So again, Ford worked to take to 390 to a 406, why not a 427 to 452, or 482?
Be careful, don’t let a Suburu WRX sneak by you.
Did you read the article? The problem was insufficient cylinder wall thickness that limited the bore size. The 427 maxed that out. Over square engines have some pretty high piston speeds and eventually you run into a situation where the piston almost has to push the rod sideways to push the crank. To go larger and maintain 100K mile plus reliability they needed a larger crank opening wider bore spacing and a taller deck. Those really big displacement FEs are usually build up from a Genesis block or other non stock not really mass produced casting.
I like the way you think!
All stock with a 600 cfm carb and GTE 390 exhaust manifolds? If yes, then lets go!! And if you want a stompin I got my 67 Stang with the Boss 351 stroked to 460. 4.11 and 35 spline carrier and axels. Subframe connectors and 90/10 and 70/30 with Calvert Racing leafs and traction bars. Lets get dirty!!
Rob
I am ready to race some more. Let’s do it!
No I didn’t read the article, since when did ANY manufacturer give more than 12,000 miles on a HP engine, let alone 100,000, Not sure about a Chevy 454 on 70, but I’m almost positive no Hemi got more than a year or 12,000, and we know what the HP 427 Ford got. I know of many Ford 427’s built up, including one that I have in a car, topping out at 482.
The majority of the 427s built were sold for industrial purposes. You can still find them running agricultural pumps all over the ogallala aquifer. They have all been rebuilt countless times and in many areas they run on natural gas. As to longevity, it wasn’t about the warranty it was about how long they would last. Marine use also outstripped car installations, of course the fact that many of those turned backwards just adds to the confusion. I am sure that when Ford won Le Mans by being able to run a 427 at 7000 RPM for 24 hours it even helped them sell industrial accounts that valued durability above all.
If you want to know why they built the 385 series your first clue is the number 385. Where the 428 was using what was considered to be maximum stroke of 3.985" the new 385 series only required a 3.85" stroke to achieve 460 cubic inch displacement. It may not seem like it but the FE was very compact and light in weight compared to the other big block engines of the time. It was intended to be the little brother to the MEL series engines. The 385 was intended to be versatile enough to replace the FE and go way beyond it in displacement. You have to look at the big picture to see that performance was just a tiny part of what was going on at Ford.
The article will give you a historical perspective of how all the transitions came about. https://cccforum.discoursehosting.net/t/the-august-2018-ride-of-the-month-is-ted-taylors-68gurney-429-powered-70-standard/9410/1
Thanks for that picture. Now I have to try and find a copy of that magazine.
Here is the cover - unfortunately the GT-E they tested had an open rear end and couldn’t get traction.
- Phillip
Ahh, the old, “disconnect the sway bar” trick. 
No, they launch just like that with the sway bar connected. Here’s me in 2001 at the Columbus, Ohio All Ford Nationals.
How about 498 cubic inches in a stock block!! Turn up your speakers!! Built for pump gas and using stock heads. This is a very conservative build!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MY_6OjRQIj8&feature=youtu.be
Apparently, there was at least one prototype 1968 Mustang hydraulic 427 with a 4-speed. I believe that topic was discussed on the Cobra Jet forum recently. I recall reading on the SAAC (Shelby) forum (before it crashed last year) that there was also at least one prototype 1968 Shelby GT500 with a hydraulic 427 with a 4-speed. I don’t remember ever reading about a 427 Cougar 4-speed prototype.
The Shelby 427 prototype was built using a production GT500 and was an automatic. It was tested by one of the magazines back in the day. Like all GT500 Shelbys it had a “S” engine code in the VIN. The car is not known to exist, but it could be out there as it was not a Ford prototype. I own the magazine where it was tested and have shared it on various forums over the years.
Well, you might be right that the 1968 prototype 427 Shelby 4-speed was not built because we have no photos of that car that I am aware of, but Shelby documents prove that the 427 GT500 4-speed was planned to be offered for the 1968 model year, for example ^. If you are referring to the 1968 press release cars, I think that 427 car is a different car from the airport TOW vehicle(s).
Not only was the 1968 Shelby GT500 with the optional 427 and 4-speed planned, people actually ordered them before the 427 was cancelled:
So, apparently a 427 with a 4-speed was planned at some point for 1968 Mustangs and 1968 Shelby GT500’s, but I have never seen any indication that the 4-speed was planned for Cougars.
Lots of 427 powered Ford and Mercury and Shelby vehicles were engineered and planned for 1968 model year. Then all those plans were cancelled when the strike happened. We are so lucky that the 427 GT-E Cougar was the only vehicle produced. No Shelby Mustangs, Torinos, Cyclones, or Mustangs were ever produced with the 427 at the factory. Piles of paperwork, emblems, warranty programs, advertisements, etc were produced for all those vehicles that never existed.