Thinking of Updating to this 427 CUI

[ICETOO]

Hi All,

Thinking of updating the plant next year some time and was looking at replacing a warm 5.0 HO with this Ford Racing M-6007-Z427AFT 427 CUI Alloy stroker set up.



The company that created the famous 427 FE engine announces a modern version of the legendary motor. Built on Ford Racing's aluminum Z351 block, the 427 crate engine is engineered and built for drive-ability and durability while still offering a throaty growl. The engine is ideal for street rods, kit cars and all Ford projects requiring big power in a reliable, lightweight package.

Features

427 cubic inches
600 hp @ 6500 rpm (STP), 558 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm (STP)
570 hp @ 6500 rpm (SAE), 530 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm (SAE)
11.0:1 compression ratio (nominal)
Ford Racing aluminum 4-bolt main block M-6010-Z351
Forged Mahle pistons
Forged steel H-beam connecting rods
Solid Roller Cam
Intake duration 258 @ .050" intake
Exhaust duration 260 @ .050" exhaust
Valve lift intake .644"
Valve lift exhaust .653"
Roller Rocker Arms (1.65:1 ratio)
Rocker arm stud girdle
Double Roller Timing Chain M-6268-B302
Forged steel crankshaft
High performance rear sump oil pan M-6675-DRS351 fits most kit cars
CNC ported Ford Racing aluminum "Z" cylinder heads M-6049-Z304P with 2.08"intake valves and 1.60" exhaust valves
High-performance harmonic balancer M-6316-D302
Can be used in kit cars, street rods, Mustangs, Fox-bodied cars and trucks
Depending on your application, a different timing cover, water pump, performance oil pan and pickup may be required. See installation notes
Does not include intake manifold or distributor

Ford Racing M-6007-Z427AFT 427 Aluminum Long Block - Front Sump

So noting that is based on the 351Z, with the same dimensions looking to use the masflo efi for the 351W set up, with maybe upgraded injectors.

The plan would be like so...



and thence



but using this air cleaner....



.....now the weight and dimensions do not seem larger than the current set up, initial research indicates transmission, engine mount,exhaust, wiring and plumbing compatibility...so interested in your thoughts...I like the sound of this firing order as well, so not keen on a chev option.

Cheers Az..(had heaps more in the first post but the site timed out and I lost it)

[bobcowan]

There are some external differances between the 302 and 351. The 351W is taller and wider. There are a few things that will not cross over: Intake manifold, headers, oil pan.

You can use the 302 distributor, but you must also use the 302 oil pump and oil pump drive shaft.

Do some research on using the Z heads, as (I think) they have a raised exhaust port and you might have trouble fitting the exhaust.

[olddog]

The engine specs sound pretty good. The cam may be a bit radical for EFI. The MassFlow may handle it, but the idle vacuum will be pretty low. I have 236/242 duration in a 347 and a MassFlow system. It idles OK. I have 12"Hg at 850 rpm idle.

The MassFlow EFI uses a 9AL EEC-4. Make sure the cam shaft in the engine has the same firing order, as a 89-93 5.0 Mustang.

There should be a chip to tell the computer the correct engine displacement, MAF, and injector size.

The ignition module (TFI) located on the distributor does eventually break down from too much heat. In later years, Ford moved it to a heat sink on the fender well. I moved mine. The distributor is too hot to touch and the heat sink is about ambient temp. It would be fairly easy to do prior to the install. There are instructions with pictures on the net. You can find it with google, if your interested.

[Dimis]

You may also need to improve your fuel supply to maintain sufficient pressure.
Feeding 400hp isn't the same as 600hp.
Not a big deal in itself, but just another item to check off.

Good luck with your plans, I think she'll come up real nice.

[Mrs flatchat]

The money you spend on fitting that in a DRB chassis would honestly be better spent on a new car build.
"Radiator, exhaust header system, clutch , gearbox, diff, brakes, suspension handling, etc " will need to be upgraded and the 351+ is a very tight fit.

That chev intake manifold and distributor won't fit either

[ICETOO]

Originally Posted by Mrs flatchat

The money you spend on fitting that in a DRB chassis would honestly be better spent on a new car build.
"Radiator, exhaust header system, clutch , gearbox, diff, brakes, suspension handling, etc " will need to be upgraded and the 351+ is a very tight fit.

Not sure on the Chassis make, but expect its a DRB, and is rated to handle this engine (according to the supplier anyhow).

There is still a fair bit of room, forward, on either side and height wise to. but I will definately measure twice though....amd these issues I will discuss and network with the Engineering Signatory before going ahead, as I will need recertification anyhow, to keep things legal, legit and insurable....then as highlighted, time to do the finance maths and decide accordingly.

Thanks for the rest of the intel so far to from Dimis, Old dog and Bob. Definitely aspects I will research further before commuting either way.

I am not too worried about the suspension as it is pretty heavy duty already (original builder went upgrade from the get go) and the engine mass is if anything a fraction lighter, however I do agree that I will have to bring the brakes in the 21st century assuredly, but had always planned to do this soon, and I am looking at doing this upgrade once all re-cashed up after my next Gulf deployment, so have a bit of time yet.

I will research the box and diff set up to and have read great things about the R34 Nissan LSD for capability vs weight as well. Radiator is a triple pass already and has all the connections were I need them....for now

The engine listed has the same firing order as the 5.0 HO and 351 (1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8), so one less hassle.

I am looking forward to also hearing feedback from Craig (RAAPS) to who is likely to be installing this engine in a Harrison as well.

Thanks for the info and keep it coming you guys are a wealth of knowledge.

[ICETOO]

Based on recent information back from DRB, this option may not be achievable.

After I sort out the upgrades to the brakes and suspension though I am definately looking at some options in the fordstokers.com "liberator" range.

I understand Ash (Towmaster) runs something along those lines and would appreciate any feedback or advice with pitfalls on the install.

[Rob. Smith]

You will have to find out what the maximum cu in engine has been submitted on your particular cars engineers report.....you can only go about 15% higher in displacement ( i'm at work and can't look up my files so the % may be less ) under NSW rules. good luck.

[ICETOO]

Cheers, thanks Rob, I will have a check through the national light vehicle modification codes, so I can keep it all legit and insurable.

Appreciate the advice.

[vector1]

man, you guys got some weird rules!

[Tim Brewer]

Remember, this engine IS a 351. You only need to think about the difference in swaping a 351 for a 302, plenty of info here on this site. The weight difference between the two engines isn't much, def not enough to have to rework your suspension. Maybe only a little stiffer front springs. I'm not familier with you guy's engineer's report, but unless they CC your heads, I would just tell them it's a 351. Size? I can't imagine any Cobra replica having trouble fitting a 351 in it.

[ICETOO]

Thanks Tim,

I would imagine that as a crate engine, that it would not have numbers on it.

What I need to ensure is that the state rules here recognize the block as a 351 cui and also consider it as such, rather than the actual volumetric displacement of the stroked engine.

This was the case with a Cosworth YD 2.0 engine I am using in another car, that was bored and stroked to 2397cc using the ranger crank and eagle pistons and rods stroker kit. The local roads and traffic authority at the time where happy that it was a 2.0 engine based on the Cosworth designation of the YD 2.0 block.

If this remains the case, the next task will be to see if a 351 is within the allowable increase percentage as designated by our national light vehicle modification codes or whether further engineering certification will be required.

As it is, I have to get the brakes upgraded to some 4 pots (still running 15 rims that I am very fond off, so do not have a lot of room to play with the rotor and caliper set up), get the suspension upgraded and set up correctly and then get some decent new rubber to get the existing traction issues sorted.

Thanks for your recommends though, definately a point worth pursuing, however I need to keep things legit, but am not adverse to legit loopholes.

[Aussie Mike]

One thing to remember is that the 351 block has a taller deck height so the motor is taller and wider. This means that things like headers and exhaust may need to be modified to fit.

You may be better off sticking with the shorter deck 5.0 block and building a 347. These combinations will make some great power. I've got the tickford version in my ute.

http://www.keithcraft.com/item--331-...e_331_347.html

http://www.keithcraft.com/item--347-...e_347_363.html

Cheers

[Merv and Sharon]

Mike, it is correct that engine builders now have largely solved the earlier problems with some 347 designs? I recall also that Rebel1, and others, spoke highly of the effectiveness and longevity of 331 capacity motors.

[Aussie Mike]

I think one of the issues with the 347 is the short rod length making for a poor stroke to rod length ratio. There are a few kits available now with different rod and piston combinations.

I think 5.31" and 5.4" rod lengths are the main options. The longer rod giving the better stoke to rod lenght ration and rod angle. The down side is that the longer rod puts the piston pin in the oil ring land so can affect oil control.

I think this is why the 331 was more popular as it ran a slightly shorter stroke and resulted in a better rod angle.

There are now more pistons available with better materials and designs including things like offset pins to control the extra side thrust from the short rod angle.

The other thing that has helped is the advent of stonger after market blocks. The stock bottom end can suffer with the extra loads (Ask Waz). My Tickfor motor uses the stock block but they added a main bearing girdle and also set the rev limiter at a more conservative 5850 RPM.

Cheers

[spookypt]

Originally Posted by Aussie Mike

One thing to remember is that the 351 block has a taller deck height so the motor is taller and wider. This means that things like headers and exhaust may need to be modified to fit.

You may be better off sticking with the shorter deck 5.0 block and building a 347. These combinations will make some great power. I've got the tickford version in my ute.

331/347 Street/Performance Crate

347/363 Street/Performance Crate

Cheers

As Mike suggests it fills up the engine bay.



Spookypt

[ICETOO]

Thanks Mike and Spook,

Some very attractive options.

Now, my experience with windsor or small blocks fords is very limited.

I have had big blocks both ford and chev, and a swag of Clevelands, but never a Windsor or the 5.0 HO before.

So with the stroker options posted, are the mounts, bell-housing, PCM's(firing order, cam vs spark/injection timing etc) and plumbing the same between the 302 CUI Winsdor block and the 5.0 HO???

Additionally, noting that I already have a 5.0 block I would consider pulling the engine, standing it, pulling it down, and installing a compatible stroker kit, rather than an entire plant switch. I am comfortable with how to do this..so are the 302 stroker kits the same as the 5.0 kits.

If its a hassle then I will look at the plant change out option assuming compatibility with mountings and other aforementioned variables, (and do I need another PCM?)

Cheers Guys, you have been great just looking at all the options and evaluating performance vs cost (time, effort and cash), so more than happy to read your thoughts.

Cheers Adz

[ACO05]

Hi Adz,

I dropped an Edelbrock crate engine in my DRB in June last year.
The endurashine finish is awesome and so so easy to keep clean.
I live is Cairns to driving through the odd rain shower is common.
Car had a 347 in previously built on a HO block.
Edelbrock did specify I had to use a manual water pump not the CVR electric it was using and also change ICE ignition to MSD as verified rev limited ignition was needed to satisfy 2 year warranty requirements.
90% happy with crate tune, think a holley carby would be easier to tune as the edelbrock only has an external idle adjustment. No external float adjustment on edelbrock carb.
Immediately noticed an improvement on low rev torque and this engine has a very smooth power curve that never seems strained.
Like you I considered switching to a bigger block and cubes but given I only drive the car spiritedly (above 80%) on the odd occasion, a straight swap without any exhaust, clutch etc changes was the right option.

Good price, power and looks.

Edelbrock.com - Crate Engines - Small-Block Ford - Performer RPM 9.9:1 (438 HP & 413 TQ)

[Merv and Sharon]

Nice job ACO05. That is a good way to go. How did you handle the Qld Transport guys? Did it need another inspection? I suspect not given that it was the same capacity and type of motor (SB Ford).

[spookypt]

Merv, AC005 did the engine swap as that particular 347 had been polished to death by its urrrr previous owner! I believe it had excessive "external" wear and tear from the microfibre rub!