I am a 23 year old guy who has been turning wenches for almost 8 years. I have heard about Chevys "awesome" motors and MOPAR's HEMI's for quite some time now. I think Fords SOHC 427 SOX motor is THE SICKEST MOTOR EVER. All most 800HP, and was outlawed in NASCAR and NHRA in 1968, for KICKING MOPARS AND CHEVYS ASS!!! The only BB GM ever had was in a CADDY!!!!

So you know What MOPAR stands for???

Master Of Plaster And RUST

keep dreaming there big guy  

You got the right idea I'd say.

FORDBBGROUPIE4EVAH or whatever your name is...  Find me ONE SOHC 427 that isn't in a museum....  You should have at least mentioned the BOSS 429 since it was sort of a production engine, though still not as good as the Mopar Hemi...

yep your on the wrong track

Did you know that the FORD Flathead V-8 had the FIRST hemi HEADS, and some #### RIPPED off a guy who had the IDEA first. Hey Man I like MOPAR and FORDS and HATE CHEVYS!!! And the the #### WHO LIVE IN HOLIDAY INN EXPREES, HOW MANY MOTORS HAVEW YOU REBULID!!!! Me 3 and 4 DIESAL MOTORES!!!  

Gib0 you are a BONEAFIDE IDIOT!!!! You have no Clue who you are talking to, do I WILL PUT YOU TO SHAME AT MOTORS!!! MISTER," I have been turning WRENCHES for 2 year...####!!!! How many Motors have your Rebuilt and BUITLT???!!!!

I have Built 3 CAR MOTORS and 4 DIESAL MOTORS,SO SUCK IT HARD!!!

Let me guess you LIKE CHEVYS??!!! Chevy MOTORS is like a EXCUSE, EVETYBODY HAS ONE!!! CHEVY MOTORS are the EASIEST TO BUILD AND BLOW UP!!!! You can go to a JUNK yard and FINE a 350 in any JUNK YARD!!! Go toa JUNK YARD and find a 351 Cleveland 2 bolt main and a 2 barrell CARB??? THE ARE LIKE FINDING A NEEDLE IN A HAY STACK!!!  

Listen Dipstick, you are only 15, why don't you go play your PS2 and learn some RESPECT!!!!! For guys that have been doing this MOTOR WORK longer and who actually know how to build a motor instead of "thinking" thaey can.  

Ok for one why would you want to build a 351 with a 2 barrel anyways. For two all ford motors suck, how many head bolts hold there heads down, and they still blow head gaskets, or how about the problems they are having on the new motors were the sparkplugs get blown out of the head. They couldn't even put the distributor on the right end of the motor, you have to take half the motor apart just to change the timing chain, or how about their none adjustable rocker arms, or their five inch long crank snouts that are just waiting to break off, and we can't forget their poor head designs, fords are known for their poor flowing exhaust ports. And this is to just name a few things wrong with ford.

I think the small and big block chevy speak for themselves, look at when these motors were made, in the 50's and 60's. The basic design of the small block chevy have been around for over 50 years and it is still in production today. Fifty year old technology and it is still kicking fords ass. Look at how many different ford and mopar V8's there are and then look at how chevy kept to the basic design of the small and big block chevy. I guess when you make it right the first time you don't need to make different motors to try to keep up.

And if anyone has the right to talk about motors its me. I've  built more motors than I care to count, and have been a ASE master certified technician for over 10 years. You say you know how to build motors, then tell me how you would build a motor for all out drag racing, using a small block ford. Give some detail, list parts, lets see if you know about motors.

And I have to say for a kid GibTG knows his stuff. And maybe even more than you. One thing I'll say, when he is your age he will definately know more than you.

FORD= F*cked Over Rebuilt Dodge  

"I think the small and big block chevy speak for themselves, look at when these motors were made, in the 50's and 60's. The basic design of the small block chevy have been around for over 50 years and it is still in production today. "

Yup.  I tell a lot of ricers that.

So they have 2-valve, pushrod cam-in-block motors.  Very low tech ancient technology.  But if you compare, GM V-8 blocks still make big power, emissions legit, and pretty fuel efficient.

IMHO, GM is the only one who knows how to build 2-valve, pushrod engines.  Everyone else failed or gave up because it was hard to keep them emissions legit and make power at the same time.  While some may look down on the small block, it really didn't matter except for the end result.  They improved manufacturing process and with the use of computer to analyze flow dynamics, they keep improving it.

For me, it is hard to improve on a simple engine, because there are very little variables, but that's what makes them so fun to build.

TubbyCamaro and you are missing the point.  Two and four-valve "cammer" engines are more than a match for antique pushrod designs.  Given equal cubic inches, cammers should win every time (assuming reasonable airflow numbers) because the cammers' lighter valvetrains allow higher rev limits.

The 427 SOHC would have ruled NASCAR if it hadn't been outlawed.  Cammers are also verboten in Top Fuel (where they would smoke the aftermarket "hemis" now used).

Case in point:  SVT's weak-cammed 1999-2001 DOHC 4.6 Cobra gave up 67 cubes to the LT-1 and LS-1, but virtually matched their power outputs.  And the 2000 Cobra R's 5.4 obliterated all but the latest LS-6 plants.

Low end torque and packaging are the only apparent advantages of GM's pushrod museum pieces. And Fords new SOHC 3-valver is about to snatch away the torque-per-cube crown.

I won't even mention any European DOHC V-8s . . . .

Thank!! dc511scj. For the HElp on FORD and Telling all the CHEVY BEERNUTS to," KNOW YOUR ROLES AND SHUT THERE HOLES!!"" Man I know more about cars than a 15 year old KID!!!! Who needs to QUIT TRYING TO BE A MECANIC AND START PLAYING HIS PS2!!!!!!!!!  

I think someone needs to settle down and pull their head outta their ass.   

The 4.6 is a piece of sh*t, in a dyno test were the 4.6 was supose to put out 300+ HP, it only put out 260 HP. I believe you can find this article in CarCraft, it was at one of the car shows that they covered.

Also doesn't GM have a pushrod motor that dominates Indy.

And how long is a overhead cam motor's timing chain. What, about six feet long, that will keep everything in time won't it. And think about the stretch, with any real HP you'll waste that chain quick. And think of all the work that is involved in doing a cam swap. I'll stick with my one cam motor thank you.  

I'm fully aware of the benefits of an OHC and more than 2-valve setup.

It just cost too much and because of the large heads, the width is greater, and to make it fit, displacement has to be made smaller.  The engines are also heavier.

Those setups work best with variable valve timing/lift and variable runner length intakes, because the high breathing that it supports at high rpm hp doesn't support it at low rpms.  It's basically like having a heavily ported head, intake and cam to match, torque curve pushed up and low-end torque is lost.  Multi-valve pentaroof heads are superior to inline wedges, but they cause tumbling more than swirl, and swirl is better because it happens in the downstroke and upstroke.  Many OHC setups need to optimize the velocity of the intake charge with variable this and that to induce enough tumble and swirl for better combustion.

Hell, GM's Vortec 4200 DOHC cam-phasing inline-six 4.2L makes more hp than the 4.6L.

I think the Northstars meet or exceed the power output of Fords, just they're pricey (good thing the CTS-V is a LS6).

"SVT's weak-cammed 1999-2001 DOHC 4.6 Cobra gave up 67 cubes to the LT-1 and LS-1, but virtually matched their power outputs.  And the 2000 Cobra R's 5.4 obliterated all but the latest LS-6 plants."

Good point, but you can also reverse it.  GM's larger, ancient pushrods outperformed Ford's engines equipped with OHC/multi-valve setups.  I don't just look at peak values.  Power to the ground and the LS engines smoked the modular motors.  Same goes with a lot of other motors.  The LS6 smokes a lot of cars.  Displacement will overcome technology.  Both is even better.

GM's latest's antique pushrod even met or exceeded their own Lotus-developed DOHC LT5 found in ZR1 Corvettes.

Their cars are also a lot cheaper, particially due to the uses of the cheap simple motors.  More bang-for-the-buck.  Lots of it...

And I think an Integra Type-R can beat 4.6L GTs.

And I never liked the intake manifold of Mustangs.  Looks like they don't work well...

If there was a Ford I'd like to build up, it would be destroking a Triton V-10 to 4.6L to bump up the rod-stroke ratio, individual throttle body it, and make over 460 hp emissions legit, then stuffing it into a Mustang, to shut up 100 hp/L Honda ricers.  Basically almost like a Ferrari engine, but Ford already did and cost was too high to make it feasible(like a Ferrari).