1971 ltd

[whd507]

as I'm tearing into the engine compartment, cleaning the engine etc. I ran across the serial numbers on both the engine and trans. its a 360hp 429 4v (4 barrel) its all original with 60k miles, I tried to document all the crayon marks, and such since I'm not restoring this time around, only making a weekend driver, but I may restore in the future.

[Stranger in the Black Sedan]

Great engine, I had a 72 429 and threw the 1970 D0VE heads on it to bring compression back up to 10:1, and I also changed the later 4 deg retarded timing set to pre 72 set. That engine ran great. With 80k on mine there was no ridge at all at the top of the cylinders when I swapped heads. The first thing I got rid of was that odd ball autolite carb though. Edelbrock 750 out of the box ran great, although I had to richen the cruise mixture slightly

[whd507]

its kinda odd, it has a non air injection head on the drivers side, but a drilled head on the passenger side. both heads are DOVE-C head castings. I cant see any evidence of it ever being apart.

[CROWNMARAUDER]

Can you post any pictures of the LTD? I am a fan of the 71-78's.

[69marquis conv]

Those are some tough old mills. It's nice to drive a car once in a while that is making an incredible amount of torque right off of idle.

[Vortex]

71's were still high compression and ran about 365 hp if I remember right. I always thought this was one of Fords best engines ever. Id love to have it in my MM instead of the cammer.

[Master]

Is it true that the 429/460 were the same block? If so, is there much difference between the two other than displacement? I ask becuase I have a 76 LTD with 460 4bbl that was supposed to have 225-odd hp according to what I could find. I am told by family members that it always felt like significantly more.

[Breadfan]

What carb is that, is that an Autolite 4300?

The 4100 appears to not be a bad option, the more I learn about this carb the more I like it and it appears the general consensus is that it's a great carb

I heard the 4300 can be made to run great too but is more complex and harder to get setup just right.

[Breadfan]

Is it true that the 429/460 were the same block? If so, is there much difference between the two other than displacement? I ask becuase I have a 76 LTD with 460 4bbl that was supposed to have 225-odd hp according to what I could find. I am told by family members that it always felt like significantly more.

I think this correct unless there were any differences in deck height.

The 427 was an FE block but 429 was the other ford big block that the 460 is based on. Again not sure if it's literally the same block (just bored and stroked to get 460) or if the 460 is any taller. Probably not though.

[Breadfan]

its kinda odd, it has a non air injection head on the drivers side, but a drilled head on the passenger side. both heads are DOVE-C head castings. I cant see any evidence of it ever being apart.

Didn't some emissions changes really start in '71? Perhaps it was a partial retrofit to meet some new standard for 71 vs 70?

[Master]

Google the old 70's thunderbirds and you get all the poop on the 429/460. They phased in the 460 to meet emmissions standard (why, I've no idea) and phased out the 429. This was around '74. By '75 the 460 was making 218hp, 220 tq with Cats. So, my numbers were about right, sadly. Surely, though, the basic block was unchanged and a good head/cam/intake combo could boost that back up into the 300's without any trouble at all.

See here: http://auto.howstuffworks.com/ford-thunderbird3.htm

[Stranger in the Black Sedan]

They phased in the 460 to meet emmissions standard (why, I've no idea)

Longer stroke was better for emissions somehow, I remember that coming up frequently for 70s stuff.

Remember the difference between the GROSS hp ratings of 1971 and down, and the NET ratings 1972+. The 360 gross hp rating would be far lower, net, since the gross ratings back then didn't factor in accessories, water pump, exhaust, anything. I drove the 429 in both "212 net hp" and "360 gross " hp trim, and although the 71-earlier spec 429 in the same car was definitely snappier, it was not as big a difference as the apples to oranges gross to net comparison would make it seem. I do know that my 212 net hp 429 in my 72 T bird, which I weighed on the scales at 4700 lbs, only a few gals gas, no driver, to a 16.00 1/4 mile w/ 3.50 posi rear and 31 spline axles that I added. I bet the car ran close to 15 flat when I re did the motor to the "360 gross hp" specs. Those cars are some of the heaviest cars Ford ever made. The AC/power steering combo bracket on my 72 t bird was CAST IRON. THat bracket probably weighed 25 lbs. The whole roof of the car had sound proofing insulation in it that weighed a ton as well.

[Master]

I can explain the stroke thing. The emmissions are directly proportional to the surface surface area of the cylinder. Surface area of a cylinder is directly proportional to stroke, but goes up by the square of diameter. So, reduce the diameter but increase the stroke and you have less surface area. This is from PiD2/4*L=SA.
That site I referenced did indeed say that the T-Bird of that vintage was about the heaviest thing Ford ever made.
My preference would be to have about 300 rwhp and 500 rwtq in the old wagon. That should make it move briskly enough without sacrificing ride quality.
This is why of two mugs with the same volume of hot tea, the short fat one will cool faster than the tall skinny one.

[88LTDCV351]

I love the big old sedans with the big blocks. Since I've been working on my old Crown Vic and joined up with the Police Car Owners of America club, I've seen a lot of those nice old big ex-police cars at their car shows with the big engines. I think when I'm finally done someday fixing up my Crown Vic, I'm going to look for an old Ford Galaxie around late sixties/early seventies to fix up next that has the big engine. I've always been a Ford person but I love this article
http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2007/05/01/hmn_feature15.html (http://www.hemmings.com/mus/stories/2007/05/01/hmn_feature15.html)

[69marquis conv]

As mentioned by others, the crank (stroke) was the primary difference between the 429 & 460.
The 1969-70 429 4Vs were rated 360hp (gross), 476lbs/ft of torque and had an 11.0:1 compression ratio.
1971 429 4Vs were rated 360hp (gross), 480lbs/ft of torque, and had a 10.5:1 compression ratio.
1972 429 4Vs were rated 208hp (net), 322lbs/ft of torque and had an 8.5:1 compression ratio.
Lincoln offered a 460 in 1968-71 that was rated 365hp /500lbs/ft of torque.

The emissions heads of 1972 were responsible for the comp. drop.

[prchrman]

go here to find all the info you will ever need on 429/460ci...www.460ford.com...

[whd507]

even on the 72-later 429/460s (dont forget the 370 truck engine) some goodies will help. I always use a 68-71 timing set on the later engines, it helps a lot as the cam is the same grind, but retarded after 71. the 68-71 4v intake is superior to later ones, plus no smog. I have a 68 Lincoln intake on my 79 370 in my F600. the 370 is a de-bored 429.

73 -later heads are not bad, and use Cleveland-style rockers that are easily converted to roller rockers, plus most are unleaded-ready.

the next engine will be a 71 429/460 block I have, with the forged steel crank in the 370, with 429 forged pistons, full floating pins, plasma coated likely 9.1 comp. 75-78 unleaded heads with end smog holes capped, and minor porting on the exhaust side. the 68 Lincoln intake with 3" four-hole spacer and 1411 Edelbrock (it has that stuff now) I would like to get a E40D from a 92-97 F-450 as it has a e-brake on the tailshaft, and then that goes into the F-600, with headers and duals to the rear of the 12 flatbed...