Need rebuild recommendations on a 1970 460.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Trav
I am not familiar with the engine at a rebuild level but in general my main areas of concern with older engines is the cam and making sure the valves and seats are no lead fuel compatible.

I would definitely look into a roller cam conversion, hardened seats (I don't know if they still use stellite but it was the best at one time for conversions), SS valves.
The less boring and turning of internals the better. You may not need the crank turning, you need a good machinist and someone competent with high end measuring tools.

The standard .xx over and turn the crank .xx and line bore is mickey mouse, if anyone hits you such a thing without measuring first run. A good machinist can make or break the build.
Old engines like this are great because the iron is aged and much stronger than when it was made. The tens of thousand of heating and cooling cycles have made the iron itself much stronger and more stable.

Personally I would keep the old iron heads and have them properly done for this engine, I don't like mixed alloy engines in general.
Iron block and heads or aluminum block and heads either way is fine but mixing them creates a lot of stress on gaskets.
Even an aluminum intake can cause sealing problems with iron heads more so on a V engine, aluminum expands at over twice the rate of iron and wants to tear the gasket apart.


Yes, I totally agree with you! If I can't find a machine shop in the area that satisfies me I'll just do it all myself. I did many rebuilds in the early 70's and I know how to mic everything myself. I will keep everything as original as possible. My one dilemma is how to lower the compression. I don't want to do it with a thicker head gasket. So I'll probably end up buying pistons with a dish in them - I'm still searching on this. I have a complete set of factory manuals to help with the rebuild.
 
More camshaft duration will make engine less octane sensitive. It will also lower cranking psi. What rpm does engine ping at? Does engine only ping in top gear? Was engine running too lean under load?
 
Originally Posted By: Highline9
More camshaft duration will make engine less octane sensitive. It will also lower cranking psi. What rpm does engine ping at?


Pretty much all rpms's.

Originally Posted By: Highline9
Does engine only ping in top gear?


No

Originally Posted By: Highline9
Was engine running too lean under load?


Don't think so - did quite a lot of tweaking when I installed the Edelbrock 1406 on it 2 yrs ago. I thought I had it correct.

All my pinging answers above are with the timing set factory (yes, the harmonic balancer is correct) and just running premium, and in the heat of a south Texas summer. The pinging does go down when it's colder out.
 
Everyone makes a big deal about pre '72 HP but the truth is that engine may have had 300Hp & 410ft lb tq on a good day... Starting 1972 figures were far more truthful and are as installed in the vehicle, not running on a dyno using open headers with carb and ignition tuned for max HP...

If you want some real HP outta that beast you'll find a way to buy those aluminum heads and run headers with a full 2.5" exhaust system... With even a fairly mild cam, it'll make a HP per cu in easily...
 
Have you tried different step up springs in carb? If you want to richen it alot for a test you can take the rods out. What is your cranking psi?
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Wow a 460 and a 4000 lb trailer? Those cars must have been pickup trucks with car bodies attached!

Dont have any tips, but sounds awesome.


Back in the 70s when my folks were somewhat into trailer camping, *most* people towed their rigs with big-block cars. Vans were considered excellent tow vehicles too, but pickups were almost only used for 5th wheel rigs. True quad-cab pickups were rare so it was hard to carry the family and trailer. For a long time only Dodge even offered one, and they did kinda own the tow market for a while with their 440-powered D/W series 3/4 and 1-ton Trailering Special.

As for cars, the general campfire wisdom was that 460-powered Fords (LTDs and Mercury station wagons mainly, Lincolns were too heavy and soft-sprung) were among the best tow machines. Cadillacs were considered poor, because even though the big 472 was a fantastic engine and the TH400 would hold together through a lot of abuse, the rear suspension was just too soft and lacked lateral stiffness and led to a lot of trailer sway. That was a complaint with most of the big coil-spring/trailing arm GM cars of the day, but less-so with Pontiacs, Buicks, Olds, and Chevies than Caddys. The big C-body Mopars (Monaco, Polara, Fury, Newport, New Yorker) were generally well-liked, but because they were unibody there were good and bad aspects. On the good side, they were lighter than similar sized Fords and GMs, so more weight could be in the payload. The 440/727 combination was every bit as tough as the 460/C6, or 455/TH400. On the downside, load-equalizing hitches for them were considerably more expensive because they had to tie in across the entire rear partial-fame in order to properly distribute the load to the unibody. If done right, they were awesome because the rear leaf suspension had great lateral stiffness. It really was pretty much a pickup truck suspension, after all.

And pretty much everyone threw the factory tow ratings out the window and designed their own tow package to their needs- it was much more of a gearhead hobby than it is today. Campgrounds were filled with the loping sounds of tow-cammed, carbureted, free-exhausted, big-block gasoline engines: Olds 455s, Chevy 454s, Ford 460s, Mopar 383 and 440's... even in the motorhomes. The GM motorhomes were front-drive 455 Olds powered (using the Toronado drivetrain). Winnebagos were all Mopwer-powered (360s up through 400 and 440s, Itascas were Chevy 350-454 powered. A diesel motorhome or tow rig was very rare, and was always someone's home-conversion using a Cummins or Cat, usually in a big GM pickup.



Back in the early 1980's, we had neighbours across the street that were big into camping, and went all over the place with a pop-top trailer towed behind a 1974-ish Chev Impala wagon.

No idea what engine it had, but it was fairly plain, so I'm guessing a 350. In talking with the father years later, he said it was a great car, and it lasted like 15 years and thousands and thousands of miles before the engine gave up on the highway on one of their trips...

My dad was a little smaller scale - packing a tent, supplies and me into the back of a 1978 Malibu wagon for camping trips. Good memories, camping with station wagons in years gone by......
 
I lived with 10.5:1 compression in a 283 that we converted to run on unleaded. predetonation was a real issue.

1. unleaded burns hotter than leaded. make sure the valves and seats are new to handle the temps.

2. I'll 3rd (4th) the vote for aluminum heads if you are set on 10.5:1

3. I would think long and hard about dropping the compression some if you are going to tow 4000 lbs. just moving the bel air we had on level ground, the difference between 92 and 93 octane (~500' above sea level) was noticeable. 87, the car would not propel itself on level ground after 10-15 minutes of warmup from cold start. 89 it would barely, unless it was really hot. So if you are looking at having a streetable vehicle that can tow, and tow reliably, I'd pull the pressure back some. Otherwise you will always be forced to carry extra additives, and play with temps, timing, coolant flow, and whatever else you can think of.

If this was a fun car, and not something you were going to commute and haul with, sure 10.5:1, 93 & some octane boost, and have fun.

I don't know your motor well but some fun could also be had with a cam, a modest but classy exhaust, high rise intake....

The other consideration would be cost to operate... these engines know how to drink lots of fuel, and in this case it's lots of expensive fuel. I'd want to try to keep the engine temp in a more efficient (ie, 190F+) range, which contradicts tricks for running high compression, high advance. The comments above for better swirl and more complete combustion play there as well. You'll want to daydream about where you'd like to fall in that arena too.

Makes me think.... drop the compression a bit, and then... could you stroke it? helps during the tow, still fun to drive, easier at the pump?

Just my $0.02. It sounds like a great project, good luck--!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: meep
...1. unleaded burns hotter than leaded. make sure the valves and seats are new to handle the temps.


10-4

Originally Posted By: meep
...2. I'll 3rd (4th) the vote for aluminum heads if you are set on 10.5:1


Not set on 10.5:1 and will not be using aluminum heads. I'll probably end up with pistons w/a dip in them. I'm targeting 8.5:1. And I'll be reusing the stock iron intake, there's no room under the hood for a high rise.

Originally Posted By: meep
...3. I would think long and hard about dropping the compression some if you are going to tow 4000 lbs. just moving the bel air we had on level ground, the difference between 92 and 93 octane (~500' above sea level) was noticeable. 87, the car would not propel itself on level ground after 10-15 minutes of warmup from cold start. 89 it would barely, unless it was really hot. So if you are looking at having a streetable vehicle that can tow, and tow reliably, I'd pull the pressure back some. Otherwise you will always be forced to carry extra additives, and play with temps, timing, coolant flow, and whatever else you can think of.


Will take this all into consideration...

Originally Posted By: meep
..If this was a fun car, and not something you were going to commute and haul with, sure 10.5:1, 93 & some octane boost, and have fun.

I don't know your motor well but some fun could also be had with a cam, a modest but classy exhaust, high rise intake....

The other consideration would be cost to operate... these engines know how to drink lots of fuel, and in this case it's lots of expensive fuel. I'd want to try to keep the engine temp in a more efficient (ie, 190F+) range, which contradicts tricks for running high compression, high advance. The comments above for better swirl and more complete combustion play there as well. You'll want to daydream about where you'd like to fall in that arena too.

Makes me think.... drop the compression a bit, and then... could you stroke it? helps during the tow, still fun to drive, easier at the pump?

Just my $0.02. It sounds like a great project, good luck--!


I'm looking forward to this - will pull the engine in early Jan., hope to have it all together and running by mid February.

Plans so far:
1. stock DOVE-C heads, w/all new valves, guides, springs and checked for cracks of course.
2. cam - street cam for lots of torque at mid range. Btw, my rear end is the trailer rear end, so my engine turns a few more rpm's at 70mph than other MK III's.
3. carb - stay with my edelbrock 1406
4. pistons - a set of good ones with the cavity in them to bring the compression down. Don't plan on putting a thicker head gasket.
5. crank - mic'd and turned if needed, all new mains of course
6. new oil pump, not going to scrimp here
7. all new hydraulic lifters
8. block - mic'd for clearance and IF it's needed, bored as little as possible.

Keep the suggestions coming everyone!
 
Will it have adjustable valvetrain? Look into some of compcams new hyd cam grinds. I will check out some grinds and send a link. A bump in duration and lift will give that engine alot more power. Did you post headers or manifolds? 2 1/2 pipes.
 
Originally Posted By: Highline9
Will it have adjustable valvetrain? Look into some of compcams new hyd cam grinds. I will check out some grinds and send a link. A bump in duration and lift will give that engine alot more power. Did you post headers or manifolds? 2 1/2 pipes.


Stock manifolds - The car comes stock with 2.5" complete duals

Was thinking stock rockers - I don't have an unlimited budget. I think they'll suffice for what I need to do.
 
Originally Posted By: sasilverbullet
Originally Posted By: Highline9
Will it have adjustable valvetrain? Look into some of compcams new hyd cam grinds. I will check out some grinds and send a link. A bump in duration and lift will give that engine alot more power. Did you post headers or manifolds? 2 1/2 pipes.


Stock manifolds - The car comes stock with 2.5" complete duals

Was thinking stock rockers - I don't have an unlimited budget. I think they'll suffice for what I need to do.


You sure that isn't 2.25"??? I don't remember any Ford with 2.5" stock, not even the Cobra Jet big blocks...
 
Originally Posted By: TFB1
You sure that isn't 2.25"??? I don't remember any Ford with 2.5" stock, not even the Cobra Jet big blocks...


Might be 2.25. I just had the entire exhaust system replaced, I'm leaving it as is.
 
Originally Posted By: ag_ghost
FWIW:
Here's a forum on the 385 series. Not very active, but found this page of "385 Series Engine Build Combos and Data"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/267359/

If you've already found this apologies to all for taking up the electrons.
Enjoy,
Kevin



Kevin - electrons are cheap!

thanks for the link, I didn't know about them, will check it out.
 
I like where this is going. If you are sticking with the original heads, melikes that with the dished pistons for lower compression.

1. updated valve grind?
2. port the heads, intake for a little flow?
3. any thoughts on having it balanced/blueprinted? Makes a nice difference if you see yourself stretching out the tach a bit...
4. consider a new drive shaft for the oil pump, especially if it's not stock pressure/flow
5. if you like the stock exhaust, no problem!
6. I know $ can get crazy--- you seem set on the edelbrock... but maybe later TBI fuel and ignition system could be entertaining.
7. for the work, it will deserve some chrome bits! do it right!
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: meep
I like where this is going. If you are sticking with the original heads, melikes that with the dished pistons for lower compression.

1. updated valve grind?
2. port the heads, intake for a little flow?
3. any thoughts on having it balanced/blueprinted? Makes a nice difference if you see yourself stretching out the tach a bit...
4. consider a new drive shaft for the oil pump, especially if it's not stock pressure/flow
5. if you like the stock exhaust, no problem!
6. I know $ can get crazy--- you seem set on the edelbrock... but maybe later TBI fuel and ignition system could be entertaining.
7. for the work, it will deserve some chrome bits! do it right!
smile.gif




1. updated valve grind - maybe, depends on the machine shop.

2. port the heads, intake for a little flow - nope $

3. any thoughts on having it balanced/blueprinted? Makes a nice difference if you see yourself stretching out the tach a bit... - would love to, again the $$ FYI - the early 69 MK III's engines were balanced and blueprinted from the factory, little know trivia.

4. consider a new drive shaft for the oil pump, especially if it's not stock pressure/flow - yep, going to

5. if you like the stock exhaust, no problem!

6. I know $ can get crazy--- you seem set on the edelbrock... but maybe later TBI fuel and ignition system could be entertaining. - already looked into it, again the $$$

7. for the work, it will deserve some chrome bits! do it right! - definitely! This will probably be the last engine rebuild I'll do in my lifetime...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom