Ford vs. Chevy small block

[Python14]

Yea, the biggest reason you see so many chevy SBs in restorations/rods etc is because they are easy to get cheap. Chevy put them in just about everything they made at some point or another. Plus chevy has a big crate engine program.

But what do I care? I am a diesel person. If it'd fit, I'd put a Powerstroke in a mustang.

[SniperSmurf]

As to rodding? And thats not restoring by the way.... Well there are several other reasons. They are easier to fit for one. And who's rear end is always used to mate up to that Chevy in a Hot Rodded car? Fords.

[anonymousbill123]

Screw Ford!!!

screw ford. they sux vs. chvey. My dad has a 67 camaro ss with a 350. That was a small engine for chevy back then. Ford thought that the 289 was big. woopdi doo. lets see... ford's 289 put out about 250 hp. Chevy's 350 put out a little over 300 hp. and also chevy had many large engines such as the 396, 382, 454, and the wonderful 502. the 454 stock put out about 450 hp. I think ive proved my point thank you for listening.

I <3 chevy, GMC, pontiac, cadillac, etc.

[dj89]

man your sig is way to big..

[Python14]

You proved nothing. Wow. Chevy can make big engines. Woopity do. Their cars are still ugly as sin. Also, a GM small block will not produce over 300 HP stock. I've worked with my fair share of small blocks, and promise you, 300 horses is not an out of the box number. Secondly, the 454 could only produce the supposed 450 hp when paired with the right parts and with high octane fuel(100+)...something you can't really get today without knowing some people. Hardly stock. Yea, the Ford engines are generally smaller...but who cares. Look at Honda. They can get over 100 HP per liter. For a 454 to get power like that, it would have to make close to 800 hp. Wow, some bragging rights.

Face it dude, Ford may not lead the race of engine size....because they only care about winning the races that require drivers.

[CoolHand]

OK folks, I can't help posting on this subject.

As an avid stock car racer, and follower of many a racing series, I'm gonna make several observations here, and you can take them as you will.

1) In the short track world (IE Local Saturday Night stuff), Fords will make more horses per cube (cubic inch), but they will cost at least 1.5X what a comparable chevy will.

2) Fords run so well in the Truck series because they've got the slickest bodies. They produce more front downforce, with less overall drag than either of the chevy or dodge trucks. Thusly, they don't need as many horses to run the same speed down the staights. NASCAR has been working on the Chevys and Dodges for the last two years to make them more competative in the aero arena.

3) In big league asphalt series (ARCA, Busch, Nextel, Etc), the big winning point is the team, and their engine builder, not the block they work with. In reality, neither motor makes more power than the other due to it make.

4) On the short tracks, since Fords usually make more horses per cube, you see them being run mostly where there is a cubic inch limit imposed by the rules. If you have an open engine rule, everyone will be running big sb chevys.

We run dirt modifieds under UMP/IMCA/Outlaw Rules, which basically means we don't have any engine rules. We run a 406 ci chevy, as do most of our competition. When we ran alum heads, the 406 was a good choice, cause we would spin the livin crap out of it (7800+ rpm), and not worry about ruining a head if we dropped a valve (you can fix alum heads). Now that we've moved to steel heads (different track, different rules), I have been toying with the idea of building a 434 thumper (still a sb chevy) so we can turn a few less revs and still have the power. Whatever the option we go with, it will still be cheaper than going with a ford of the same horsepower.

This argument has been going on since the dawn of time (kinda like the mag v cocker debate), and I doubt it will be settled by this post, but I thought I'd put out my viewpoint.

See ya in the pay line.

[SniperSmurf]

[bornl33t]

I call tell you what chevy does have that's bigger then ford... the ego's of the chevy drivers.
And you can't romp on my parade cause I own a ford, chevy and jeep. NO bias here.

[1stdeadeye]

I like the modular 4.6. Lots of cheap go fast parts are out there and available for it.

As for Nascar, any fool who thinks that the Ford or CHevy engine in them is remotely like the one in their car is a moron. Think so, go buy a Monte Carlo then and race it!

[Linkwarner]

You gotta go with the 63 Impala SS, with the 409 under the hood, makes it one of the coolest rides around.

[Linkwarner]

Not exactly the 77 impala, with a 305 under the hood.
cant post the pick of this one, its to big. Well the 63 up there is my dads baby, sometimes I think he loves it more than me, but then you think, you know that is a cool car

[CoolHand]

. . . . . As for Nascar, any fool who thinks that the Ford or CHevy engine in them is remotely like the one in their car is a moron.. . . . . .

If you are driving a car from the early to mid sixties, then you'd be pretty close. The blocks in both the chevy and the ford closely resemble their production ancestors from the days for the muscle cars.

The only real difference in the race blocks and the stock blocks are a few webs for strength, and a whole lot of deleted oil passages. Unless you knew your stuff, I doubt many folks could tell you which was a Bowtie race block (or FMS block) and which was a stock 350 (or 351).

The heads are another story all together. Now we all know that the powere lives in the heads and the intake, and so did chevy.

The SB2 heads that the Chevys in NASCAR's upper divisions run actually resemble fords more than they do the sb chevys of yore. They ditched the siamesed intake runners in favor of the more balanced individual ports. Same on the exhaust side. This had always been a sore spot for sb chevy circle trackers, and the SB2 fixed it well.

Born1337 - What are you talking about? Overgeneralize much?

[rehme]

who cares about small blocks any way big blocks can do the same thing at lower rpms

[CoolHand]

who cares about small blocks any way big blocks can do the same thing at lower rpms

Well, yes and no.

You can build a 500 cube big block, and get some nice HP numbers out of it, and do it at lower rpm than a 400 cube small block. However, a big small block will out do it every time.

You can take a bowtie block and punch it out (pretty much as far as it will go), and stroke it 'till you have to notch the pan rails, and end up with ~502 cubic inches, which will make just as much power, turn a few more rpms, AND be 200 - 350lbs lighter to boot.

For a race car, you just can't beat that.

A street car will love it too (Who doesn't like weight taken off their nose?). If you're a restorer, go for the big block to keep your ride original, but don't say its the better of the two options.

In the northeast (NY, PA, etc.) the DIRT Big Block modified class had to put a rule in place that prevents you from running a big small block in the big block class, cause that 200lbs off the nose was letting the bsb guys step all over the guys running a real big block.

You're right, that there is no replacement for displacement.

That just doens't mean a big block any more.

[SniperSmurf]

I like the modular 4.6. Lots of cheap go fast parts are out there and available for it.

Those can be nice mills, depending on what application you're looking for. I've just always preferred push rods to OHC engines.