bllsht

In message <42994A59.50357F28@***.net>, "L.W." wrote:

> Ford, too were using the overhead cams in '69 Mustang:
>http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/time...rBoss429-2.jpg

Close, but wrong link Bill. :)
The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SOHC motor
though
http://www.geocities.com/infieldg/v8sohc427.html

> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>Ruel Smith wrote:
>>
>> I'll point out again, the 308 GTB had a 0 to 60 time of 9 seconds. That is
>> not only slow, but god awfully slow. Ferraris may have made some power at
>> 1500 rpm, but it wasn't earth shattering in any way. You have to rev a
>> Ferrari to get any power out of it. How good is that unless you have a lot
>> of road to open it up? Again, a run of the mill Chevelle SS 396 would give
>> just about any Ferrari a run for its money from any stoplight, was actually
>> affordable, and could haul 4 or more people _comfortably_ home from a night
>> at the drags. Only the most expensive, and rarest Ferraris were fast back
>> then, and unless your last name was Getty or Rockefeller, you couldn't
>> afford it. Ferraris of that era had manual steering, poor reliability, and
>> kit car build quality. Some models were very handsome, but you definitely
>> didn't want to try and make one a daily driver. Ferraris simply were, and
>> for the most part still are, shall we say...delicate.
>>
>> I'm not even going to get into the ignorant crap about the Ford GT and
>> Corvette. Again, anyone can make a car that's extremely capable for 200
>> grand. The trick is to do it at an affordable price. Automobile recently
>> voted the C2 Corvette as the coolest car ever built. Motor Trend recently
>> claimed the small block Chevrolet engine as the greatest engine ever built.
>> Get over it...
>>
>> I have news for you...DOHC technology dates back to 1913 in the Peugeot.
>> It's not as modern of a design as you think.
>>
>> The 550 was not only a glorified Volkswagen, but an unsafe one at that... I
>> thought you said you wanted engines that were special? The 908 and 917 were
>> race cars, the Merc W196 and 300SLR were too. The 300SL had a whopping 215
>> HP. In 1954, when America wasn't building cars with any kind of power yet,
>> that was a lot.
>>
>> Let's talk about real performace: 1967 Corvette L-89, 1967-69 Corvette L-88,
>> 1969 Corvette ZL-1,
>>
>> --
>>
>> Registered Linux user #378193

Ruel Smith

bllsht wrote:

> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SO HC
> motor though

Correct. And Chrysler was working on a DOHC 426 Hemi to one up the SOHC 427
FE of Ford. bit NASCAR banned special engines and the project was
cancelled. Musclecar Review showed pics of what was left of the prototype a
few years back.

http://www.thehemi.com/notable.php?id=010

Skip down to A925.

The Boss 429 was a "semi-hemi", but a pushrod engine.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

Ruel Smith

bllsht wrote:

> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SO HC
> motor though

Correct. And Chrysler was working on a DOHC 426 Hemi to one up the SOHC 427
FE of Ford. bit NASCAR banned special engines and the project was
cancelled. Musclecar Review showed pics of what was left of the prototype a
few years back.

http://www.thehemi.com/notable.php?id=010

Skip down to A925.

The Boss 429 was a "semi-hemi", but a pushrod engine.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

Ruel Smith

bllsht wrote:

> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SO HC
> motor though

Correct. And Chrysler was working on a DOHC 426 Hemi to one up the SOHC 427
FE of Ford. bit NASCAR banned special engines and the project was
cancelled. Musclecar Review showed pics of what was left of the prototype a
few years back.

http://www.thehemi.com/notable.php?id=010

Skip down to A925.

The Boss 429 was a "semi-hemi", but a pushrod engine.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

Ruel Smith

bllsht wrote:

> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SO HC
> motor though

Correct. And Chrysler was working on a DOHC 426 Hemi to one up the SOHC 427
FE of Ford. bit NASCAR banned special engines and the project was
cancelled. Musclecar Review showed pics of what was left of the prototype a
few years back.

http://www.thehemi.com/notable.php?id=010

Skip down to A925.

The Boss 429 was a "semi-hemi", but a pushrod engine.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Bullsh*t, did it like this '68 Mustang:
http://----------.com/427fordOHC.jpg Clue look at the spark plug
locations.
Yes, and I have the push rod, tunnel port engine version standing
by for my Bronco which was also used in that year Mustang:
http://www.----------.com/429ford.jpg which is still used as the truck
460". The 427" is a different block, beginning with the 332" in '58,
352", 360", 390", This '62 406" tri-power:
http://members.aol.com/franangrenteria/frank_32.jpg and then the 427"
push rod, side oiler, with only dual quad, and 428". Ford oil Galleys:
http://www.----------.com/fordOilGalley.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

bllsht wrote:
>
> Close, but wrong link Bill. :)
> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SOHC motor
> though
> http://www.geocities.com/infieldg/v8sohc427.html

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Bullsh*t, did it like this '68 Mustang:
http://----------.com/427fordOHC.jpg Clue look at the spark plug
locations.
Yes, and I have the push rod, tunnel port engine version standing
by for my Bronco which was also used in that year Mustang:
http://www.----------.com/429ford.jpg which is still used as the truck
460". The 427" is a different block, beginning with the 332" in '58,
352", 360", 390", This '62 406" tri-power:
http://members.aol.com/franangrenteria/frank_32.jpg and then the 427"
push rod, side oiler, with only dual quad, and 428". Ford oil Galleys:
http://www.----------.com/fordOilGalley.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

bllsht wrote:
>
> Close, but wrong link Bill. :)
> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SOHC motor
> though
> http://www.geocities.com/infieldg/v8sohc427.html

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Bullsh*t, did it like this '68 Mustang:
http://----------.com/427fordOHC.jpg Clue look at the spark plug
locations.
Yes, and I have the push rod, tunnel port engine version standing
by for my Bronco which was also used in that year Mustang:
http://www.----------.com/429ford.jpg which is still used as the truck
460". The 427" is a different block, beginning with the 332" in '58,
352", 360", 390", This '62 406" tri-power:
http://members.aol.com/franangrenteria/frank_32.jpg and then the 427"
push rod, side oiler, with only dual quad, and 428". Ford oil Galleys:
http://www.----------.com/fordOilGalley.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

bllsht wrote:
>
> Close, but wrong link Bill. :)
> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SOHC motor
> though
> http://www.geocities.com/infieldg/v8sohc427.html

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Bullsh*t, did it like this '68 Mustang:
http://----------.com/427fordOHC.jpg Clue look at the spark plug
locations.
Yes, and I have the push rod, tunnel port engine version standing
by for my Bronco which was also used in that year Mustang:
http://www.----------.com/429ford.jpg which is still used as the truck
460". The 427" is a different block, beginning with the 332" in '58,
352", 360", 390", This '62 406" tri-power:
http://members.aol.com/franangrenteria/frank_32.jpg and then the 427"
push rod, side oiler, with only dual quad, and 428". Ford oil Galleys:
http://www.----------.com/fordOilGalley.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:--------------------

bllsht wrote:
>
> Close, but wrong link Bill. :)
> The Boss 429 was a pushrod motor. They did make a 427 cubic inch SOHC motor
> though
> http://www.geocities.com/infieldg/v8sohc427.html

Lon

Ruel Smith proclaimed:

> calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Ferraris of the 50's, 60's and 70's were the performance cars of their
>>generation overall, hands down.
>>
>>They were not dragsters, certainly. But who cares, except for a few
>>stoplight losers? The Ferrari V12 engines were capable of putting out
>>more power than all but the rumpiest musclecar engines-but they were
>>turbine smooth and would make power from 1500 rpm all the way to
>>redline. They would run a very long time and were highly rebuildable
>>with cylinder liners and a hell-for-stout lower end. And the drivelines
>>were rugged, the brakes first rate...sure, there were Cinzano wrappers
>>for fuses in the early ones, but mechanically they were first class.
>>Ferrari's real bread and butter was, and is, foundry work...and it
>>shows.
>
>
> I'll point out again, the 308 GTB had a 0 to 60 time of 9 seconds.

You can "point it out" until your face turns blue, but according to
Road & Track you have been eating too much cascara without taking
the appropriate break.
Range is from 6.8 to 7.9, with the 7.9 being for the early smogged
models.