Best engine for Mach 1

7173Mustangs.com

Help Support 7173Mustangs.com:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

MissingNo.

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2018
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Location
Cyprus
My Car
(Dream Car) 1971 Mach 1 428 Super Cobra Jet
Which is the best engine for the Mach 1 71-73, I'm not talking about the usual SCJ vs BOSS 351 , what engine after that era would best (torque and reliability-wise) (if possible even have  room for a turbo) thanks!

 
IMO, the "best" engine available in the 71-73 Mustangs was the 351C. Plenty of power, easy to upgrade and handling didn't suffer like the 429.

That said, the best modern power plant to turbo? LOL - an LS swap. 6.0L LS with aftermarket cam and a turbo kit - silly amounts of power. It would fit in the 71-73 chassis with no clearance issues using a front sump swap pan. Heck, it even sorta looks like a 351C.

 
If you are not going for original go with a coyote. Great mileage, dependable, parts anywhere. They are showing up on the salvage market more and more since the F-150 uses them along with Mustang.

I wonder if the new Bronco will use it also. Several guys here hit over 800 hp on the dyno with them without much work just a tune.

We have a couple members with them running now.

David

 
The one you want and can afford to build along with the rest of the car to handle the engine. Chuck

 
If you are not going for original go with a coyote. Great mileage, dependable, parts anywhere. They are showing up on the salvage market more and more since the F-150 uses them along with Mustang.

I wonder if the new Bronco will use it also. Several guys here hit over 800 hp on the dyno with them without much work just a tune.

We have a couple members with them running now.

David
 I'm NOT 100%, but the Windsor Engine Assembly plant management recently announced a new engine coming to that plant which I think is for the bigger vehicles. Don't quote me though!

And yes if it were me, I'd go for the Coyote too. No damn CHEVY motors in MY FORD!! It makes my blood boil when I see that junk put into Ford Hot Rods etc.

That's my 2 cents worth for today.

Geoff.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree, Geoff, no GM for me. barf.gif

To me, the Coyote would be the ultimate, easy to supercharge, good choice of transmissions.

If you're set on a turbo, I would go with a fuel injected 302, leaves plenty of room for the turbo(s). Bored and stroked to 347 cubic inches will improve performance. Plenty of aftermarket and Ford support. Easy to connect it to a 5 or 6 speed or to an AODE automatic.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you want to go Coyote wait until the Gen. III (2018) start showing up in salvage yards. Get the engine, controls, harnesses, and the 10 speed auto transmission. getting the whole might be a good idea as well. The performance is amazing especially considering the weight of a 2018 Mustang. Not an easy or cheap swap but the results would be amazing. Chuck

 
IMO, the "best" engine available in the 71-73 Mustangs was the 351C. Plenty of power, easy to upgrade and handling didn't suffer like the 429.

That said, the best modern power plant to turbo?   LOL - an LS swap. 6.0L LS with aftermarket cam and a turbo kit - silly amounts of power. It would fit in the 71-73 chassis with no clearance issues using a front sump swap pan. Heck, it even sorta looks like a 351C.
No Chevy engines in Fords!!!!!!!!!!! LOL. It is bad enough all the 1930s Ford hot rods all run small block Chevy engines. 

Ron

 
 I'm NOT 100%, but the Windsor Engine Assembly plant management recently announced a new engine coming to that plant which I think is for the bigger vehicles. Don't quote me though!

Geoff.
The new engine will be a replacement for the 6.8L V-10. A 7.0L V8 that's supposed to be more fuel efficient plus more torque.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asY3tFKoOEQ

 
Because you're in Europe, you might check into the 4.2L V8 that was used in Jaquars, Land Rovers and Range Rovers, and Daimlers, as well as Fords and Lincolns. The 2002 Jaguar S-Type R had a supercharged version that put out around 400 horsepower. You could get them with 5 or 6 speed manual or automatic transmissions, depending on the application. I don't have any information about the size of them. The Jaguar engine was designated AJ-V8, and there are other older and newer versions that range from 3.2L to 5.0L, all are dual overhead cam, and from around 2000 have variable timing.

Probably not an easy job to transplant one of them, but you would have a unique and somewhat exotic ride.

The V-6 version (AJ-V6) is also a nice engine. My wife and I had an X-Type with one, and it ran very well.

 
A built 460 if you're only concerned with going in a straight line. :) No worries about blowing up a rare 429 CJ or SCJ, plenty of 460's around. If you're talking about a classic engine and not something modern that requires a computer, the 351W actually has a lot more high performance support these days over the 351C. There's really no right or wrong answer here. You could build any of these platforms to almost any hp or torque number within reason and not even need a supercharger or turbo. Please no LS, it's being put into everything these days. I believe it was on volocars where I saw a '68 Pontiac GTO with a LS engine in it. I get it because the LS was from a 2004 GTO. Looked ridiculous in that big engine bay and I wanted to vomit. My first car was a '68 GTO with Pontiac 400 and 4 speed.

 
A built 460 if you're only concerned with going in a straight line.  :)  No worries about blowing up a rare 429 CJ or SCJ, plenty of 460's around.  If you're talking about a classic engine and not something modern that requires a computer, the 351W actually has a lot more high performance support these days over the 351C.  There's really no right or wrong answer here.  You could build any of these platforms to almost any hp or torque number within reason and not even need a supercharger or turbo.  Please no LS, it's being put into everything these days.  I believe it was on volocars where I saw a '68 Pontiac GTO with a LS engine in it.  I get it because the LS was from a 2004 GTO.  Looked ridiculous in that big engine bay and I wanted to vomit.  My first car was a '68 GTO with Pontiac 400 and 4 speed.
What would you recommend for a general performance engine , after a lot of research I've found out that's its really hard to swap a modern engine due to how back then they setup engines , I agree 100% with how disgusting it is to put a chevy engine into a mustang but what would you recommend that is easy to set up and has space for a turbo ( even a double if possible)

:thankyouyellow:

 
Because you're in Europe, you might check into the 4.2L V8 that was used in Jaquars, Land Rovers and Range Rovers, and Daimlers, as well as Fords and Lincolns. The 2002 Jaguar S-Type R had a supercharged version that put out around 400 horsepower. You could get them with 5 or 6 speed manual or automatic transmissions, depending on the application. I don't have any information about the size of them. The Jaguar engine was designated AJ-V8, and there are other older and newer versions that range from 3.2L to 5.0L, all are dual overhead cam, and from around 2000 have variable timing.

Probably not an easy job to transplant one of them, but you would have a unique and somewhat exotic ride.

The V-6 version (AJ-V6) is also a nice engine. My wife and I had an X-Type with one, and it ran very well.
Thanks so much for your help !

I know how much easier and more performance-wise is better to use a supercharger but I cannot live with myself if every time i drive and hear that squeaking Wyeyeyeyey,personally I would laugh my ass off if I saw an 800HP beast of a muscle car pur like a kitten, plus the Turbo matches more with a mustang since it personally sounds like the sound a horse makes when it's angry , I know this might sound stupid but do you know if  a 351C or the BOSS 351 are any good for turbo

Thanks  :thankyouyellow:

 
 I'm NOT 100%, but the Windsor Engine Assembly plant management recently announced a new engine coming to that plant which I think is for the bigger vehicles. Don't quote me though!

Geoff.
The new engine will be a replacement for the 6.8L V-10. A 7.0L V8 that's supposed to be more fuel efficient plus more torque.
Well Don does it again!! Great video apart from the computer gen voice!

So I guess the Bronco is NOT getting this new motor...…….. or is it!.

 
Because you're in Europe, you might check into the 4.2L V8 that was used in Jaquars, Land Rovers and Range Rovers, and Daimlers, as well as Fords and Lincolns. The 2002 Jaguar S-Type R had a supercharged version that put out around 400 horsepower. You could get them with 5 or 6 speed manual or automatic transmissions, depending on the application. I don't have any information about the size of them. The Jaguar engine was designated AJ-V8, and there are other older and newer versions that range from 3.2L to 5.0L, all are dual overhead cam, and from around 2000 have variable timing.

Probably not an easy job to transplant one of them, but you would have a unique and somewhat exotic ride.

The V-6 version (AJ-V6) is also a nice engine. My wife and I had an X-Type with one, and it ran very well.
Thanks so much for your help !

I know how much easier and more performance-wise is better to use a supercharger but I cannot live with myself if every time i drive and hear that squeaking Wyeyeyeyey,personally I would laugh my ass off if I saw an 800HP beast of a muscle car pur like a kitten, plus the Turbo matches more with a mustang since it personally sounds like the sound a horse makes when it's angry , I know this might sound stupid but do you know if  a 351C or the BOSS 351 are any good for turbo

Thanks  :thankyouyellow:
This is not an area of knowledge for me at all, not something I'd even think about doing, but why are you so obsessed with putting in a turbo? Is it for power or just because! I'm guessing that Ford engines of the era are hard to find out on the tiny island of Cyprus (or that area) and that's OK, use what's available...…. as long as it's Ford based. Ford era Jags would be a good choice as Don suggests and probably easier to find a good one with parts still available.

Another BIG consideration if you do go all out power, is the chassis strength. Again I'm not that knowledgeable on the subject, but logic tell me you'd need the frame braced and strengthened or you're going to twist it up if you have tooooo much torque.

Why not stick with a good naturally aspirated motor built up for all the power you can handle (and I mean that literally) and save yourself the headaches of computer wiring etc. etc.

Geoff.

 
That is a huge engine bay and would look strange with most of the smaller engines unless all bulked up with turbos and such stuff.  

My 460 is already built and installed, but if I had to do it over today I would still go 460 - but with CJ aluminum heads and intake to bring the weight down. Even more brute torque and horsepower for a reasonable price, without having to deal with complexities/costs of turbo's, electronic controls, etc.

CJ aluminum heads and intake are not cheap either, but core 460's abundant and available cheap. When built up modestly, you get all the power you could want (or most people would want) in a fairly simple and easier to repair and troubleshoot package than the newer engines - and it all pretty much bolts together.  

Plus, there is an abundance of bolt on parts to be had aftermarket since some of these cars came with 429 and the 460 is the same motor with a longer stroke.

Even with the big block I have a reasonable amount of room to work around motor, though if using headers that would make it a little tougher. My car just uses 429 PI exhaust manifolds which flow better than stock 460 manifolds and fit well. Extra horses from headers weren't worth the headaches of adding them to me.

I agree with previous poster that said the weight is the biggest downside of the 429/460, but if you can afford the cost of turbos and extensive mod's or acquisition costs for some of the newer/smaller motors, the aluminum heads for 429/460 are probably cheaper in the long run than all the mod's - and you don't end up with a car that is too far removed in appearance or complexity from what the factory issued.

Also agree that both 351c and 351w are even easier, no big weight penalty and can get by without aluminum heads, if that cost is a factor. Plus they have the most flexibility as far as your choice of transmissions.  Not sure why anyone would use a 302 (or stroked to 347 302),  being it is a tiny motor and engine bay is too big visually for it.

I have built a couple 460's, 351C, have a 351W on test run stand and building an aluminum head 302 right now. But the 302 is going in an MGB, so it doesn't look like a peanut in the MGB engine bay, while it would in my 73. No one of these all Ford motors has been noticeably more costly to rebuild than others yet either.

In fact, the both my DOVE headed 460's were cheaper to build than the 302 (and would have been even without the aluminum heads on 302), but that is mostly a function of inflation apparently, as 460's were built years ago and 302 just now. 

Machine shop prices for boring, head rebuilding, etc. are a lot higher than 15-20 years ago. But having a block machined or heads rebuilt isn't much different from one engine family or displacement to another these days.

So, I'd go with 429/460 first (the most torque for the money), then either 351C or 351W (both can be stroked to about 400 CI without breaking the bank too, if displacement is an issue and you dislike the 429/460 option). Again mostly everything bolts together.. But why stroke a smaller motor to get more displacement when BB is probably even cheaper with even more displacement and will be more durable as well, since it is not stretched to its limits?

Coyotes, LS motors, 302 or V6?  All fine motors for other applications, but in a 71-73 engine bay? Why torture yourself and your finances when both simpler and cheaper options are available that fit the car appropriately? 

Regardless of how fond you are of the car, some day you will tire of the car and want or need to sell it. The odder the combination, the worse beating you will take on parting with it.  Nobody else has one equipped that way?  That's cuz almost nobody really wants them modified that way and that will become apparent when you try to sell it, if it isn't now.  

My two cents...  :D

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am in the throes of the installation of this Dart Windsor 427 stroker with a Tremec 5 speed for my '73 Mach 1. It should be a great street motor.

LLd0HXg.jpg


wIpk4gJ.jpg


 
There is certainly no shortage of torque. You will have a blast going through rear tires at a rapid pace. Chuck

 
Back
Top