Maybe you got a real good deal on the car, but if somebody told me it had a 427, and it had a 428, I'd be pretty upset. I would think a 427 car regardless of the brand would bring a pretty good buck...just for bragging rights if nothing else.

Oh wwell...I guess it is one of those "let the buyer beware" type of situations.

Let the buyer SUE over wrong INFO
 

Not a lawyer but would think is seller tells you motor is a 427 and turns out to be a 428 or worse, I believe that you have a good case for a law suit. The buyer should know what he is buying , BUT also the seller better be careful of BS. It's too bad that in today's world TRUST and TRUTH has gone out the window with some people and would screw you for a nickle. I believe that Barrett/Jacksons has gone through this all ready for selling cars that are not what they claimed to be. Insurance is to protect them. Rick L.

Putting the right parts togeather
 

Rawkkawler Mike If you are unhappy with the way the motor runs, some things need machine work to get them upto flow to match other parts. You said your intakes are not working. If they are stock out of the box, they will cost you about 10-20 hp in power and about 10-30 FT of torque. The 8 intake ports don't flow the same numbers and need to be cleaned up and to match the intake ports of the heads. How much work was done on the heads?? Full port job?? short radius of the valve short side? gasket match the intake and exhaust ports? The BIG killer is your exhaust system, running side pipes?? If yes, some systems cost from 10-40 HP and about the same in torque. The numbers you gave, are there from a chassic dyno or motor dyno? My numbers are off an motor dyno and you loss about 20% to drivetrain drain. This could be higher or lower depending on what tires you are running and wear numbers, Low wear numbers( soft tire compound) more drag. I can give you a guys number for fixiing the intake manifold. Cleaning up and porting it to have all ports within 3-4 cfm of each other and fixing the flow into each port for a better balance. This will also stop the lean cylinders. Mike there is alot more, send a P-M if you want to talk about this. Rick L.

I don't think so. I don't consider stationary engines and irrigation motors the norm. The casting numbers aren't the same in most cases, so it would probably be harder to find one of those. I think the marine engines were all crossbolts, not sure about the screw in freeze plugs, but again, they have a non car number. The claim was that it was pulled from a Galaxy. Not exactly the place to find any type of irrigation/marine engine. NO casting number is visible in the pics, but that's not too unusual, I've seen several blocks that don't. It does have the later motor mount pads, instead of the early 2 bolt ones. I'd think that the "secondary" usage engine would have still had the 2 bolt mounts.

[quote=CobraEd;1091637]I heard that the bore/stroke of a "428" was closer to 427 than a "427". Not sure if that is true either, but if the guy sold you a "428" and told you it was a "427", he was sort of telling the truth. :rolleyes:[quote]


I think you are correct, it is a miniscule difference...but I would say that's stretching the truth a tad bit much. Ignorance is no excuse either

While any FE block can be outfitted with crossbolts, this block doesn't possess them. I think the 428 is a great engine for most applications, but it is the fraud that I find offensive. The reason 427 is claimed is for the extra $$ they can bring. So, again that constitutes fraud and I'd probably yank the block and set on his desk and ask for a return of some funds or a 427 shortblock. If they refuse I'd be making their life He!!. Stupidity is hard enough to deal with but fraud is unexceptable. His claim that he even swapped the block is open for suspicion under the current status. It sounds like he wanted to insure that he got how much $$ he wanted, and relied on the buyer to be uninformed. Payback is he!!.

I guess it isn't necessarily a reliable indicator but the pictures of the block look like it was last painted a long, long time and many miles ago. If someone had put a new block in and bought a nice pair of aluminum heads for it, you would think they would have slapped a new coat of paint on it first. %/

Rawkkrawler,

Lots of good info here, lots of not so good info here.......

You can tell what crank you have in the engine by measuring stroke, use a coat hanger or similar down a spark plug hole to measure from bottom to top.... 428 stroke is unique and much different than a 427. 390 stroke is same as 427.

Bore is a bit more tricky! I rely on casting numbers on the RH side of the block to tell me "most likely" what I have.....I didn't notice casting numbers on your block pictures, so you could have a 428CJ. Many were cast without numbers! Check date codes too! Those are located over near the oil filter pad mounting location. Dates and casting numbers can help drill down a most likely suspect...

As for the whole four bolt 428 thing, yes, Ford cast many many 428's and 390's with the 4-bolt provisions on the bottom end, but the blocks were never machined to accept the 427 style caps. Gotta remember that the casting molds were something that interchanged from one FE type to another.....and guys will be guys....and weren't gonna wait around for the "correct" sand insert if the 427 one would work.....production line "deviations"!


Once you have numbers, you can look them up on the web, or in the "How to rebuild your big block Ford" book for FE engines. Good stuff in there!

Good luck!
Steve

Not sure if measuring will prove what block you have since a 428 crank fits in the 427.

Just trying to learn about these engines. I have a 428 CJ and have been told the CJ block and rods are stronger than the regular 428 block and rods, would like to know if this is correct.

By the way my 428 with alum heads, Waterpump and flywheel, solid lifter big cam and 11.6 cr scares me enough i guess.

I like thes engines, they are fairly lite, sound realy good and go.

Would still like an alum block 427 with 428 rods, but proly never have one unless something happens to my 428.
marvin

Sorry meant to say 427 with 428 stroke.
marvin

Didn't the 427 and 428 have the same crank journel size? Then if so, the rods are the same with the exception of the Lemans rods which were available for either engine. These were the stronger rods with rod bolts and not just rod nuts attaching the caps. Isn't this correct? I'm starting to learn about these FE mptprs also, so I want to make sure I'm correct. Bob Q.

Not sure, the builder said you ues 428 crank 427 block for i think 454 cu.

He also said my block and rods were Cobra Jet and that the rods were better and the block has stronger webbing in the lower end?

I'm not sure about any of this since all i have had before are 302's Flatheads and 272, 312 y-blocks
marvin

The SCJ 428 had ribbing on the outside of the block for added strength if I remember correctly, but I don't think the block was stronger with the 2 bolt main system. I could be wrong though as I thought a 4 bolt main block was stronger and more durable. Also, the rods in the SCJ were the Lemans Rods which were the best rods Ford made for the FE motor. At least this is what I have read lately when sorted thru my decreased friends FE collection of parts.

I think you are correct, the 427 crossbolted block is stronger with the stock crank it would have shorter stroke larger bore and tolerate much higher rev's.

My 428 realy runs , but i have it chiped at 6000, builder said could go to 7500 for short periods but no need, plenty of power and i love the torque.

I still would like a 427 alum block engine, but these iron engines are no too heavy with the alum heads, flywheel etc.

I wouldn't wind a 428 much beyond 6,200, 6,500 max, and not that high very often. No way 7,500. But perhaps you could get away with it,,, for awhile. The 428 block tends to crack along the main journals at high rpm.

The 427 block was not only a four bolt main but used a different and complicated casting process as well. The bore was just about as big as it could possibly be and was thin walled. The bore size is why you can run larger valves, the cylinders still require a clearance notch for max size. It was good for 9,000 rpm in a drag racing application and was the base block used for the infamous SOHC engine. With the NASCAR crank mod's the 427 could run 7,000 plus and hang together for a 500 mile race. I've heard the rpm was limited to 6,500 or lower for the Le Mans 24 hour efforts. High rpm is an engine killer.

I'm running Le Mans rods in my side oiler and it has frequently seen 7,000 rpm. And sustained 6,000 to 6,500 on a road course. It tends to puke a little bit of oil out the valve cover vent at sustained high rpm, I think my oil level may be to high.

"427" is more of a name for a certain Ford engine than an accurate description of its cubic inches. Previous threads and posts have stated that the actual displacement of the "427" calculated from factory bore and stroke specs was 425 cu. in.; however, the motor was named the "427". Rightly so, a Cobra replica with a real "427" should be worth more because of this engine, everything else being equal. So, advertising the car with a "427" is indeed a deception when it really has an FE 428.

The casting numbers on the side of the block will help a lot. Should be something like "C5AE-X" where X is going to be a letter (or letters) of some sort. If you find them and post, there are lots of folks here with books that may be able to help.