351M/400 vs 429/460 bell housings
 

Are they the same? If not why? I've got 2 in the garage with that bolt pattern. Wanting to put a 4 speed behind my 400. Thanks in advance.

i may be wrong or someone may disagree but i read an article a few years back on another forum on this same subject as and in the end both are exactly the same.

I think you will be alright since you are going with a 400, but in some cases guys have had flywheel clearance problems with 460s and I think 351M bell housings. Some times they work fine and some times they don't, I have always wandered if the 351M and 400 bell housings are identical or if they are a little different. They do uses different clutch sizes and possibly flywheels.
-John

They are the same the 351 m/ 400 are the same as the 429/460, i have used them in swapping engines and transmissions

I agree Too.
My '65 F250 has a '76 460 with a '78 351m bell Housing.
That don't sound so good.

the 351M/400 was designed specifically to be a small block to replace the 429/460 in heavy applications and utilize the heavy trannies and drivetrain used by them.

When I swapped my 400 for a 460 I was told by a local truck puller that I would need a spacer because the 400 bell was 3/8" shallower. I had never heard of that and thought he might be misremembering, but he was dead on. My 400 bell would not clear the 460 clutch package. Laying flat on a table, side by side, the 460 bell was 3/8" taller.

-Jared

Rod bender as far as I know any 460 bellhousing was setup for the hydraulic clutch, so if you have one for a mechanical setup it would have come on a 351m or 400.

When I bought my truck it had a 351m with 4x4 4 speed. I swapped in a 460 and used the same manual transmission bellhousing from one engine to the next with no issues. It went together like factory. I have heard people mention a spacer plate as well and I cannot figure out why that would be nesessary and wouldn't that pull the input shaft out of the pilot bearing if you did that?

Actually the 335 series engines were designed to replace the aging FE engines, the first to arrive were actually designed to be light weight high performance engines. The 351C and you could half way throw the Boss 302 in there too.

johnboy, i understand you thinkin about it replacin the FE blocks, and that it did, but it was made to replace the 385 series in lighter applications, but still use the heavy drivetrain. hence the housin pattern.

The bell housing pattern was done just to simplify things, like killing off the 352 in favor of the 360 one less part number and blue prints for the blocks. The Cleveland was the first incarnation of this engine family and it shared bell housings with a 302. This engine was out for 7 years before it found its way into any truck. I can't think of a single time where a 335 phased out a 385 but there are very many instances where it phased out the FE.
-John

I understood that there was 2 different bells in use, and when I told whoever I talking with the casting # on mine I was told it was the deeper one and would not need a spacer to use on a 460. Another guy a few miles from here dong the same thing, ( I don't know the cast# on his bell) he had to have a spacer made this was a few years ago. thats about all I know about them.. or think I know

when i installed my 460 in my 78 f250 with a np435 i used a 360/390 flywheel ( not sure which ) a 360 clutch and pressure plate. had the pilot bearing machined to fit deeper into the crank and purchased alt, ps brackets and headers from l&l. no need for a thicker shield between the motor and the bell housing.

Why did you need to have the pilot bearing installed deeper into the crank? I hope my input shaft isn't keeping pressure against my crank.