400 c.i. opinions

[ezernut9mm]

i have always thought of the 400 engine as a dog, but never owned one. i would like everyone's opinions on these engines. also, what kind of perches do they use? fe, windsor, or their own? if they use their own type of perches can they be bolted directly into a 67?
the reason i am asking is because i am looking at a running, driving 73 to use as a donor for a drive train for my 66. hopefully i could part the rest to recoup some expense.

http://kansascity.craigslist.org/cto/951618210.html

[fordman]

they would use a small block mount. they are the same block as the 351m. one other thing that isnt the orginal engine for that truck the 400 didnt come out in trucks until 79 i think. i am not an expert on that. but they weren't put into 73 trucks factory. looks rusty. many dentside parts fit bumpside truck. even the floorpans and center hump.

[dantheman71]

I agree and disagree with Fordman. I agree that they are common with the 351M, however I disagree about the mounts, if you read in the 2008 ford racing catalog (page 213 to be exact) it will tell you that the mounts are unique to the 351M and the 400 and the bell housing is common to the 429/460.
My dad rebuilt a 400 years ago and put it in a Mercury Marquis, it was a rocket after that because it had lots of performance goodies. According to the engine builder the weak link on those engines was the valve guides. If you went with an aftermarket set of heads then that wouldn't be an issue.

I also agree with Fordman that they weren't a factory truck engine until at least the late 70's. Dad's car was a 78. Not sure exactly when the trucks got that engine. My brother has a dirt track car that is a 77 with a 351M in it.

[fordman]

dan the engine bolt pattern for the 351m 400 429 and 460 are all the same. the engine perches are different for those four motors though. starting in 1969 the 302 was introduced into our trucks. when they made that engine they put small block stands in thier to get the pinion angle correct. that stand is about 1 inch different than the fe stands. they used the same stands for 302 351m 351c and 351w as well as the 400 since the 400 is the same block as the 351m. this stand was used until 79 in 2wd. the 429 and 460 do use a different stand for those two engines. they have motor mount cups that bolt to the engine which go over the rubber motor mount. which bolt to the stand. here are some pics of the small block stands and the 460 stands. all fe small block and 460 stands will bolt on to and fit on the 65-79 truck 2wd crossmembers. oh the 6 cyl stands are the same as the fe stands. they just sit one set of bolt holes forward for the 6 cyl useage. i hope that cleasrs up what i said earlier. all 4wd stands are different than 2wd stands.

[aramil]

fordman they came in trucks before 79, my brother has a 77 that i am trying to buy, australian cleavland heads are a very good performance boost since the american ports are either too big or too small i cant remember.

[fireguywtc]

I don't think the 400 is worth the trouble. They are dog motors and take to much time, energy, and money to make decent power. My Dad had a 79 bronco with the factory 400 and it was way more sluggish then my 352. JMO but I don't think I would spind my money on it.

[fitzwell]

Had a 400 in my old ranchero. Stock, yeah they're pigs. Install a slightly lumpy cam, headers & do some minor headwork, they're stump pullers.Also pay close attenttion to the bottom end. Oiling system is like a cleveland Have a large appetite for fuel,IIRC

[LANCE65]

Check out this months Popular Hotrodding. I personally LIKE the 400. A good build will give you a very strong engine. JMO
-Lance

[sideoilerfe]

In 1977 they replaced the FE's with 351M and 400. I honestly think they're not worth the trouble.

[fordman]

fordman they came in trucks before 79, my brother has a 77 that i am trying to buy, australian cleavland heads are a very good performance boost since the american ports are either too big or too small i cant remember.

i couldn't remeber when they were put in. to confirm what you said the correct answer is below.

In 1977 they replaced the FE's with 351M and 400. I honestly think they're not worth the trouble.

[craftsman]

I personally don't have a problem with the 351m 400. I had the 351m in a 78 and it was a tire burner. i'd say go for it. Here is some info on the 351m and 400.
http://www.projectbronco.com/
Look around on there web site and you find out a lot about these engines.
When you enter the site look to the left and go under tech.

[fordman]

theres a guy in indepence on craigslsit witha 390 in the truck hes parting out.

[ezernut9mm]

i saw that one. i plan on calling him.

theres a guy in indepence on craigslsit witha 390 in the truck hes parting out.

[sgs]

The 400M has a really long stroke and is capable of producing lots of torque. Depending on how far you want to go, performance parts are somewhat rare. You will be limited on compression, there aren't a lot of piston options. I think there is a way to use 351 cleveland pistons but you should find out from someone who knows more than me. The reason they were dogs from new was that Ford had to retard the cam timing to pass emissions. An offset cam key will liven that 400 right up.
sgs

[fordman]

i have heard that about the 351m too. you can use a zero degree timing set to make the engine wake up.