Go Back   iRV2 Forums > MOTORHOME FORUMS > Class A Motorhome Discussions
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-11-2012, 08:20 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Barlow46's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: East Coast Fl
Posts: 1,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by distaff View Post
Worth noting that the 390 was an FE engine, the design of this family began in 1957, and it had a peculiar design were the push rods essentially pass through the intake manifold. The 460 is of the 385 family of engines designed in the late 60's with better breathing characteristics. Of the FE family only the 427 Single Overhead Cam (SOHC) didn't have that problem because the Ford engineers eliminated the push rods with an overhead cam design.

Really hard to make a generalization about fuel economy and power when comparing to such different architectures.
Also, I had a 1973 F250 camper special with the 390 but I had the 4:10 rear axle. I believe you could get the 3:73 with the 427. That alone could account for the mileage difference.
__________________

__________________
2016 Arctic Fox 25Y, 2016 F350 4x4 DRW, 6.7 Power Stroke. East Coast of Fl.
Barlow46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-11-2012, 08:23 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
dennis45's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: BC
Posts: 6,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_D View Post
Nope, mine was also accurate.
Sorry,,, AND MrD!!
__________________

__________________
Dennis & Carol
2003, 4006, 41' DutchStar, Spartan, ISC 8.3L W/BanksPower - 2013 Honda CRV, BlueOx Baseplate, Aventa Bar & Patriot Brake. And the 04 Bird, Sunshine Car.
dennis45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2012, 11:32 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
distaff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackf3504dr View Post
I think you meant to say the push rods run through the intake runners....
You are right, I did. I have a '66 or '67 410 in my '69 F100 4WD. The push rod placement prevents a more efficient cylinder head design, having said that, you can still get plenty out of these old V8s.

It is worth noting that in the FE the intake manifold actually overlaps the top of the block, so the intake runners are partly in the manifold. Only engine I know of that had this characteristic.
__________________

__________________
Paul
2006 Patriot Thunder C13 Allison 4000
2010 Ford Flex Ecoboost AWD
distaff is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.