Genesis 427 side oiler

[Archrms]

Has anyone had any experience with the new iron Genesis 427 s/o block? I had heard they had problems with the early ones, but that the problems have been fixed. Are these blocks worth looking into, or is it better to just find and rebuild a 60's era original?

[ffindling]

Well known FE builder Barry Rabotnick of Survival Motorsports does his builds
using Genesis blocks. The FE he built for the Jeg's Engine Masters competition
last year which dyno'd out to 752 hp was also Genesis based. He can probably
tell you as much about Genesis blocks as anyone can. His number is (248) 438-6900.

....Fred

[Carnut427]

Even the early ones were OK; they just needed a little extra work, which was done by whomever you bought the block from.

Dan

[jwoodard]

I'm running one built by Keith Craft and am very pleased with the engine. Keith has probably built more of these than anyone, give him a call. He advertises on this site.

[ffindling]

Tom Lucas of FE Specialties, another advertiser on this site, also uses Genesis blocks.

....Fred

[427SnakeSC]

Keith Craft will be using a Genesis or Pond block for my build. When I talked with him last, he told me the Genesis blocks were good, but needed a little work. I have been told the Genesis block is a very close duplicate in appearance to the original blocks.

[Archrms]

Thanks for the feedback so far. I have spoken with both KC and Perormance Engineering (as well as a few others) regarding the Genesis blocks, and have gotten some good info, however, I was hoping to get some feedback from the people who are actually using them in their cars. I'd like to know how they like the performance it provides and how it is holding up over time.

[ceslaw]

I installed a Genesis crate engine in my Everett Morrison Gen IV. Took delivery of the engine in February, 2006. Fired it up on the completed chassis in July, 2006. Started right up and ran great. I have run it several times as we fine tuned various issues, like some minor coolant and oil leaks, none of which were the fault of the engine. Car is still under construction - waiting for EM to deliver the body - so can't give a more detailed report yet. Check out my gallery for some pictures. (key words: Genesis or Everett Morrison)

I picked up the engine in Indianapolis on a cold day in February where it was assembled and watched it being dyno tested. 500 + Hp and 500 + pounds of torque. That was a fun day!

I was very pleased with the personal service and construction updates provided while the engine was being built.

Chuck
CESLAW

[decooney]

I've only read people using the iron blocks from Genesis and wondering if anyone has actually tried one of the alumuminum Genisis blocks yet; and any feedback?

[Excaliber]

Shelby alloy blocks also required a lot of machining, at least the 'early ones' did. Sounds typical of a new block on the market as the bugs get worked out.

[427SnakeSC]

Great looking 427 Chuck (CESLAW)! I hope mine looks as good!

[Barry_R]

I just shipped my Engine Masters Challenge entry for this year off to New York for the contest. This is another Genesis based piece. Rules for this year include 434 cubes, 10.5:1 compression max, mufflers, 14x3" air filter, and running on 91 octane.

The local DTS testing delivered 685 peak HP @ 6500, 587 peak TQ, and a solid additive average (TQ+HP) "score" over 1000. Only time will tell if thats enough to make the finals - but its a heck of a nice little motor.

So far the Genesis parts have performed well for me....

[Archrms]

Visually, the Genesis blocks are supposed to be an exact copy of the original 427's, and have a 1965 date code on them. If they are visually correct, is there any reason other than "authenticity" that makes an original block any better than a new Genesis? I also understand that the new blocks are drilled for use with hydraulic cams. Any opinions would be appreciated, as I am trying to decide if having an original 427 is worth the price tag.

[RICK LAKE]

Archrms what are you going to do with the car? Show, Run&Gun, Orginial to spec, or beat the crap out of it every day? Ponds and Genesis are cheaper the a Shelby block and more correct. Shelby block is stronger and better engineered in my opinion. Any of these 3 blocks will work fine for you. How deep is your pocket? IF YOU CAN FIND a 427so block the price will be the same or more an the Genesis or Ponds. It will either be a service block or used with an overbore done to it. 427 motors are thin walled to start .030" over is the safe max on oem blocks. A crate motor may be your answer. If you want to talk on this call me 732-254-3536 after 7:00pm. I am in Jersey. Rick Lake

[Carnut427]

Originally Posted by Archrms

...is there any reason other than "authenticity" that makes an original block any better than a new Genesis?...

Absolutely not. My first motor was an original SO. A cylinder wall broke while roadracing, which siezed the piston, which broke the rod, etc. etc. It wasn't a pretty picture, and was only bored .015 over. My Genesis is bored .075 over the original 427 spec and can be bored .060 more. They just didn't have the technology to build them any thicker originally...and yes, the Genesis has the C5AE code cast on it as do the originals. IMO, it's a no-brainer. I wouldn't waste my money on an original block when something better is available.

Dan

[RedCSX1]

I started with a 427 Center oiler and two flat cams later, I said to heck with it and bought a Pond Aluminum 482 short block from Keith. Much better off than getting an original. With that said, machine work still needs to be done to these blocks to correct certain manufacturing flaws and you want to go with someone who has experience with these motors like Keith Craft or Mike at Mitech. http://mitechengines.com/index.htm And of course Barry of Survivalmotorsports.com who already responded to your question. In fact you can also include George of www.gessford.com (or 402-463-9844)

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Carnut427

My first motor was an original SO. A cylinder wall broke while roadracing, which siezed the piston, which broke the rod, etc. etc. It wasn't a pretty picture, and was only bored .015 over. My Genesis is bored .075 over the original 427 spec and can be bored .060 more. They just didn't have the technology to build them any thicker originally...

I don't think that it's not because Ford didn't have the technology, but in the basic design of the engine. The "original" 427 had water jackets completely surrounding each cylinder, for even cooling. The Genesis has siamesed cylinders, that is no coolant pasing between the cylinders. If Ford wanted the 427 this way, I'm sure they could have cast it the same way as the Genesis. I'm not saying one way is better than the other.

[Commander]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I don't think that it's not because Ford didn't have the technology, but in the basic design of the engine. The "original" 427 had water jackets completely surrounding each cylinder, for even cooling. The Genesis has siamesed cylinders, that is no coolant pasing between the cylinders. If Ford wanted the 427 this way, I'm sure they could have cast it the same way as the Genesis. I'm not saying one way is better than the other.

First off, anyone boring ANY FE, be it an original 427SO or a more plebian 390, should have it sonic checked, by someone who knows what they're doing. And then, if you have cylinders that shouldn't be bored, don't.

Second off, the Pond block, in addition to having siamesed cylinders, has a bulged block around each cylinder that adds material (and strengh and weight) to the block. So strengthwise, it goes: bored-Original, Original, Genesis, Shelby, Pond.

Ford DID want it that way, at least initially. The FE was a thinwall casting, state of the art at the time, that weighed just enough but not too much. If you want an engine that was cast using 19th century theory, look to the 'elephant' hemi where the block was cast sooo thick that you could bore it probably an extra 1" per cylinder (JK). That was bad for real life usage in passenger cars, but great on a straight line drag strip.

Personally, I'd get a Pond, an aluminum Pond, a Genesis, an aluminum Genesis in that order of preference. You get the benefits of a design that has been updated for strength, that looks very close to the original, that will take all original parts as bolt-on's, and that are better than the originals. The Shelby just looks wrong. It might be 'better', it just looks wrong.

[Carnut427]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I don't think that it's not because Ford didn't have the technology, but in the basic design of the engine. The "original" 427 had water jackets completely surrounding each cylinder, for even cooling. The Genesis has siamesed cylinders, that is no coolant pasing between the cylinders. If Ford wanted the 427 this way, I'm sure they could have cast it the same way as the Genesis. I'm not saying one way is better than the other.

You're right, Anthony. I used the wrong word. Substitute knowledge for technology. Ford (nor the other manufacturers) knew siamesed cylinders would work. To my knowledge, Chevy was the first to do it on the 400 smallblock. Another thought is how much metal must you have minimum around the siamesed bores for the process to work? Ford could have saved a lot of money by making the cylinder walls thicker. They scrapped a lot of 427 blocks because of core shift and the sand used for the casting was so thin between the bores it wouldn't always stay in place.

Dan

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by olddog

I'm in the process of pulling apart a 95 4.6 DOHC modular. I ...I haven't got it apart enough to measure the bores, but there are no ridge lines at the top. This engine has 105K miles on it. By feel I'm guessing less than 0.010 wear as I cannot feel anything anywhere, and you can still see the hone lines. Here is where it becomes relevant. This is an aluminum block with steel sleeves. I think the steel sleeves hold up much better than cast iron. This is a plus for a modern aluminum FE block, assuming they use steel sleeves rather than cast iron..

I think the sleeves are ductile iron. Although the cast iron of the sixties for the most part may leave alto to be desired, in addition to lighter weight, the real advantage is the ability to repair the block and easily change out a sleeve(s), although you can still sleeve an iron block.

Originally Posted by olddog

Additionally aluminum conducts heat better than cast iron, so cooling and even temps are much improved. However with the aluminum there is much more thermal expansion (think 4 times not sure). In my mind a large aluminum block push-rod engine almost has to have hydraulic lifters. With solids the valves would be mighty loose cold..

Just the opposite, the valve lash is very tight when the engine is cold, about 0.013" for an all aluminum FE. Solids are not a problem.

Originally Posted by Carnut427

Substitute knowledge for technology. Ford (nor the other manufacturers) knew siamesed cylinders would work. To my knowledge, Chevy was the first to do it on the 400 smallblock. Another thought is how much metal must you have minimum around the siamesed bores for the process to work? Ford could have saved a lot of money by making the cylinder walls thicker. They scrapped a lot of 427 blocks because of core shift and the sand used for the casting was so thin between the bores it wouldn't always stay in place.

I think the main reason why auto manufacturers didn't make siamesed cylinders is for even cooling, even expansion, maintaining a concentric cylinder bore for effective ring sealing, i.e.more HP. I would think that with any given engine displacement, it would be better to have an engine designed with cooling around the cylinders than not. As the 427 was made only for NASCAR, for 7 liter displacement limit, as was the subsequent Boss 429, 426 hemi, chevy 427, etc. they designed engines with big enough bore spacing to allow water jackets for an engine of 7 liter displacement. Obviously, with siamesed cylinders, you can take the bore out bigger, compromising cooling which may or may not be an issue.