[job1bf]

Due to the dwindling supply of good 351C blocks here in the states, the 400 is getting a lot more attention. They are plentiful and cheap. This is only one example, but here is someone who has some exp. in 400 performance.

TMeyer, Inc. Precision Automotive Machining

 

[job1bf]

BTW - rumor has it CHI is make a dedicated 400 single plane manifold...if so, that should jump start more development.

 

[bryanscott]

I put together a 400 for my79 f 150,TO drive to work and haul with,not as a hot rod,it runs 10's in the 1/8,gets 14 mpg,71 2v heads ported and gasket matched 268 comp cam.edelbrock streetmaster intake,headers.pulls really hard from 1600 to 5000, probly killed some bottom end with the porting and the cam,if i had a small stall there's no telling.It makes great power.JUst wonder how it would feel with a big cam,more carb,in a smaller vehicle.

 

[micklessm]

HOWEVER - Weiand no longer makes the spacers. They are still on the Holley site, but they are discontinued. The only intake made for the 400 is the dual from Edelbrock. They do not sell a single plane for the 400. Holley does not make intakes for the 400. The may be an old SP2P out there, but those all sucked rocks anyway. See pricemotorsports.com for other spacers. Warning - not cheap.

The big problem with the 400 (and it's a 400, not a 400M) is the deck clearance and the lack of pistons. You can bush the rods and run a 351C piston, but you'll ahve to work at it to get the pistons up close to the deck. And any US 2V heads built after 1975 suck badly in the exhaust ports.

 

[micklessm]

I'm in Australia. I have a unmolested original 1973 351 with over 10 inch deck height, 4 inch bore, rod length 147mm centre to centre, 60mm mains, 3.5 inch stroke. The block is dated 20 December 1973. I have been told that the large journal crank was standard in the 351m / 400 clarified through a quiet a few people who can not agree. Very confusing. This engine has never been disabled until now. Any info much appreciated.

 

[micklessm]

I'm in Australia. I have a unmolested original 1973 351 with over 10 inch deck height, 4 inch bore, rod length 147mm centre to centre, 60mm mains, 3.5 inch stroke. The block is dated 20 December 1973. I have been told that the large journal crank was standard in the 351m / 400 clarified through a quiet a few people who can not agree. Very confusing. This engine has never been disabled until now. Any info much appreciated.

 

[micklessm]

Some pics don't know if they will help. Mate with GT Falcon tells me stroke and bore are same as his 351 Cleveland but my deck height is over an inch taller ???

 

[CLEVELAND JUNKY]

I'm in Australia. I have a unmolested original 1973 351 with over 10 inch deck height, 4 inch bore, rod length 147mm centre to centre, 60mm mains, 3.5 inch stroke. The block is dated 20 December 1973. I have been told that the large journal crank was standard in the 351m / 400 clarified through a quiet a few people who can not agree. Very confusing. This engine has never been disabled until now. Any info much appreciated.

Taking a gamble anyone on this thread is even alive still with covid and the time frame of 13-14 years 🤣🤣🤣

 

[micklessm]

But you saw it so perhaps I might be lucky 🤔😉