Ford FE 427 SOHC Bolt Comes Loose @ 10K RPM - Ottodyn

[powerviking]

This is another reminder why I use ARP fasteners EVERYWHERE!

[TheHanndave]

Quite appropriate.."cerebral damage"

You're comparing a racing engine to production engines....lets compare racing engine to racing engine,based on hp per litre...like what you say.

Honda F1,various engines,all NA:

1963: 1.5 l and 230 hp=150 hp/litre

1966: 3l and 360 hp= 120 hp/litre and aircooled

1967: 3l and 430 hp= 143 hp/litre

And now you're back tracking by making excuses for the sohc not revving high enough.

Admit ti,there are other engines out there that do as well or better

[cerebraldamage]

@TheHanndave So now you attack my user name because you've run out of logic...where have I seen this kinda tactic before. Maybe it's in the rice Forums or in the political chats, I'm a Racist too? LOL

How cute you posted number of a few F1 engine

Never realized that Honda made does engines for the public to buy.. ohhh wait they didn't

Sounds to me like someone is grasping for straws.

What's funnier still is none of those has made 600hp...LOL

[jamesandrewjohnson]

Also, the ARP stud and bolt strengthened engine combined with the MLS gaskets, billet steel wrist pins, and forged aluminum pistons should be able to easily handle all that power, at least if it's not abused. And I know junk yard 429/460 engines can last because my dad's car has a 429 in it pulled straight from a junker without being rebuilt in the late 1980s, and it still runs and has a few thousand miles on it.

[bmays002]

Its not easy to make this much power N/A. If we want to talk budget i can throw a turbo on a junkyard 460 and make 1000hp for $2000. It will last longer then a 900hp 4g63.

[jamesandrewjohnson]

@bmays002 Good point. Of course you can't expect it to be the easiest thing to make 1,000 hp out of any engine that you'll pull from a junkyard, but it's always cheaper to build a powerful Ford than a Honda. Also, the 460 is perfect for turbos, because they have plenty of meat in the walls to handle pressure and it only has around 8.5 factory compression.

[jamesandrewjohnson]

@bmays002 And for around $4,000, you can actually make a relatively easy 1,000 hp Ford 460. For $4,229 you can get a set of ARP cylinder head studs, ARP main cap studs, ARP connecting rod bolts, forged aluminum pistons, billet 4340 wrist pins, Cometic multi layer steel gaskets, and a Garrett GT45R turbocharger. Everything but the turbo comes from Summit Racing. Also, that turbo is designed for 700-1100 hp in 2.0L-8.0L engines. The 460 being a 7.5L, it should be able to get 1,000 hp out of that.

[bigorangetrucker]

the factory non boss shortblocks are good to about 550-600 hp so I'm told. you would never make it to 1000 hp on a factory rotating assembly without major part failure.

[thing503]

@ztkRaptoR not true at all. Pistons are the same compression and bore as the pushrod 427 motors. So buying bigger pistons and new rods wouldn't cost nearly as much as you were saying. Having it professionally done between the machine work which would really only cost a couple hundred bucks at the most, new pistons and rods, rings, all of that would cost around 3 grand at the most. A lot of that money going towards labor costs.

[thing503]

@ztkRaptoR Why do you say "this motor" It wouldn't cost any more to bore that particular block over another.

[thing503]

@ztkRaptoR haha, so. It is actually relatively cheap to overbore a motor if you compare the cost to other modifications. And big deal, if the guy says it has that much power then why not believe him? The motor OBVIOUSLY has major modifications.

[thing503]

@ztkRaptoR and I found an example for you. 900hp

watch?v=3le-x4olvw4&NR=1

[thing503]

@ztkRaptoR But the problem is, you aren't going to find a rice burner that didn't undergo MAJOR modifications to get that much power. This is a bone stock motor. I think that you could EASILY get 800 to 900 horsepower naturally aspirated from one of these.

[thing503]

@thing503 Well, it's obviously going to take lots of money. It takes lots of money just to get your hands on one of these motors alone. But it definitely wouldn't take lots of parts to achieve this.

[jamesandrewjohnson]

Also, with .395" more stroke than a 2JZ pushing 10,000 rpm out of a 46 year old engine before a bolt comes loose is one big OHC win on Ford's part, not a fail.

[thing503]

@jamesandrewjohnson definitely haha. 10K RPM's is damn impressive for a heavy counterweighted motor made in the 60's lol.

[mrfarmerjimbob]

This was a racing engine which never appeared in a PRODUCTION Ford car from the factory. They were used in certain classes (non-stock) and were very successful, but could not consistently beat the Mopar Hemis, which is the reason Ford pulled the plug. Too bad they never offered them as an option in the Galaxie or Fairlane.

[Race62hud]

@mrfarmerjimbob Wrong, they built this engine for NASCAR, GM complained so much that NASCAR outlawed OHC engines. 8-1967 fairlane fastbacks ( can you say Torino) were factory built with this engine and all the cars were scrapped as soon as Ford lost the Engine battle. They didnt last as they were so much better that all the Race orgs were banning them. The Hemi which is just as cool lasted becasue it used a singel cam is all. Pontiac also created a OHC v-8 for nascar but canned it.

[Samsgarden]

No 60's/early 70's muscle car engines made anywhere near what people claim, besides, it was all done in NET without accessories.

[MrRonnieG]

I lived @ SoCal dragstrips fromj 1964 until 1969 (got drafted/Vietnam) and can well remember the "cammer" Ford in top fuel & funny car. I was @ the 1967 Winternationals when Connie Kalitta won Top Fuel with the 427 SOHC Ford motor. I also remember they had some major issues with the timing chains in those early years. The late Pete Robinson designed a gear drive (the front of the motor looked like a the guys of a pocket watch) which helped the problem.

[Ottodyn]

@MrRonnieG Very cool story. Thanks for your comment, interesting information.

[DoveManufacturing]

Minor problem compared to a rod bolt coming loose at 10K rpm and who said the big block Ford could not REV!

[Ottodyn]

@DoveManufacturing Yes, if this happens in a complete running engine, you got big trouble!

[9b8]

@Ottodyn Yeah, as in about $30K+ kinda trouble, LOL.

[chabbalato]

push rod fail

[halohadel]

@chabbalato you are a retard. SOHC (SINGLE OVER HEAD CAM)

NO PUSHRODS

Yea ford had that in the 60's so stuff that up your honda's tail pipe

[thing503]

@halohadel just because an engine is an overhead cam design it doesn't mean it can't be a pushrod engine. I'm not saying this one is but it's true. The old chevy indycar engines were overhead cam engines and they had pushrods.

[halohadel]

@thing503 that is probably the only example of an OHC engine having pushrods...just saying

[malcolm1414]

@chabbalato theres no push rods its a sohc dumb 

[chabbalato]

@malcolm1414 yeah, i caught that after the first guy pointed out SOHC in the title.

Let me rephrase my original contention: "American attempt at OHC fail"

[cerebraldamage]

@chabbalato This engine was produced in the 60's and made 616 BHP @ 7,000 RPM it took Toyota 10 years to develop a functional OHC engine (1970's) and it only made 70 BHP up to this date NO Japanese engine has made that kind of power in a Naturally Aspirated form. So your comment= FAIL since you lack any knowledge in regards to engine history. BTW FFWD to 2011 and Ford still develops one of the best DOCH engine out that's out there.

[chabbalato]

@cerebraldamage IIf you read my last comment, it was about the implementation of the OHC, but ok yeah, 600hp ... it only takes 7 liters of displacement, no biggie...........

[cerebraldamage]

@chabbalato No biggie? You do realize that's 616bhp is 725hp at the crank / by 6.99 liters is 103hp per liter or 1.6 hp per cubic inch with out direct injection or Variable Cam timing. I don't think you realize that this engine is over 40years old and that other manufactures still haven't been able to produce that kind of power naturally aspired.

[chabbalato]

@cerebraldamage I don't realise that 616 brake HP = 725@crank. BHP is at the crank (non-SAE no less). If was WHP, it's a different story. It was a non-production highly tuned cammer, comparing to production engines is unfair. Even still, production Rotarys and the likes of Honda F20C have it beat f hp/L AND meet emissions. "Ford"s Duratec 4cylinders are 100% Mazda designs. Not co-developed, ALL JAPANESE. The V6 isnt bad. Coyote isnt bad either. I'm not tryina take anything away from you.

[MrBignate420]

@chabbalato ford was always balls deep in innovating big blocks. more than anyone . period.

[chabbalato]

@MrBignate420 I'll give you that... since GM ripped them off for their LS series !

[drewnashty]

@cerebraldamage Not bashing but, the original Z/28 was only 4.9/5.0 liters (2 liters less than then a 427) and could put out close to 450-500 hp at the flywheel under NHRA Stock class rules. It's not as extreme as the Cammer but still close and respectable while not having the SOHC tech. A more radical cam and better flowing heads has been proven to yield even more power but most owners stick with their matching numbers and hold their records in NHRA Stock class. I agree with you though.

[pocketfiend36]

@cerebraldamage Bhp is at the crank. Wheel horsepower is on the dyno. Also back in the 60's and 70's there were no rules for getting engine specs. Most companies at that time removed A/C compressor, alternator and things like that. Im sure this motor never made more than 450 at the wheels of any vehicle.

[chainsawboy1996]

@cerebraldamage not ganna disaggree that this is bad ass and id problly sell my left nut for this but bmw made 100hp per liter in the e36 m3 but that was 25 years later. only if ford knew how to make a dohc head in the 60's

[baier413]

@chainsawboy1996 actually ford did create a dohc in 1963 which was the older brother to this. It was made for their indy racing. It was a 255 cubic inch v8 so about 4.1 liters would be correct and made 425 horse with carbs and 450 horse with fuel injection and the kicker is that the engine complete from carb to pan weighed less then 300 pounds, not bad huh? so their is your 100 horse per liter 45 years ago. only 8 were produced and ran but i cant find the results on how they did.

[jamesandrewjohnson]

Ford made a DOHC long before 1963. They made one in 1942. A 1,100 cubic inch V8 with DOHC, hemi heads, 4 valves per cylinder, centrally located spark plug, aluminum block and heads, dual distributors, and produced 1,050 lb ft of torque at its regulated rpm with only 7.5:1 compression. It was used in the Sherman tank in WWII, and was doubtlessly far more advanced than what Japan and Germany had at the time. Shove those 1,100 CI's of aluminum DOHC 32V Hemi up your Honda's tailpipe, chabbalato.

[baier413]

@jamesandrewjohnson thank you for that bit of history i never new that. Ii also made in error not 300 pounds but 400 pounds.

[jamesandrewjohnson]

@baier413 Yeah, sure thing. The 1,100 V8 (called a GAA engine, for reference) only made 29 hp per liter, although it was regulated to 2,800 rpm being a tank engine. But on 7.5:1 compression and small two barrel carbs with 1942 era fuel, 1,050 lb ft isn't too bad. And with all stock components with the addition of 4 inch turbos, they've made over 2,000 hp, which is just over 111 hp per liter, and 250 hp per cylinder. But the 427 SOHC is still my favorite of Ford's OHCs.

[Race62hud]

@jamesandrewjohnson not quite, German/Italian engineers were the inventors oof overhead cams, hemi's center locasted and multi plug heads and fuel injections. The DKW diesel that powered the Tiger II was a v-12 making 850BHP at the crank. The Sherman tank never used this Ford, the Patton was the first and only vehicle powered by it . But to the end You bet Honda can blow it out of their tailpipe, I have two of these puppies in my garage, one still in the factory crate. Ha to you all.

[jamesandrewjohnson]

@Race62hud Thanks for the reply, but all the sources I'm finding say they were used in the M4A3 Sherman tank. For some reason I can't post links in my comment, but I found tons of sites saying this when I searched "ford gaa tank engine" on Yahoo. I don't know first hand, but that's one awesome engine either way.

[Ottodyn]

@cerebraldamage Thanks for your comment.

[xblackxbulllittx]

@cerebraldamage couldnt have been explained any better for all you tools that are like ddiirrr this aint no ricer

[TheHanndave]

@cerebraldamage

427 sohc was a racing engine....

PRODUCTION Honda Sportscars:S500=45 hp,S600 = 58hp with the S800 putting out 70 hp with warranties...

Honda S2000 = 120 hp/litre

Mazda 1200 cc rotaries putting out 130hp in '71 on a PRODUCTION engine..

Compare race engines to race engines:Datsun 240z racers of 1971,2.4l and 300 hp etc etc etc

BTW Toyota had OHC in '65 and DOHC in '67

As you said: "So your comment= FAIL since you lack any knowledge in regards to engine history."

Indeed

[cerebraldamage]

@TheHanndave I take it that reading comprehension skills fails you. None of those engines that you listed make close to 600hp. Thank you for listing a Honda engine that was manufactured 40 yrs later with VVT I'm sure that's a fair comparison, not! Mazda is still not pushing 600hp NA try again. Did you really think a deck out @ full tilt 427 makes peak power @7k RPMs look at the video gain, if you didn't get it that's a 3k rpm difference, so yeah it makes more power.

[TheHanndave]

@cerebraldamage

Quote from yourself: "by 6.99 liters is 103hp per liter "

So now that i pointed out your errors you change from 100 hp per litre to total hp???

The 46 YO Hondas I mentioned are,well,46 years old and do not have VVT...yet were very close to 100hp/litre.

Quoting yourself once again..."I take it that reading comprehension skills fails you."

Face it-you're wrong and any more back tracking just makes you look bad

[cerebraldamage]

@TheHanndave Pointed out my error how laughable, let's try this gain slow child. Close but no cigars.. Comparing your 100hp to the crank engine to one that makes and is well capable of producing 700 Rwhp does not equals the same and if you think it does, then you got some issues.

If you had half a brain you would of understood how my comment came about in regards to ricer math you seem to love.

[TheHanndave]

@cerebraldamage

BTW some more racing engines:

Porsche,aircooled LeMans cars built to run for 24 hours.

Try that in the 427 SOHC:

1967 908 3l and 350 hp=116 hp/l

1968 4.5l and 520 hp=same

1970 917 4.9l and 600hp=123 hp/l

Lemans Ferraris were pushing 125 to 130 hp a litre for 24 hours....

[cerebraldamage]

@TheHanndave So now it's the world against a lonely Ford V8...LOL

That's great that you found some exotic low displacement V12 reserved for Le-mans to compete, but I bet you the power under curve on that V8 is much greater..Now you're seriously boring me..

[BoogWar01]

@TheHanndave Not withstanding the Wankel, Ford made a 255 inch, quad cam four valve motor popularly known as the Ford Indy V8. Out of the box it made 365 hp and was fuel injected. Granted, that was 'only' 87 hp / litre, but it was certainly cutting edge at the time. What made the 427 SOHC so trouble prone was the actual size of the components used and the aluminium block construction was not strong enough to prevent wave oscillations being set up / transfered to other engine components.

[spikejnz]

@cerebraldamage You mean OTHER than the Honda F20C used in the S2000 which makes 118.5 HP/Liter? I'm not saying that the 427 wasn't a beast; far from it. However, to make an absolute statement that "NO Japanese engine has made that kind of power in a Naturally Aspirated form" is rather foolish. Yes, I may drive a Honda ATM, I'm far from a fanboi. I've owned everything from turbo Saabs, to a '79 Firebird Formula with a built 350, to a MK3 Supra Turbo. 118.5 HP/Liter is damn impressive from a N/A.

[cerebraldamage]

@spikejnz If you read the other comments you would have realized that I was talking about total output. Well show me some 500,600,700, or 800RWHP Naturally Aspired Japanese engines? There's none!!

Don Bowles Mustang makes 800RWHP with a 7L Modular engine.There's a 5L already making 500+rwhp.

I wont say that I'm not impress with the Honda's hp/L but when it comes to total hp output it isn't that great compared to how much more a V8 can achieve.

240crank hp vs 500RWHP Get the picture?

[TommyRocker919]

wow, thats an amazing view. Its crazy seeing how much activity there is at those speeds. the valve spring bouncing like that....cool

[jamesmeeks1]

ah i bet that wasnt cheap

[metsu962]

Thanks for upload! Awesome video