460/429 in 1969 Mustang - Vintage Mustang Forums
 66Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-29-2017, 02:09 AM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3
460/429 in 1969 Mustang

I'm currently researching what would be needed to put a 460 cubic inch engine in my 69 fastback. I don't have much experience with engine work, so any help is appreciated. Is a 460 block better than a 429 block? I've heard that they're basically the same block, but that the crankshafts are different (obviously more displacement in the 460). Also, I've read that 429 heads will work on a 460 block. Any truth to that? Finally, would there be any cutting of the shock towers or any other modifications to the engine bay in order to fit said engine? I'm sure these questions have been asked before, and I'm also sure I sound like an idiot asking them. Thanks everyone.
HunterDoc69 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-29-2017, 03:56 AM
Senior Member
Supporting Member
 
supershifter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Frum Hear Two Their Eventually
Posts: 10,708
Theres a company that makes a kit to put a 429/460 in a 67-70 mustang. The 429/460 blocks will interchange. The heads will interchange. The intakes will interchange. The connecting rods are the same. The piston pin locations are different and will not interchange. The cranks are different and will not interchange. A 2 bolt main 429/460 block is plenty strong for a street engine.

supershifter2ô < !
supershifter2 is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 06:23 AM
Senior Member
 
TommyK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: CT
Posts: 1,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDoc69 View Post
I'm currently researching what would be needed to put a 460 cubic inch engine in my 69 fastback. I don't have much experience with engine work, so any help is appreciated. Is a 460 block better than a 429 block? I've heard that they're basically the same block, but that the crankshafts are different (obviously more displacement in the 460). Also, I've read that 429 heads will work on a 460 block. Any truth to that? Finally, would there be any cutting of the shock towers or any other modifications to the engine bay in order to fit said engine? I'm sure these questions have been asked before, and I'm also sure I sound like an idiot asking them. Thanks everyone.
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/429-460Stangs/info

1973 Mustang Convertible
460
TommyK is offline  
 
Old 07-29-2017, 08:24 AM
Senior Member
 
TheMaineEvent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 431
Garage
Ford Performance makes a 460 using a 351 short block so that may be an option.

http://www.cjponyparts.com/ford-raci...SAAEgL8GvD_BwE

1969 Raven Black M Code Mach 1 with 351W
1965 Shelby AC COBRA Factory Five MKII with 514
1965 Rangoon Red Fastback/Convertible with 289
1949 Chevy 3100 Pickup with a 350
TheMaineEvent is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 08:42 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,566
Jsams is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 12:03 PM
Super Moderator
Supporting Member
 
Israel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 8,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDoc69 View Post
I'm currently researching what would be needed to put a 460 cubic inch engine in my 69 fastback. I don't have much experience with engine work, so any help is appreciated. Is a 460 block better than a 429 block? I've heard that they're basically the same block, but that the crankshafts are different (obviously more displacement in the 460). Also, I've read that 429 heads will work on a 460 block. Any truth to that? Finally, would there be any cutting of the shock towers or any other modifications to the engine bay in order to fit said engine? I'm sure these questions have been asked before, and I'm also sure I sound like an idiot asking them. Thanks everyone.
Welcome to the board. They're the same series, just stroked.

460

Produced from 1968 to 1996.
Available in Ford, Mercury and Lincoln.
Same as 429, but with longer stroke. (3.85 inch)
During its earlier years, pre 1973, horsepower was rated at 365. After 1972 horsepower ranged from 208 to 275.
Intake/exhaust valves are 2.08/1.66
Intake/exhaust valves for the Police Interceptor 460 heads (from 1973-í74) measure 2.19/1.66

Ex-wife,....."You drove how far for that thing?"
Daughter,..."Theres no inside and it stinks."
Friend,......."Dude, thatís a rusted pile."
Son,.........."This old car is cool."

USMC Security Forces, Kamiseya Japan, 0311

Build Thread: http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vi...sted-pile.html
Israel is offline  
Old 07-31-2017, 09:42 PM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 3
Thanks everyone for the input. I'm gonna go with the 460 block more than likely, since I've found quite a few for only a few hundred bucks.
HunterDoc69 is offline  
Old 08-01-2017, 02:37 PM
Member
 
Per Berglund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDoc69 View Post
Thanks everyone for the input. I'm gonna go with the 460 block more than likely, since I've found quite a few for only a few hundred bucks.
The 460 is a tired engine best suited for a truck or fullsize car...It is not a performer at all!
The weight and dimensions is a problem for the 69 engine bay and even if you get it it it will be a pain when you need to work on it

You will also get problem with the front brakes that will need to work more than they are designed for.
Also there are often a C6 transmission wish also is a slow tranny that robs a lot of horsepower.

Go for a regular 351 is my recommendation.
Crank_It_Up likes this.
Per Berglund is offline  
Old 08-01-2017, 02:41 PM
Senior Member
Supporting Member
 
supershifter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Frum Hear Two Their Eventually
Posts: 10,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Per Berglund View Post
The 460 is a tired engine best suited for a truck or fullsize car...
EEEYeah , tell that to John Kaase. I built a "mild" 460 for my wagon that made 550hp at 5700 rpm on the dyno and idled like grannys 6 cylinder. I had a toploader behind mine.

Kaase BOSS Nine | Jon Kaase Racing Engines
Attached Images
File Type: jpg bubbas babe.jpg (26.8 KB, 16 views)
Rorin67, Israel, Huntingky and 4 others like this.

supershifter2ô < !

Last edited by supershifter2; 08-01-2017 at 02:45 PM.
supershifter2 is offline  
Old 08-01-2017, 03:09 PM
Super Moderator
Supporting Member
 
Israel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 8,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Per Berglund View Post
The 460 is a tired engine best suited for a truck or fullsize car...It is not a performer at all!
The weight and dimensions is a problem for the 69 engine bay and even if you get it it it will be a pain when you need to work on it

You will also get problem with the front brakes that will need to work more than they are designed for.
Also there are often a C6 transmission wish also is a slow tranny that robs a lot of horsepower.

Go for a regular 351 is my recommendation.

Not so,....a 460 will produce more power than you can handle at a much lower rpm. How about a Very easy 500/500 hp tq turning at a comfortable 5,400 rpm?

Stroke that baby, 502/557, and now you're really getting scary.

The 69's easily handle the 429/460 as far as size, they were made for this.
Rorin67, C7Z and knifefighter like this.

Ex-wife,....."You drove how far for that thing?"
Daughter,..."Theres no inside and it stinks."
Friend,......."Dude, thatís a rusted pile."
Son,.........."This old car is cool."

USMC Security Forces, Kamiseya Japan, 0311

Build Thread: http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vi...sted-pile.html

Last edited by Israel; 08-01-2017 at 03:12 PM.
Israel is offline  
Old 08-01-2017, 03:25 PM
Member
 
Per Berglund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Israel View Post
Not so,....a 460 will produce more power than you can handle at a much lower rpm. How about a Very easy 500/500 hp tq turning at a comfortable 5,400 rpm?

Stroke that baby, 502/557, and now you're really getting scary.

The 69's easily handle the 429/460 as far as size, they were made for this.
Sorry I have seen lots of build with 460 and it is almost a terrible result.....It is not only a "power" issue
The front end cant handle it as simple as that if you don't replace to aluminum parts in the engine and it will cost you.
500hp feels like only 300 when it reach the asphalt.
The C6 eats up a second with its huge internal rotating mass.

It simply is a waste of time and money and something folks did in the 70's...Todays winsor strokers is the easy way to go and the Mustang performs overall better with lighter load.

If you want to bury money to a stroked 502/557 you could likewise drop in a Chevy LS7 and really make power
Crank_It_Up likes this.
Per Berglund is offline  
Old 08-01-2017, 03:37 PM
Senior Member
 
SVTguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 1,143
I agree with above ...unless want the underhood eye candy of a big block or more than 427 CIs a stroker 351w is the best of both worlds.

Big block cubes in a small block package..
SVTguy is offline  
Old 08-01-2017, 03:54 PM
Super Moderator
Supporting Member
 
Israel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 8,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Per Berglund View Post
Sorry I have seen lots of build with 460 and it is almost a terrible result.....It is not only a "power" issue
The front end cant handle it as simple as that if you don't replace to aluminum parts in the engine and it will cost you.
500hp feels like only 300 when it reach the asphalt.
The C6 eats up a second with its huge internal rotating mass.

It simply is a waste of time and money and something folks did in the 70's...Todays winsor strokers is the easy way to go and the Mustang performs overall better with lighter load.

If you want to bury money to a stroked 502/557 you could likewise drop in a Chevy LS7 and really make power

We'll agree to disagree.

Ex-wife,....."You drove how far for that thing?"
Daughter,..."Theres no inside and it stinks."
Friend,......."Dude, thatís a rusted pile."
Son,.........."This old car is cool."

USMC Security Forces, Kamiseya Japan, 0311

Build Thread: http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vi...sted-pile.html
Israel is offline  
Old 08-01-2017, 05:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Anaheim
Posts: 1,070
Per,
You may simply lack the talent in your country to build a high horsepower 460 and a reliable C6. Sure a 460 is heavy but so is a "talldeck" big block Chevy. Both can be built to 632ci with an aftermarket block and make similar power.

'66 GT350H-3 time cover car - Car Craft July'77,Modified Mustangs and Fords Feb2011 ( w/article), Mustang Monthly June 2014. Bracket raced by me for the last 44 years. Yes it is a real one.
'68.5 R code GT fastback
'67 Ranchero 408W -427 glass hood
'78 F350 "Oleynik" car hauler
Ford Experimental parts collector
GT350HR is offline  
Old 06-26-2018, 11:55 PM
Senior Member
 
tarafied1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Western KY
Posts: 392
Garage
fact vs fiction

I don't know if some people speak as if they are an authority on something they have no actual experience with, but I'll offer some facts rather than just an opinion. FACT: I have had a 385 series engine in my 67 since 1990. FACT: The car has been driven in 18 states and year round. FACT: I have done the HRPT 5 times with the car (about 3,000 miles in a week round trip in June driving in traffic and the heat). FACT: I have done two open track events (Nashville Speedway) with it and run it on the drag strip. Up until about a year ago it was a 1970 iron head (D0VE-C) 429 with a C6. The car has Granada spindles (also since the 90's), OPR roller perches and idler arm. The Arning drop, 620lb springs, an added passenger side torque box (was originally a 289 car and didn't have one), it has welded in sub-frame connectors and a repop export brace. FACT: The car handles great considering it is nose heavy. But it still handles great. FACT: I don't have any concerns throwing it into a corner at speed, going over RR tracks, pot holes or panic braking if needed and taking on-ramps well over the posted limit is no problem. FACT: I drive this car anywhere. It was a PS car but in the 90's with the old crossover headers I had to remove the PS. A few years ago I did upgrade to EPAS which made it much more fun to drive. I also tossed the old headers in favor of some FPA shorty headers. I built the engine on a budget many many years ago and it was a stock bore 429. I recently pulled the engine and had it bored .030" over, put a SCAT crank in it making it a 502. I added the Eddelbrock RPM heads which use the standard ports vs the SCJ so I could use my FPA headers. FACT: I ran the engine on the dyno with the FPA headers, and everything on it that will be in the car with 93 octane pump gas and it made 615hp @ 6K and 628 lb ft of torque @ 4200 rpm with a very broad and flat torque curve. I am converting it to a TKO 600 at this time because I like to shift but naysayers of the 385 series engine and C6 that don't have actual experience should be ignored. I can attest to the the strength, durability and smiles per gallon that I have enjoyed in nearly 30 years with this combo. FACT: I never dyno'd the basically stock 429 (218 @.050" duration and .500" lift cam, Edelbrock Performer 460 intake and 750 Holley carb) but it would run 12's in the 1/4 on pump gas with 3.25 gears and stock stall converter. The car weighed 3400 with me and fuel in it at the track. Full interior and stereo and trunk loaded with a spare tire and jack, etc. With the aluminum heads I have shaved at least 60 lbs off the nose, I also added an aluminum radiator and water pump so maybe shed a couple more pounds and it definitely has more power now! So I'll keep my truck engine. I fully expect to be deep into the 11's and maybe get kicked off the track since I can't run faster than 11.49 without a cage. I will need some slicks though, the 429 ran 12's spinning the tires and had a lousy 60 foot. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against a Windsor or Cleveland but I only spent about $5000 on my 429 (cam, heads, rotating assembly, etc.) to make over 600 hp and over 600 lb ft of torque and it's still a very mild build that will be reliable and streetable. FACT: The car has no trouble being street driven, hasn't cracked or tweaked the body, and has been safe and fun to drive with a big block in for nearly 30 years. That is all fact, not an opinion... Now could a small block car have a few tenth quicker lap times? maybe, Can you make over 600hp from an LS engine? yep. Now based on those facts, here is my opinion, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with a big block Ford
TommyK, SM94Cobra, Rorin67 and 7 others like this.

My wife's name is TARA so I am the TARA-fied 1!
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/t1.0-9/63634_4358514046617_1881987486_n.jpg
67 Hardtop, 429 Big block, 9" rear, 4 wheel disc brakes...
tarafied1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Thread Tools



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome