big block429 or 460

The block d1ve 8015AA
The heads d2ve AA but I did happen to find a tag bolted on the timing cover
That reads 429 72 10
9-1 k811s
Can anyone kind of head me in the right dirrection on if its worth putting money in to it ran strong had amazing power but spunn a rod bearing and the 390 I replaced it with is nowhere as close to what I. Had with that motor thanks for any help you can provide


Register now (free) or login to remove ads

Info from the "American v-8 engine data book"

'71 casting block-d1ve 8015AA

'72 casting heads-d2ve AA

"N" vin id- 811 engine tag

"N" id makes it a low compression, retarded cam timing, 197-208 HP from the factory.


A solid platform to build from, but that crank and rod replacement may be pricey. Using a early straight up timing set in it really wakes those early smog engines up.

HTH,
Tony

We "like" the D1 blocks. The C9s are very rare and the D8s are "thin".

There is no difference betweeen a 429 block and a 460 block. The difference is in the crankshaft. If you're planning a build and intend to "max" it out, the crank will go bye-bye anyway. We HAVE had significant success offset-grinding 460 cranks to a 4.14" stroke, making a "501" (.030 over). Aftermarket rods and pistons are required, but readily available.

There is no comparison in potential between the FE (390) and Lima ("385 Series"). A 429 is a good one. 460 is even better (IMO). The only FE that can approach the power of these engines is 427 ($$$$).

State what you want the engine to "do" and what the specific ap[plication is, and I can offer more info.

Jim

I have heard nothing good from fellows in the hobby about the open chamber D2VE heads and want you to be careful here. It's common to hear horror stories about them and here's a paragraph written by Paul Kane on fordforums.com, a pretty savvy 385 guy....

"D2VE-AA heads are single year heads, used in 1972 production 429s and 460s. They are the only 429/460 passenger car cylinder head that is of the open chamber design. Those heads proved to be so detonation prone that Ford quicky dumped the design after one year and went back to a closed chamber head, known as the D3VE-A2A."

I seem to remember that Ford had to pull the static compression ratio back into the 7's to prevent detonation with the D2's. You fellows who are regulars on this forum will relate this to lack of squish and you'd be right in my opinion.

D3 heads will have hard exhaust seats for unleaded fuel. C8, C9, D0 and possibly some heads cast in '71 would be small chamber, high compression heads without hard seats.

If it were me, I'd hunt around for some D3VE heads and use flat top pistons with them like this KB unit, for a static compression ratio of 9.70:1.
http://www.kb-silvolite.com/kb_car/...etails&P_id=190
Then I'd use a retrofit hydraulic roller cam something like this one....
http://www.cranecams.com/product/ca..._detail&p=24362
that closes the intake valve at 35 degrees ABDC @0.050" tappet lift. That would afford a dynamic compression ratio of 8.52:1 and should make enough power to rip your head off.
Use Edelbrock RPM intake manifold mounting a 750 vacuum secondaries carb, long tube headers. Also, use a Cloyes roller timing set. The Ford units were retarded, so you want to bring that back to zero.

If you can't swing the roller cam, this flat tappet hydraulic stick will work fine....
http://www.cranecams.com/product/ca..._detail&p=24138

With that mild a cam a hydraulic roller offers no benefit over a flat tappet cam other than break in. Also, BBF HR cams create valve train geometry issues which are not easily overcome. Severe pushrod angles, pushrod hole clearancing, guideplate alignment issues etc...A properly spec'd and broken in flat tappet cam will give equal performance for a lot less money and headaches.