351W vs. 60s 428FE

[Dominik]

dear engine builders,

did anyone run a comparison of the torque curve from a 60s FE to a 351 or 392 from FORD motorsports?
I wonder if the "FE" engines from then are not much better in torque then todays free flowing aluminium headed units of the "W" family.

a Desktop Dyno simmulation may provide the first indication, but I don't have the cam data and don't know how high to rate the aluminium cylinder heads..

maybe one of the magazines did a dyno run of the 351 and 392, so we only need one from the old BBs to compare.

I am not after which maxed out engine is better, let alone SB vs. BB... - please ;-)

cheers,

dominik

[MidOHasp]

Dominik,

Depends on the trim level of that 428!

A friend of mine has a 427 SO with a 428 crank (454 ci) and I have a somewhat hairy 408. Mine makes more HP and TQ than his (slightly), but his torque curve starts quite a bit earlier.

The torque curve of a Windsor based motor, especially a stroker, can be made to be pretty flat and wide. But it will always be difficult to duplicate the torque curve of a BB with a SB, especially if that SB is meant to make any kind of power at any kind of RPM.

I guess the question I'd need answered to provide more info is what is the HP of each engine in question, and where does that HP peak? That will tell a lot.

[Dominik]

Hi,

this is what I want to tell, if it proves to be correct:

a current 351W from FORD motorsport (crate) makes more torque and hp than a 60s stock 428, as delivered for the Cobra (or "stock" 427).

cheers,

dominik

[MidOHasp]

A 392 maybe, but even then I don't think so.

Didn't the "stock" 427's make 475HP?

351W crate from FMS is 385 HP. I think the 392 is 450 or something. 425?

I'm pretty sure the "crate" SB's are not making more HP/TQ than the "stock" BB's of the 60's. I could be wrong. It happens a lot.

But I think to make a SB with more HP/TQ, you have to go beyond the FMS catalog.