367 vs 410 Engines Masters

-
It's a comparison between this similarly built 367 vs 410, not this 367 vs W9 410 what comparison sense does that make?

I know, I used the W9 as an exaggeration, Same thing if you just put ported Edelbrocks with a 2.08 vs this 367 still not a fair comparison. Every time there's a 360 vs 400+ engine some always want the 400+ built better in some weird sense of fairness. Like I said makes no sense to me.
 
It's a comparison between this similarly built 367 vs 410, not this 367 vs W9 410 what comparison sense does that make?

I know, I used the W9 as an exaggeration, Same thing if you just put ported Edelbrocks with a 2.08 vs this 367 still not a fair comparison. Every time there's a 360 vs 400+ engine some always want the 400+ built better in some weird sense of fairness. Like I said makes no sense to me.
W9...that's reaching;-)

The comparison is ill fated, because they are not similarly built. The comparison is actually teaching you what happens when the 4" crank is installed into an engine combination designed to feed 360ci. And, as its already been said, the 360 is the far more economical combination with the aforementioned camshaft and cylinder heads.

To each their own...
 

my point exactly. nothin' like jumpin' tracks part way through a conversation (as it were). it got to it's worst when the 500hp honda came up. wtf!!! if heads that good were available for domestic v8's imagine the hp potential. look.... i'm doing it now :BangHead:
neil.
 
my point exactly. nothin' like jumpin' tracks part way through a conversation (as it were).
neil.
16 pages long no one cursing out others, topics are in the ballpark of one another, I'm sure there's been a lot of eye roll's but overall not too bad :)
 
Yes sir. Although Ford never gave the 400 the "M" designation, it kinda got hung with it anyway. I have the 351M that was in the truck when I got it. It burned an exhaust valve so I put the 400 in it that I had built under the work bench. The 400 lost oil pressure "mysteriously" after about three years, so here we are after making repairs and fixin to go back in.
 
Last edited:
Yes sir. Although Ford never ave the 400 the "M" designation, it kinda got hung with it anyway. I have the 351M that was in the truck when I got it. It burned an exhaust valve so I put the 400 in it that I had built under the work bench. The 400 lost oil pressure "mysteriously" after about three years, so her we are after making repairs and fixin to go back in.
Used to "borrow" a neighbors LTD for beer runs and that 400M would blaze the bias ply's... Good to see someone appreciates them.
 
Last edited:
Used to "barrow" a neighbors LTD for beer runs and that 400M would blaze the bias ply's... Good to see someone appreciates them.
I've always liked them. They got a bad rap because Ford had mega problems with detonation with the increased stroke. They made the compression height on the pistons shorter and shorter and the dish bigger and bigger lowering compression, when what they should have done was put some quench heads on it like the 351C had in Australia. That would have fixed the problem. OR they couldda done like I did and mill the heads .060" and put more cam in it. lol I actually have a set of the 351C 4V closed chamber big port heads, but they need a lot of work. That would make for a really nice one, but it ain't in the budget. lol
 
16 pages long no one cursing out others, topics are in the ballpark of one another, I'm sure there's been a lot of eye roll's but overall not too bad :)
No one cursing out others, that's because Rumblefish360 hasn't showed up.
 
Yes sir. Although Ford never gave the 400 the "M" designation, it kinda got hung with it anyway. I have the 351M that was in the truck when I got it. It burned an exhaust valve so I put the 400 in it that I had built under the work bench. The 400 lost oil pressure "mysteriously" after about three years, so here we are after making repairs and fixin to go back in.
There supposed to be a 400 in my 80 Bronco that what I was told when I bought or it just has 400 valve covers but have never check it out forsure, is there a 400 stamped on the block somewhere ?
 
There supposed to be a 400 in my 80 Bronco that what I was told when I bought or it just has 400 valve covers but have never check it out forsure, is there a 400 stamped on the block somewhere ?
Nope. Nothing like that. They (351M and 400) all shared the same series of casting numbers, so the ONLY way to verify 100% is either measure the piston at BDC from the deck, OR get the casting number off the crank. The 351 will have a "4" designation, while the 400 will have a "5" designation, both usually followed by an "M" or some such.
 
I've always liked them. They got a bad rap because Ford had mega problems with detonation with the increased stroke. They made the compression height on the pistons shorter and shorter and the dish bigger and bigger lowering compression, when what they should have done was put some quench heads on it like the 351C had in Australia. That would have fixed the problem. OR they couldda done like I did and mill the heads .060" and put more cam in it. lol I actually have a set of the 351C 4V closed chamber big port heads, but they need a lot of work. That would make for a really nice one, but it ain't in the budget. lol
There is more satisfaction building a well thought out engine with what one can afford. Good on you! I'm guessing "Ken" set you up with the proper valve events too.
 
There is more satisfaction building a well thought out engine with what one can afford. Good on you! I'm guessing "Ken" set you up with the proper valve events too.
No, I went with an off the shelf Summit cam for this one. I used their version of the 351c 4V camshaft. .509 .509 218/228 @.050 on a 114 stabbed in 6 degrees advanced. I wanted a little more vacuum signal than the 108 LSA was giving for power brakes.
 
Cool comparison. Not sure if anyone mentioned this.

On the 367 and 410 in the original post.
One thought, if someone could deal with a higher tq peak.

Do the 367 and use the funds that would’ve gone for the stroker assembly and run trick flow heads and a roller cam instead of the flat tappet cam. Depending on some variables, could work better???
 
Cool comparison. Not sure if anyone mentioned this.

On the 367 and 410 in the original post.
One thought, if someone could deal with a higher tq peak.
Ya, In the street it's probably easier to get the 367 to hook up.
Do the 367 and use the funds that would’ve gone for the stroker assembly and run trick flow heads and a roller cam instead of the flat tappet cam. Depending on some variables, could work better???
There's no catchy saying for better top end :) like there is for strokers "There no replacement for displacement" "Torque is King"
 
-
Back
Top Bottom