Build a '79 ford 400 engine - Page 2 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 01:21 AM
tbirdscott's Avatar
stuff'n things'n whatnot
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: P-Dot B.C.
Age: 29
Posts: 356
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamfasm
define reliable = for the 351M and the 400 ford oh lets say JUNK. if you have ever had any exposure to this engine you know the problems associated with this JUNK.
They arent powerhouses or fuel misers but i'd hardley call them junk, havn't had any more problems with the 351-400M in my time dealing with this "junk" than any other group of engines.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 01:47 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 9
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hi

Quote:
Originally Posted by bamfasm
define reliable = for the 351M and the 400 ford oh lets say JUNK. if you have ever had any exposure to this engine you know the problems associated with this JUNK.
I STRONGLY DISAGREE,THE 351M&400M CAN BE REALLY NICE ENGINES IF YOU RECAM IT! AND MAY BUMP THE COMPRESSION RATIO.BECAUSE FORD RETARDED THE CAM BY 4 DEGREES TO MEET EMISSIONS REQUIREMENTS, AND DROOPED THE COMPRESSION RATIO. THATS WHY THEY HAVE A LACK OF POWER BUT EVEN IN ITS STOCK FORM IT IS RELIABLE
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 12:51 PM
xntrik's Avatar
Save a horse, Ride a Cowboy.
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,131
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Persons who were born after a particular item ended production and have no personal experience of that item should not be considered as "experts". Their opinion should be observed with those facts in mind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 12:58 PM
jesse01's Avatar
mini me
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: titusville, fl.
Age: 31
Posts: 802
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canzus
You obviously can't define "reliable", or you wouldn't have
made that statement, right?? Reliable = go out every
morning for ten or so years, stick the key in, twist, engine
starts... That is what I call reliable...

But then again, Does you ride run yet??
it sure does! i go out every morning and turn the key in my roadmaster and go to work, than at the end of the day i get in it and turn the key and go home. so i guess it makes it very reliable since i turn the key twice a day and it fires up. sometimes 3 or 4 times a day if i decide to stop somewhere

also reliable is something you rely on hell or high water it won't let you down. and the only thing i rely on is my own 2 feet. you do have feet....right?

now as for your car starting for everyday for 10 years (which i think is a bunch of bull) is just dependable but not reliable. especially if it's a ford j/k



J

Last edited by jesse01; 01-08-2006 at 01:05 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 05:48 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 9
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by xntrik
Persons who were born after a particular item ended production and have no personal experience of that item should not be considered as "experts". Their opinion should be observed with those facts in mind.
WAS FOR ME?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 06:09 PM
redlightning's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TN
Age: 49
Posts: 1,082
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 3
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
http://www.ford-trucks.com/user_gall...&albumid=16758

In the post above he has a 400.A guy I work with has a 351m in a 4wd ,he is happy with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 07:11 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 9
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Me Again

I Also Have One With 175,000 On It And Its Still Running Strong
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 08:53 PM
xntrik's Avatar
Save a horse, Ride a Cowboy.
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,131
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRONCO_78
WAS FOR ME?
No sir. No attack on anyone intended.

Just a general statement that many persons pass on old stories they "heard" and they might have no direct experience themselves. (and some persons on forums just enjoy controversy, and some people are named "Dick")

I laughed at the "junk" statement as being absurd.
Personally I think the M series is a very strong engine, just birthed at an inopportune time of automotive development, design was iffy, technology was ancient, and smog rules were in their infancy...

I personally feel that Ford was going to develop the M series into the new "power house engines" replacing the FEs, but was fubarred by the gas crunch and the smog laws.

A properly rebuilt M today should run 150,000 miles easily with reasonable maintenance.

About the only real "junk" I can think of quickly was the aluminum Vega. Is there anyone named Dick who would argue that is was a great engine?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMAG0023.jpg
Views:	106
Size:	151.8 KB
ID:	9062  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 08:57 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 9
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Me To

Quote:
Originally Posted by xntrik
No sir. No attack on anyone intended.

Just a general statement that many persons pass on old stories they "heard" and they might have no direct experience themselves. (and some persons on forums just enjoy controversy, and some people are named "Dick")

I laughed at the "junk" statement as being absurd.
Personally I think the M series is a very strong engine, just birthed at an inopportune time of automotive development, design was iffy, technology was ancient, and smog rules were in their infancy...

A properly rebuilt M today should run 150,000 miles easily with reasonable maintenance.

About the only real "junk" I can think of quickly was the aluminum Vega. Is there anyone named Dick who would argue that is was a great engine?
I AGREE WITH YOU 100% ON BOTH . SORRY I THOGHT IT WAS TO ME
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 01-08-2006, 10:08 PM
predator carb guru's Avatar
Mark Goulette
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Morrison, Colorado
Age: 46
Posts: 149
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i know xntrik is gonna raz me on this one, but i have to say it. my first car was a 1975 ford ldt two door i bought for 300 bucks with lawnmower money. car was beat to hell, trans was going out, and had a 400m in it. a low buck tune-up, carb overhaul, and band adjustment turned it into a whole different car. would run 95-100 mph with ease, and actually got decent mileage for what it was.............i ended up trading it in on my first truck, and got $1100 bucks for it at the dealership................when i traded it in, it had over 150k miles on it, and didn't burn a drop of oil...............for a car driven by a teenager with a lead foot, i'd say it was pretty reliable...............oh, and might as well add this.............if you don't think they are good engines, just ask a high school friend of mine from long ago, steve doyon.........he had a 1978 f-350. 18" of lift, 44" tires, and a supercharged 400m that made a DYNO'D 850 hp. that was his daily driver, and he won alot of the local mud races with it too..............(damn rich kids anyway) who says they won't hold up??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 01-09-2006, 07:57 PM
xntrik's Avatar
Save a horse, Ride a Cowboy.
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,131
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Hey Pred, I would never raz you about this.

They are good engines..

I owned one new 73 400 and then one new 75 Cougar 351M simultaneously with a new 76 Elite 351 W (almost identical cars)...... W was better by 2 mpg and power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 01-09-2006, 09:01 PM
Max Keith's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fort Madison,Iowa
Age: 66
Posts: 2,391
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Reliability issues

351/400 M blocks are very reliable engines but have gotten short shrifted due to them being brought out during the days of infancy in reducing smog.
The 400 is an extremely torquey engine, and can hold its own quite well along side any other engine of similar displacement. Keep in mind that due to it being a square engine, its not intended to turn super high RPM, however, I do know of a few that have been turned well over 7000 RPM, without a lot of high dollar parts, and have survived quite well. It is very easy to get 1 hp per cubic inch, with out spending the national budget doing it, and come in easily around 5000 RPM , and do it on 87 octane gas as well.
The caviat is that if you are wanting to turn it into higher rpm, there are a couple little tricks that one should know for keeping the engine alive.
Since the M block is basically an expanded version of the Cleveland, it shares the same heads, cam, timing gear, exhuast manifolds, and ignition system. This makes getting parts a lot simpler. The intake is, however, wider, so a Cleveland intake wont work without adaptor plates. Both Edelbrock and Weiand make good street intakes for the M block, so adding carburetion isnt a problem. Ford also made a cast iron 4 bbl intake for some California models back in the mid 70's. They werent much more than a 2 bbl intake with a 4 bbl mounting surface, but if you can find one for $25-50 bucks its worth it to consider one.
The M block along with the Cleveland and Limas share one minor oiling problem, that being the passages from the mains to the cam bearings are too big, Allowing too much oil to go topside, at the higher rpm's. A simple cure for this is to get 5- 3/16th X 1 inch roll pins and 5- 3/8thsX 2 inch roll pins.
Starting with #2 main, start a 3/8ths roll pin into the oil passage going to the cam bearing. When you have the pin about half way in, start the 3/16ths pin into the 3/8ths pin, then drive them both down til they clear the top of the main bearing seat. Repeat this process on #3-5 and include the oil passage going from #5 main to the lifter gallery. DO NOT put restrictors in #1 main, as this passage also supplies the distributor, and you dont want to starve the distributor. There are enough items needing the oil from #1, and the lack of restriction there doesnt seem to be a major problem like on the others.
The other thing is on valves. The stock valves are a 2 piece unit and if you deside to run stiff valve springs, you can actually pull the head off of the valve, making for some very exspensive engine noises.
The 351/400 M weighs an average of 575 lbs, making it a fairly light engine, weightwise, for putting out big block types of torque.
I have put together a couple 400's, both for racing in hobby stock classes, and I know that both engines went 3-4 seasons without needing overhauls, so I guess thats a testament to their surviveability, and ran competitively as well. Not bad for a junk engine, but then you wouldnt ever see a 400 SBC last that long.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 01-11-2006, 05:02 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 82
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Wow, I guess this forum picked up again. I figured it just disappeared. I still haven't, made a decision on my 351M, and it developed an oil leak AGAIN from sitting, so I assume its pan related. Can't wait for it to warm up so I can check it out since my garage needs a new heater. If its not one thing, its anopther.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2012, 02:27 PM
Cars, Trucks, Boats
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Toledo, N.W.Ohio, USA
Posts: 881
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 80 Times in 78 Posts
. Hey Sal did you ever do your 400 and cdiedrick do your 351M?

. Lots easier now here in 2012 with off the shelf modified 351C pistons to get compression ratio up easily, just add a budget Summit cam/lifters/springs (and 4bbl. carb./intake or adapter if your engine didn't come with one) and you have instant good HP (350-450) and big torque (450-550)... (+ add a 400 crank to 351M, rods are the same)

. The 351M and 400 are reliable, just wimpy stock. As was Chevy 400. Same torque (2,000 RPMs) and HP (3600 RPMs) RPM peaks as an old flat head Briggs&Stratton lawn mower engine. The 351"M/400 block in my truck won't push it over 75 MPH... and gets horrid gas mileage with the stock low compression ratio and retarded cam... although most people think it has a 'cam' by the idle sound...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
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:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ford GT-40 Crate Engine Questions 31rdster Engine 8 11-27-2005 02:32 PM
Engine build help! 400 Small block 74montecarlo400 Engine 5 10-08-2003 11:36 PM
Engine build for hire,decision 78 monte Hotrodders' Lounge 9 05-10-2003 09:44 PM
will a 1969 455ci olds engine bolt right in place of a pontiac 400??? chevyelc81 Engine 3 06-12-2002 03:54 AM
Ford Engine Sizes bigjoedo Engine 1 01-31-2002 04:05 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.