|
|
Original Message
|
RE: You are comparing apples and oranges |
By hawkrod - 11/03/2003 9:26:51 PM; IP 64.12.96.237 |
i'm just going to pipe in here as a couple of comments were pretty strong, and i think innacurate. the 409 is not at all known for killing itself. in fact they have gone down in history as one of the most trouble free chevrolet engines based on warantee repair records. now i don't own one and don't have the desire to, but to make a statement like that that is contrary to the facts kind of rubs me the wrong way. also the only reason the 409 production tapered off is expense. they were expensive to manufacture due to the unusual design and they were near the cubic diplacement limit for the block design and so a new engine was designed in the early 60's to replace the 409. note that the replacement design was begun about the same time the first 409's were hitting the streets. the reason the 65 409 production was so low is because the 396 was cheaper and easier build and the savings were passed on making the 396 a better buy for the consumer. it also didn't hurt that the performance potential of the 396 was much greater than the 409 due to the excellent head design. the only thing that killed the 409 was the limitations of the design not the competition. keep in mind that teh vast majority of the big races were won by 409's not 427 fords. sad but true. hawkrod |
|
This thread, so far...
|
|
Post A Response
|
|
|
|