Ford 400M vs. Chevy 400 - Page 6 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Notices
Ford vs The Competition Technical discussion and comparison ONLY. Trolls will not be tolerated.

Ford 400M vs. Chevy 400

 
  #76  
Old 11-20-2010, 09:40 AM
Hola Man
Hola Man is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 195
Hola Man is starting off with a positive reputation.
Just found my old "Motor" manual (unfortunately a car addition) and in it we have a 76 car Ford 400 rated at 180 hp @ 3800 and 336 tq @ 1800! Remember that's with only a 2 BBL and through a cat boys and girls! The same year 4 bbl Chebby 400 only gave us 175 hp @ 3600 and 305 tq @ 2000! Again, the Chebby had a 4BBL!
Regards, Eric
 
  #77  
Old 11-21-2010, 12:30 PM
Mudsport96's Avatar
Mudsport96
Mudsport96 is online now
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chillicothe
Posts: 1,677
Mudsport96 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
1972 chilton 2bbl for both chevy 170hp @ 3400 [email protected] ford [email protected] [email protected]
 
  #78  
Old 11-21-2010, 12:31 PM
Mudsport96's Avatar
Mudsport96
Mudsport96 is online now
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chillicothe
Posts: 1,677
Mudsport96 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Lol is it bad the newest chilton I have is 1972
 
  #79  
Old 11-22-2010, 06:35 AM
Hola Man
Hola Man is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 195
Hola Man is starting off with a positive reputation.
Yes, it is! People call me a dinosaur but you top me!
It rained here all day Saturday so I used the time to find my truck "Motor" manual but I haven't had time to digest the data, there is just too much of it! If it had rained today too like they said it would, I would have been trapped inside again and I would have got this done. (There are a lot of footnotes to read through.) The 76 400's 180 @ 3800 and 336 @ 1800 still seems to be the high water mark for the 400 Ford. My theory as to why a 76 car 400 Ford beats a 76 truck 400 Ford and even a 72 400 Ford (that had an easier smog standard) is the fact that the cats cured a multitude of ills. They cleaned the exhaust so well that the OEMs were able to stop using some of the other crutches that they had been using. Maybe one of those crutches that Ford dropped was the retarded cam timing. Just a theory though. Trucks had an easier emission standard until 78/79 when they got cats too. In most cases, power of truck engines went down even further at that point so who knows.

How much would a 4BBL have helped the 400 Ford? Well, in 74, the only year the 400 Chevy came as both a 2BBL or a 4BBL, the difference was 30 horses. 150 @ 3200 vs. 180 @ 3800. The 290 torque rating didn't change but the peak went from 2000 RPM to 2400 RPM with the 4BBL The 400 Chevy's 4BBL was rated at 750 CFM, the Ford 400's 2BBL was rated at only 350 CFM, less than Half of the Chevy 4BBL's capacity! It's no wonder that a 2BBL on the Chevy 400 cost it 30 horsepower! I think all of this shows even more evidence of how the 400 Ford, even in stock form, was superior to the 400 Chevy.

I mentioned several posts back that the 400 Ford has won more "Engine Masters" challenges than any other Engine. This year's contest was won by a new generation Hemi, but the Ford 400's record still stands. The new gen Hemi would have to win several more before it can threaten the 400 Ford's record. You'll be able to read more about this year's competition when the magazine hits the news stand in about another month.

One of the other things I found on Sat. was my 02/08 issue of Popular Hotrodding. That year a 400 Chevy won by 4.8 points over the second place finisher, a 400 Ford. The engine's builder, Jon Kaase, had entered the engine as a 404 even though it was really only a 403, just to be on the safe side for when the engine was inspected after the competition. That move cost him 6 precious points of score and cost him and his engine first place that year. Both him and that very same engine came roaring back the following year to win the competition. The 400 Ford is THE MAN!
Regards, Eric
 
  #80  
Old 11-24-2010, 07:51 PM
virgil tatro
virgil tatro is offline
New User
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: montana
Posts: 5
virgil tatro is starting off with a positive reputation.
Originally Posted by kermmydog View Post
One is a big block & the other is small block so what are you comparing? Now if you want to campare a Chevy 400 BB to a 400 M then your comparing apples to apples.
the 400m is not a big block!! its an M block, meaning modified.. its a block all in its own, with cleveland heads and a windsor crank, featuring the same bell housing pattern as the 429/460..
 
  #81  
Old 11-30-2010, 01:20 PM
CRUNKED77FORD's Avatar
CRUNKED77FORD
CRUNKED77FORD is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 120
CRUNKED77FORD is starting off with a positive reputation.
i can attest to 400 fords being exceptional motors if built right i just got a 400 in my 77 swb f100. its got a 4 spd pushing it with 3.55 gears. it was built by my firend its pretty peppy and i raced my my buddy who just bought a 2010 chevy 2wd crew cab with 5.3 an 6spd auto. i have a slippin clutch cause of a rear main leak an i smoked him we did a street start (10mph) an i literally beat him by 2 lengths in an estiamted 1/4 mile (later went back it was .3 tenths but close enough). 400 fords can be awesome. never had a 400 chevy but i can attest for ford. i like this 400 better then the 74 f100 swb i had with a 460 even course its a little more built.
 
  #82  
Old 11-30-2010, 07:20 PM
jimandmandy
jimandmandy is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Running Springs CA
Posts: 5,228
jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.jimandmandy has a great reputation on FTE.
Thats a fair fight. A 6000lb truck with 5.3L against a 3800lb truck with 6.6L in a drag race. Anyway I thought this was about the Chevy 400 SB vs the Ford 400.
 
  #83  
Old 12-01-2010, 02:32 AM
Hola Man
Hola Man is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 195
Hola Man is starting off with a positive reputation.
Those 6 spd autos are a huge advantage themselves. And don't forget his clutch is slipping, that's a huge deal too. Lastly, I'm holding a March 2009 Car and Driver (unlike many magazines, they actually weigh the test vehicles) and their FOUR WHEEL DRIVE 5.3 crew cab Chevy only weighed 5540 pounds! In my May 09 Consumer Reports, (who also actually weigh their test vehicles) they had a 4WD 5.3 crew cab Chevy that came in at 5370. (Probably more sparsely optioned.) We know the 2 wheel drive version is gonna be a good amount less than that. So let's call it 5,000 not 6,000.

Originally Posted by rickpilgrim View Post
As long as we now have both a 400 Ford in a 1977 4x4 F-350 at my shop and the 93 Chevy ex cab 4x4 Dually we can put this to the test.
The Ford is .030 overbore, has a .214/224 @.050 cam, Wieand Intake, Summit headers and distributor with 2 1/2 Dual exhaust with H pipe. C-6 and 4.10ish gears. It smokes the Duals with ease. My former landscaper brought it to me for a complete restofication and will be here 'till spring.
The Chevy is one of our lawn mower tow vehicles, was a diesel, Had Caddy power for the past 2 yrs and fuel expenses dictate smaller engine now. Went to boneyard looking for 425 Caddy but no luck, Had a recent rebuilt sbc 400 4V, runs good for 5 bills so I took it. The plan is a Summit 1103 cam(same .050 duration as Ford), Offy Dual Port Intake, shorty headers, 2 1/2 to 4" y pipe to 4" Mandral bent exhaust and a KMJ distributor. It has a 4L80E trans, 4.10 gears and a TCI trans ECM.
We will test both with the on-ramp mph test, hook the 7500 lb mowing trailer up and re-test and check mpg and post it all here.
What ever happened with this test? Now this is a test I want to see!
Regards, Eric
 
  #84  
Old 12-01-2010, 04:47 AM
Mudsport96's Avatar
Mudsport96
Mudsport96 is online now
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chillicothe
Posts: 1,677
Mudsport96 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
The 6L80e saps power like you wouldn't believe.plus the new gen motors suffer from extensive computer hampering called torque management hence bolt ons don't do anything for off idle power lol. From a ten mph roll I can walk a new 6.0L chevy hd with my 96 blazer with a 4.3weighing 4680 with me and a full tank doesn't mean I make more power just that the 6.0 can't use all its power till 20mph and now its gotta play catch up. Now back to 400 vs 400 lol
 
  #85  
Old 12-01-2010, 08:33 AM
Hola Man
Hola Man is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 195
Hola Man is starting off with a positive reputation.
Still, the advantage given by that 4.04 first gear ratio is nothing to dismiss so easily, especially when you consider that our old C4s and C6s only have a 2.46 to 1 first gear ratio. That's barely better than the 2.36 to 1 second gear ratio in the 6L80e!

There is also no disputing the fact that before the end of the 1/4 mile, that 6.0 will wax that 4.3 Blazer. (I own a 95 Blazer with a CPI 4.3 that has a higher hp and tq rating than the post 95s do so I know of what I speak.)

Now back to 400 vs 400 lol.
Regards, Eric
 
  #86  
Old 12-01-2010, 08:40 AM
CRUNKED77FORD's Avatar
CRUNKED77FORD
CRUNKED77FORD is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 120
CRUNKED77FORD is starting off with a positive reputation.
lol i wasnt tryin to say anything to get off track i was just attesting that the ford 400 can be awesome. i can say a destroked sbc 400 (377) is an awesome engine my friend has one in a 84 longbed. maybe should compare 434 stroker (400 ford) and a stroked/destroked (400 sbc) in another thread.
 
  #87  
Old 12-01-2010, 09:39 PM
Mudsport96's Avatar
Mudsport96
Mudsport96 is online now
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chillicothe
Posts: 1,677
Mudsport96 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by Hola Man View Post
There is also no disputing the fact that before the end of the 1/4 mile, that 6.0 will wax that 4.3 Blazer. (I own a 95 Blazer with a CPI 4.3 that has a higher hp and tq rating than the post 95s do so I know of what I speak.)
Not my 96. 170hp and 243tq at the wheels dynoed. 95s are rated at 190 thru drivetrain loss you will be 145 150ish and lucky to be 210 tq that's here nor there tho.

Back to 6.6v6.6
 
  #88  
Old 12-02-2010, 05:30 AM
Hola Man
Hola Man is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 195
Hola Man is starting off with a positive reputation.
The 95 was rated at 195hp @ 4500 and 260lb @ 3400, the 96 was rated at 190hp @ 4400 and 250lb @ 2800. While the 96 and later 4.3s did benefit from improved heads, Chevy cheaped out and took away the "active" intake manifold which is why the CPI 4.3s perform better. BTW, 195hp translates into 160 at the wheels and 260 translates into 213.2 at the wheels.

170 divided by .82 (for the 18% power loss) = 207.3, not bad, your rig must be modded a bit, right? Your flywheel torque is 296.3, again, not too shabby! But if your rig is a 4WD version it ran no better than a 17 flat in the 1/4 mile stock. Even if you have managed to knock a half second off of that (which would normally take a 50hp gain at the flywheel and you are only at 17 at this point), you still would need another half second on top of that since the slowest 6.0 Chevy trucks are running sub 16 second 1/4 mile E/Ts. Do you have any videos like this one that you can post to substantiate what your Blazer runs? YouTube - Mercedes 400E vs Dodge Dakota R/T @ ACD 5-30-9 (My Benz engine is only a 4.2L BTW.)

NOW back to 6.6 vs. 6.6!
Regards, Eric
 
  #89  
Old 12-04-2010, 03:07 PM
Mudsport96's Avatar
Mudsport96
Mudsport96 is online now
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chillicothe
Posts: 1,677
Mudsport96 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
No track vids yes its got a few mods including a k&n for a 3.8 mustang booger welded to a 3 inch turbo down pipe duct taped to a mtn dew 1 liter adapter hose clamped to the maf, 1 in tb spacer. No cat 3 inch mandrel bent y pipe to axle exhast thru a race bullet muffler and a dyno tune. So mods are redneck at best. No track passes not fun on 32x9.5 bias swampers just a mud toy
 
  #90  
Old 12-05-2010, 04:46 AM
Hola Man
Hola Man is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 195
Hola Man is starting off with a positive reputation.
Sounds fun though!
Regards, Eric
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Ford 400M vs. Chevy 400


Contact Us About Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.