CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Entertain Us - 400 sbc question

Found this on this site. For my truck.

View attachment 458834

Yup, by '79, they weren't great.
The '70 400 that I pulled out of a station wagon was better, and rated differently.
 
Ands what the bent one is ignoring is I didn't give a crap about the horsepower number, just the torque and the rpm that it peaked at. Midrange torque. Period.
No, they didn't have great heads, but look at the torque numbers and the torque peak rpm of the Olds, Buick and Cadillac engines of the late sixties and 1970.
None of those engines were turds, and the cam/port numbers on all of them were more proportional to size than the 400

350 engines didn’t have enough air, and the 400s used the same port size/shape and same PN for the cam. Therefore it was short airflow by an additional 11.42%
 
400 was never a performance engine in stock form.

Upgrade some parts and they can go.
 
Top Bottom