2 and 3V versions of the CHI (also the Edelbrock and Aussie 2bbl heads). Their flow potential is beyond those intakes (I think ) Also, the CHI's, all versions, kill a 21 hundred $ bill----absolutely not saying they arent worth it!!. I think most mid range W heads (225 AFR, Brodix, TW R, etc) are around 14-15 hundred $. Also, think of the possibilities of headers that might work for the W heads, even with the extra height.

What I really like is a streetable motor that is 400-500 HP range that only weighs little more than 500# with Alum heads and intake. Windsor heads (alum aftermarket) seem to be considerable cheaper, maybe because of competition.

I again looked at the block in my shed on a stand and it is a D1AE. Didnt see any cracks over the lifter bores, also could not find a foundry casting code--and I used my good eye . I am working on (at least dreaming stage) that 400 with some CHI heads (2v or 3v) for my 70 Mach I.

BTW, do you park that pick-em-up outside at night? Any dogs? Are you a good shot?

 

You can get AFD (http://www.airflowdynamics.com.au) heads in 2V and 4V. The complete 2V are $2100 delivered in the US. These will take a 2V intake so you could pick up Price spacers and add a E-brock Performer RPM.

If you use W heads, you will still need spacer/adaptors and a C intake. So, the only price difference is going to be between what you would pay for a set of AFDs or what you pay for the W heads PLUS modifying the W head water passages PLUS having a set of custom adaptor/spacer plates made (Price doesn't make a W-head-on-400-with-C intake spacer). The custom spacers may completely blow the budget.

 

Pricemotorsports makes and adapter (AP-03C) that is for a 351C block, Windsor heads, and a 302(W) intake. I wonder how close in thickness it would be for a 400 block, 351W heads, and a 351W intake. Maybe just a matter of the right thickness of the adapter. I do like the idea of FI bungs cut into the adapter plate. For that matter, CHI/AFD/Aussie/Edelbrock heads with an adapter for FI bungs sounds good also. Offenhauser used to make an intake that was like a single plane except for a plenum divider running lengthwise that was a fairly low profile----I have absolutely no idea if they were any good though.

I also have a car in mind (a little portly though) that I would sure like to put a 434 in for those who think the only alternative is a 460---again, I am aware that the 400's will not be as powerful. But also not as heavy---or expensive. Try this boat anchor on for size----

 

That adaptor won't come close to fitting. The 302 deck height is 8.2", the 351C is 9.2, 351W is 9.5", and the 400 is 10.297-10.302. So the spacers will still need to be thicker for either the really narrow 302 intake or the much wider but still too small 351 intakes. If you plan to stroke the 400, you are now opening up a whole new can of worms. You will need to pick the proper W head to support that much HP. Most of the inexpensive aftermarket heads do not have the port volume to support the 408+ci W based motors. The average W stroker motor is the 331-347ci mills. Still, I'd wager that a good set of W heads will set you back in the $1200-$1500 range. If you truely want light weight, then just look at a stroker 351W. You can build a 427ci engine from a stock block. It would be much easier to drop into most Fords--I know from experience, the 400 is a bear to put into most cars because there are no motor mounts and you have to fab. You will find that the W heads are only a couple of pounds lighter than the CHI/AFD/E-brock alloys heads so you will not see any significant loss there. If you want to do this "just because", I can unserstand that but if it is for a lighter weight and/or less expensive motor, then you are barking up the wrong tree. The lightest weight, less expensive alternative is a stroker 351W. If you want a 434, kickass 400, then the less expensive alternative is to runn a set of CHI or AFD heads. If you look at my pics, you will see that a Troker intake is pretty low profile, possibly the lowest of all the single plane intake alternatives so you can reduce the height of the combo if you need to.

 

Yep, I understand your points and they are logical to me. I am aware of all the different dech hts of the various blocks. The AP-03C is for a 9.2 C block and an intake for an 8.2 W intake. It addresses the basic issue of Windsor head on Cleveland style block, that is the main issue. I am sure that it wont work in its present form (thickness), but I see it as only a somewhat minor issue of a thicker plate, not one of bolt holes and water jackets, the AP-03C has already resolved those issues. I spoke with PMS a while back--a long while back---and my impression was they might be able to do a plate, I got busy and never did pursue that issue.

Did some "surfing" of AFD and CHI last night looked at pricing---. Their prices are for "Bare" heads, 1 each!! (thats what their material indicates--hopefully I misread). That means $4K-5K for a pair, USD. AFR 225's, Brodec, TFS-R, if you even need that much air come in ~ $2100 to $2700 for a complete pair. Gawd, both AFD & CHI "shore is purdy"

Motor mounts---Have done the stare and compare. The 400 has 3 bosses, for a flat block plate, easily buildable. Adapt a motor mount to the plate, ~2 bolt holes.

W strokers---yes, agree. Except that rod ratio goes down significantly, generally street torque goes down as well (relative to rpm and stroke). Not talking higher rpms on the 434. Yes, if I had any grey matter, would (may) go that route----never said I was smart

Bigger (wider) engine----Yes again. But I said "alternative" to 460 swap. Many people who have put 460's is a 302/V6 slot say that it fits about as well as original---except for weight and length. FE--10.17" 460--10.2-3" 400--10.297". 400 fits anywhere they do.
I wont try to convince anyone, kinda going to have to beat my head against this wall myself! I just dont see a big expensive process. Few problems, but I have been there before. Didnt build my first C6/AOD/E4OD because I was afraid to jump-- TX for input---welcome more, except dont call me stoopid, hear that enough!!

 

CHI 3V 225cc heads are $1550.00 per pair delivered. That is bare, but you should be able to build them up and still be in the same price range as W head. In fact CHI will quote them complete.

 

Tx danlee-- Did I ever misread that one! I was so far off that I need to go back and see where I went wrong. I wonder about their website pricing figures. Sure does paint an entirely different picture of using the CHI's maybe even the AFD's. I still am hung up on trying W heads-----as I said, I my have to beat my own head against that wall! How many times have we ever done the wise thing!! I see a way with adpt plts to go FI with the CHI's---like that. Now if I can just resolve the bellhousing issue for small pattern autos. Either SFI adapter bells or an adapter (again!) plate for the bellhousing.

Time to roll the Mach I out of the garage (practically gutted & on small wheels) and clean it out ----again!

 

73XAFalcon--

I just saw some of your (and other) pics on the other thread. I knew that I was an amateur, but not a "rank amateur". Best I keep my mouth shut and read more! Sure do love those pics with the spacers--. If I could just see a weight on a 400/434 assembled, along with those pictures, I would really have some "gottcha" ammo for the "boat anchor" crowd.

As I fade quitely to the back of the class----

 

All in all, dropping a 400 into a Ford unibody (Mustang, Fairlane, Falcon) is a big job. Nothing is a straight bolt in and you will need to do some minor fab work--like crossmember motor mounts. As for the bellhousing, there are companies that sell 351M/400/385 bellhousings for C4 and AOD trannys but those are expensive! My 400 project isn't cheap and I doubt I could save much more money to build it. If you want to keep the costs down, you either have to run a 351C or a Weezer. Now I'm not saying a 400 is a bank breaker but if you want alloy heads and other eye candy, you will spend more money. Weezer heads on a 400 is a novel idea and would turn heads at cruise night but I really don't think you would save enough weight or money to justify the effort. There are several guys now running alloy headed 434ci motors. These aren't all that heavy and they make gobs of power. These will for sure turn heads on cruise night and shut up the boat anchor crowd.

 

FWIW, you can always shoehorn a C6 behind that 400. That's my most feasible option right now for my 88 tbird.

 

Or find one of those elusive FMX blocks.

 

Hahaha! Good luck with that one! It took me 10 years and then someone else found it and I bought it from him.