PDA

View Full Version : Why no Fords?



cortica37
07-17-2007, 01:16 PM
I was at a large car show at the MN State Fair Grounds a few weeks back and saw lots of small and big block Chevy and a few Hemi engine conversions in a variety of cars. What I noticed was the complete absence of any Ford engines used in conversions. Why are Ford engines not more popular for swaps?

skyway
07-17-2007, 01:34 PM
Because they need to be fixed or repaired daily?

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Dan White
07-17-2007, 01:39 PM
Parts are not as cheap and plentiful at SBC. The same could be asked for any number of other relatively high volume V8s, Pontiac, Buick, Mopar, etc. Take a look at A Summit or Jegs catalog sometime.

Dan White
64 R1 GT
64 R2 GT

Dick Steinkamp
07-17-2007, 01:43 PM
The small block Fords (289, 302, 351 W) are dimensionally bigger than a small block Chevy making swaps tougher. Virtually all have a front sump oil pan which makes transplanting into most cars impossible at worst and a nightmare at best. Rebuilds are less expensive on a small block Chevy. Crate motors (factory) are far cheaper for the Chevy. Speed parts are more plentiful and cheaper for the Chevy.

If your goal is big HP, a big block Chevy will get you there faster and cheaper than a big Ford. Most of the big Fords (FE motors) are dated technology and expensive.

If you want something special (Hemi, nail head Buick, Rocket Olds, flathead Ford V8, Studebaker [8D]) you pay a pretty hefty price for the "cool factor" for both the power, transmission, and adapting it to the body and chassis.

http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

Swifster
07-17-2007, 02:04 PM
Everyone with a hot rod is looking for a combination of cool and cost. A lot more nailhead Buicks and older Rocket Olds engines are finding their way into more 'traditional' builds. SBC, Hemi engines, Ford flatheads and early Cadillac OHV engines see a lot more use.

I'm more of a '50's and '60's type car person, but one day it would be cool to have an older hot rod. I'd really like an old truck :D from '30-'35.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Valrico, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/1965_Studebaker_Commander_front198x.jpg

cortica37
07-17-2007, 03:43 PM
Ah, the larger size (and therefore weight?) along with the sump location are the probable killers. I remember back in the 50's and 60's that swapping was not very common. Occasionally I would see an OHV Cad or Olds conversion and once and a while a big six GMC with a Fisher head in a Chevy, but in most cases the cars original stovebolts and flatheads were souped-up. Life was simpler then.

Mike Van Veghten
07-17-2007, 05:58 PM
cortica37 wrote -

quote:I remember back in the 50's and 60's that swapping was not very common.

Say what...?

Since time began...engine swaps have been popular. Here in So. Cal., you never knew what was gonna be under the hood. In the mid-60's there were two 56 Chevys with Hemis in them...at school!! And I went to a small high school.
In Collage, I had two friends that had the Crown kitted Corvairs, one with a big block Chevy and one with a small block Chevy.

Around town...as is today (as noted...) little Chevys were in everything small (Vegas, Corvairs, Aston Healys, etc.) and later, big Chevys were in bigger cars...you even saw 60's Ford engines in 60's Chevys. Bigger in place of smaller..every swap you could think of.

In pre smog cars...it'll never change...and so it shouldn't!

Mike

theGman
07-17-2007, 06:28 PM
Chevy parts are cheap. That's why some even put Chevy engines into old Fords. I personally would never want a Chevy engine in anything.
What idiot would design an engine from scratch and put the distributor way back there? I don't get it.

Dick Steinkamp
07-17-2007, 06:37 PM
quote:Originally posted by theGman
What idiot would design an engine from scratch and put the distributor way back there?


Studebaker engineers. [:o)]

http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

cortica37
07-17-2007, 07:36 PM
Say what...?

The trend toward engine swaps apparently was much earlier in S Cal than here in the Midwest. I think you speak of a later period then I. The Crown conversion came out in the late 60's and of course the highly forgettable Vega didn't appear until the early 70's. But, I do recall some Austin Healy 3000/Chevy conversions in the early 70's. The difficulty here was that most of the Chevy and Chrysler V-8's weren't available from salvage yards for many years.

wagone
07-17-2007, 08:23 PM
Well.....................Studebaker put the distributor in the back also. So................Chevrolet had idiot engineers and so did Studebaker. Among the mistakes I've always thought Dearborn made was in the great number of V8 engines they produced. Ignoring the flathead, Furd built something like FIVE (or more) distinctly different V8 engines in the years 1954 to about 1984. What......they never could get the design right? If Dick S. is correct (and I'm NOT implying that he isn't) and the Windsor Furd is BIGGER than the 283/327/350 Chevy (physically, I mean) then Furd built FOUR small block V8s and Two or THREE big blocks. Count them up: the wonderful Y block, the original 260/289 (which is physically smaller than a Chevy), the Windsor 302/351, The Cleveland 351 (which, for it's displacement, is a huge engine), the 332/351/390/406/428 engine, the 429/460, and I don't know where the 427 fits in. Go figure? Why all the distinctly different blocks? Trying to get it right? Must have something to do with Fix or Repair Daily.:D:D:D

wagone and the Old R2 Avanti

Dick Steinkamp
07-17-2007, 08:41 PM
Actually, I believe the 221, 260, 289, 302, 351 are essentially the same external dimensions. The problem (for swaps) is that they are about 2" longer than the small block Chevy. Greater when you use the short pump from an early Chevy.

http://www.wagoneers.com/FSJ/tech/Engines/swapchart.html



http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

wagone
07-17-2007, 09:06 PM
I never measured the Windsor engine but it certainly looks smaller, especially in width and weight (extreme thin wall castings). I do know that early on in the life of the "second generation Ford overhead valve V8" the people in Dearborn wanted to stroke the "original Windsor" to 3 1/4 inches (to make a 327) for the early GT 40 Le Mans program, but they found that the rods were so short (something like 5.15 inches) and the deck height so close to the crank centerline that a modest 3 1/4 inch stroke could not be used. Hence, a short while later for use on the street they raised the deck so that they could get a 351 cu inch engine on a 3 1/2 inch stroke. So the funny thing in the land of Dearborn engineers is, in the very year (1962) that Chevrolet introduced the 327 (in Corvettes), Ford started producing the 221/260 V8 (soon to be the 289), which could not take a stroke longer than three inches (for 302 cu inches). So.......I'm not so sure that Chevrolet had idiot engineers, at least NOT because they put the distributor in the rear. And they got by for 30 years with three V8s while Ford was building something like five or six in the same time frame. They may have had the distributor in the front, but designing an engine is a little more complicated than that.



wagone and the Old R2 Avanti

studelover
07-17-2007, 09:32 PM
The real reason street rodders don't use ford small blocks or prefer chevy is because of swap-a-bility. If you have a small block ford and need a starter you have to be almost perfect to get the right part. The Chevy small block interchange is almost unlimited. We swap parts(intake water pumps distributors) all the time. Something breaks at a friends house he has the gaskets and all for a fix. I do have friends with the 302 and they are very satisfied with that motor. The 351 C or W is a very good motor also as far as interchangability, I don't know. Remember ford had the first big block and it was great!

Studebakers forever!

Dick Steinkamp
07-17-2007, 10:15 PM
quote:Originally posted by studelover
Remember ford had the first big block and it was great!


What was it and when?

(beat the 392 Chrysler hemi?)



http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

studelover
07-17-2007, 10:17 PM
between ford and chevy

Studebakers forever!

Dick Steinkamp
07-17-2007, 10:19 PM
quote:Originally posted by studelover

between ford and chevy


Ford came out with the 352 FE motor in '58. Chevy came out with the 348 in '58.

http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

studelover
07-17-2007, 10:28 PM
Yeah dick,in 58 what month! I can't match wits with you, I just have a very large number of cars that I enjoy. I know what mopar had we used to play with a hemi motor in our front yard guess what it went into and we still have it http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v145/mr1940/bc28e854.jpg

Studebakers forever!

studelover
07-17-2007, 10:33 PM
Oh, my 352 ford big block, very reliable for a 1960, I hope this Studebaker is half as good.[8D]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v145/mr1940/1940001.jpg

Studebakers forever!

Dick Steinkamp
07-17-2007, 10:35 PM
Beautiful Charger! [:p]



http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

sbca96
07-18-2007, 01:10 AM
If I was transplanting an engine into my Avanti, it would be an LT1,
it cant be beat for cost vs power vs mpg. If you wanted something a
bit more powerful, but still mpg friendly - LS1 or LS2. If you want
to blow the doors off anything you come up along side of - LS7.:D

Tom


quote:Originally posted by hotwheels63r2
If you want to spend the time, there is no better transplant.

'63 Avanti, zinc plated drilled & slotted 03 Mustang Cobra 13" front disc/98 GT rear brakes, 03 Cobra 17" wheels, GM alt, 97 Z28 leather seats, soon: 97 Z28 T-56 6-spd, Ported heads w/SST full flow valves, 'R3' 276 cam, Edelbrock AFB Carb, GM HEI distributor, 8.8mm plug wires

Guido
07-18-2007, 07:03 AM
quote:Originally posted by hotwheels63r2
Only a Buick had 510 foot pounds of torque below 3 grand in stock form.
I used to hunt with a fellow from Florida who had an airboat. I recall me telling me on one of his trips back to Virginia that he was looking for a '69-'70 Cadillac motor to put on it because it had 530 pounds of torque. Any truth to this?

http://thumb14.webshots.net/t/53/453/1/21/36/2964121360097493054pVJTFL_th.jpghttp://thumb14.webshots.net/t/57/757/2/88/4/2023288040097493054SEKowB_th.jpghttp://thumb14.webshots.net/t/18/19/8/37/21/2050837210097493054IYBJJL_th.jpghttp://thumb14.webshots.net/t/59/559/1/43/57/2876143570097493054jKVhDw_th.jpghttp://thumb14.webshots.net/t/22/22/0/2/68/2589002680097493054ftBuBw_th.jpghttp://thumb14.webshots.net/t/28/28/8/30/30/2075830300097493054aSSlFv_th.jpghttp://thumb14.webshots.net/t/59/459/2/23/86/2067223860097493054YoeGMx_th.jpghttp://thumb14.webshots.net/t/28/28/5/18/33/2537518330097493054OgEKcN_th.jpg
Guido Salvage - "Where rust is beautiful"

Studebaker horse drawn doctor’s buggy; Studebaker horse drawn “Izzer” buggy; 1946 M-16 fire truck; 1948 M-16 grain truck; 1949 2R17A fire truck; 1950 2R5 pickup; 1952 2R17A grain truck; 1952 Packard 200 4 door; 1955 E-38 grain truck; 1957 3E-40 flatbed; 1961 6E-28 grain truck; 1962 7E-13D 4x4 rack truck; 1962 7E-7 Champ pickup; 1962 GT Hawk 4 speed; 1963 8E-28 flatbed; 1964 Avanti R2 4 speed; 1964 Cruiser and various other "treasures" (including a 1959 IH B-120 4 wheel drive and numerous Oliver and Cockshutt tractors).

Hiding and preserving Studebakers in Richmond, Goochland & Louisa, Va.

Dick Steinkamp
07-18-2007, 11:04 AM
quote:Originally posted by Guido
I recall me telling me on one of his trips back to Virginia that he was looking for a '69-'70 Cadillac motor to put on it because it had 530 pounds of torque. Any truth to this?


My 1971 Motors Manual lists lists the biggest 1970 Buick motor as a 370 HP 455 CID, 510 lbs ft of torque at 2800 RPM. The biggest 1970 Cadillac motor as a 400 HP 500 CID, 550 lbs ft of torque at 3000 RPM.

http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

sbca96
07-18-2007, 12:10 PM
Unfortunately those Caddy engines are going to add weight, one of the
LSx engines will take 200 pounds off the front end. LS7 has 505 hp.:D

Tom

Thomas63R2
07-18-2007, 10:02 PM
Tom, you may be surprised to learn that the Caddy 425/472/500 are not much different in weight from a SBC - much less weight than the Stude V8.

Thomas

First year Stude guy! Long time hot rodder
'63 Avanti R2 4 speed

55pres
07-18-2007, 10:12 PM
One more, don't forget the Ford 351M/400

Randy Wakefield

1955 President

"For the future that we wait..."

DEEPNHOCK
07-18-2007, 11:40 PM
Sheesh...
Club Hot Rod has moved here;)
But not the H.A.M.B.[}:)]
Jeff[8D]

Karl
07-19-2007, 12:27 AM
hehehehehehehe......a slow day or what[}:)]

63 Twin Supercharged Avanti
64 Avanti R3w/NOS
88LSC Avanti 350 Supercharged w/NOS

sbca96
07-19-2007, 12:38 AM
That would surprise me, but even the LT1 has aluminum heads, the LSx
engines are all aluminum, you cant touch those for weight loss. Just
imagine the weight distribution/power to weight on an Avanti II with
an LS7.[:0][:0]

Of course .. it would end up with Karl's problem - no traction![:p]

Tom


quote:Originally posted by Thomas63R2

Tom, you may be surprised to learn that the Caddy 425/472/500 are not much different in weight from a SBC

cortica37
07-19-2007, 12:49 PM
And thus the 50's adadge - "There's no replacement for displacement."
I come across a few Chevy 4.3 V6 conversions. Seems like it might be a light, compact engine and a potential candidate to replace the older 164/169 Studes. Anybody got any knowledge about problems with this conversion? Also, how about a Mopar slant six? It has a pretty good reputation from what I hear. I'm thinking along the lines of a moderate performance improvement and not a 1/4 miler.

Swifster
07-19-2007, 01:29 PM
quote:Originally posted by cortica37

And thus the 50's adadge - "There's no replacement for displacement."
I come across a few Chevy 4.3 V6 conversions. Seems like it might be a light, compact engine and a potential candidate to replace the older 164/169 Studes. Anybody got any knowledge about problems with this conversion? Also, how about a Mopar slant six? It has a pretty good reputation from what I hear. I'm thinking along the lines of a moderate performance improvement and not a 1/4 miler.


The 4.3L will bolt in with the '65-'66 Chevy mounts. It's a 350 with two cylinders missing, and will take the front accessory drives from the 350 as well. If built for power, you can get over 300 HP N/A. Put a supercharger on the front and you can get an easy 475 HP.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Valrico, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg

Dick Steinkamp
07-19-2007, 01:51 PM
quote:Originally posted by cortica37
I come across a few Chevy 4.3 V6 conversions. Seems like it might be a light, compact engine and a potential candidate to replace the older 164/169 Studes. Anybody got any knowledge about problems with this conversion?


It's essentially the same amount of trouble/work/expense to put in a small block Chevy V8 as it is to put in a 4.3 V6. You'll regret the V6. The car wouldn't be easily resaleable, no real increase in fuel mileage, no V8 sound [8D]. You can get a brand spanking new Chevy V8 for as little as $999

http://www.crateenginedepot.com/store/-1994---1995-Caprice-43-V8-L99-New-Goodwrench-Engine-88894191-P36C63.aspx

"I coulda had a V8"



http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

Roscomacaw
07-19-2007, 02:08 PM
Wow![:0] One of those and a JC Whitney catalog and you're ready for the next trophy trials![B)]

Miscreant adrift in
the BerStuda Triangle
http://images.andale.com/f2/115/106/906179/2006/12/7/truckonhill3.jpg

1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe

dave smith
07-19-2007, 05:25 PM
I'm putting a 302 or 351 in my 62 hawk, tired of 350s I have 302 thinking I might stroke to a 347 with injection it should run ver:Dy nicely. if money were no object I'd put a 5.7 hemi crate in it

mbstude
07-19-2007, 06:02 PM
quote:Originally posted by black56hawk For CHEAP street horsepower, IMHO it's hard to beat a big-block Mopar. :D

After getting that ride in your '67 HEMI Charger; I'll definitely agree! ;):D

Matthew Burnette
'59 Scotsman
'63 Daytona
Hazlehurst, GA

Cruising the Proving Ground Test Track
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j209/mbstude/provingground2.jpg

cortica37
07-19-2007, 06:50 PM
I got my old Studie because I like the styling, engineering and the whole design philosophy that went into creating the car. And I like it especially because it's different and an Independent, not just another dead-common, brown-wrapper, big three product. I know that there are compelling arguments for just sticking a SBC or BBC into the old gal but to me that seems too much like going with the crowd. So, if I decide to swap I'd like take a different path and go with something different, especially since I can do my own work and resale is not a factor. Maybe a Studie V-8 is the answer. Thanks for the all the input guys.:D

Roscomacaw
07-19-2007, 07:02 PM
Dave, I turned down the chance to buy a 58 Golden Hawk a few years back. My decision was more because it was a real Bondo Baby than the fact it had been fitted with a 351.
I DID buy the remanufactured 259 (service replacement engine), and NOS HD Flight-o-matic that the guy had.;) Gave $500 for the pair and it was a toss-up as to which of us thought we had just "taken" the other![}:)]

Miscreant adrift in
the BerStuda Triangle
http://images.andale.com/f2/115/106/906179/2006/12/7/truckonhill3.jpg

1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe

bob40
07-19-2007, 07:36 PM
Oldsmobile Toronado's also had 510 ft lbs of torque at 3,000 rpm's.

Laemmle
07-20-2007, 11:04 AM
No, they were all Found On The Road Dead.........


quote:Originally posted by skyway

Because they need to be fixed or repaired daily?

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Laemmle
07-20-2007, 11:06 AM
Who coined the phrase........"Race on Sunday, sell on Monday?"

Studebakester
08-26-2007, 09:58 PM
Wait til you guys see my 54 lakester (hence the name, Studebakester) It will be powered by a 292 Chevy 6 sporting 3 sidedraft webers and other go fast goodies with a 6 speed behind it and a quick change rear end. Of course, 18" are missing out of the middle of it (lengthwise) and so is the top.

It's a disease for which there is no cure or proper name. A rare form of it at that.

Worry is a waste of imagination.

studebakester