400 small block swap in 2002 ranger

[mattswan267]

Just picked up what I thought was a 351M out of a 77 f250 for my ranger. I got it home and pulled the pan off and discovered its actually a 400. Ive heard good things about the 351M and I think that would be just fine for what I'm usin it for. I don't know much about the 400's.

Ive heard that the 400's have overheating problems and they have a tendency to go through rod bearings, My question is if any of these problems are true, OR if there are any other problems with the 400's.

I plan on using a C6 transmission, Does the 351M/400 use the big block 460 bell housing pattern? Or does it use the 302W/351W/351C small block bell housing pattern?

The truck I'm putting it in is a prerunner, coilovers and deavers and a full cage etc... I'm planning on running it throught the sand dunes at high speed(60-90 mph) over whoops and bumps and jumping it.

Any input would be greatly appreciatted.

 

[baddad457]

Who told you all that ? The 351M is simply a destroked 400. If one had overheating or bearing problems, they both would have. The only difference between the two is the crank and pistons. As for what you want to use it for, you're far better off going in with a (lighter weight)302 based stroker. The 351M/400 uses the same bell pattern as the 429/460. There was a small bell 400 block but these are a rareity, being a one year only, one application only deal.

 

[mattswan267]

The 400 has a bigger crank and longer rods. The deck hiedth on the 400 is about an inch taller. I think they share the same piston and heads.

Do you know what kind of rpm's a 400 would turn? I have a 4 barrel carb with a 4 barrel adapter plate bolted to the 2 barrel intake. Id like to run a 4 barrel manifold if I can get one

 

[Mac]

Good luck with that swap, believe you'd be the first with a "M" series in a late model. Very few have even done the 351 into one. Sounds like you might be a good fabricator from what you have planned. You really are breaking ground.
Dave of the Nord

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The 400 has a bigger crank and longer rods. The deck hiedth on the 400 is about an inch taller. I think they share the same piston and heads.

Do you know what kind of rpm's a 400 would turn? I have a 4 barrel carb with a 4 barrel adapter plate bolted to the 2 barrel intake. Id like to run a 4 barrel manifold if I can get one

For what is and the timeframe it came out, the 400 is an awesome engine. They had decent power for the day, pull like a locomotive, and last darn near forever and that is what they were built for. Dad has one in his '80 F-350, it just keeps going.

But they are about the same size as a modular engine, and produce nowhere near the horsepower, decentish torque and hidious gas milage.

But for the work envolved, you would be farther ahead to go with a 5.4 and forget the 180hp 10mpg big block wannabe. Fitting would probably be easier without having to fight with the BB transmission Wiring would be a tough call going from new to old vs going from new to new. Probably be easier to go from new to new actually. 5.0 from an Explorer is supposed to be fairly easy/plug and play into a like-year Ranger.

As far as what kind of RPM they turn, kinda depends on your setup. According to the floppy tach in dad's, with a T-18 4-spd, 4.10's and 235/85-16 tires it is about 3k at 55mph.

 

[baddad457]

The 400 has a bigger crank and longer rods. The deck hiedth on the 400 is about an inch taller. I think they share the same piston and heads.

Compared to the 351M ? Nope. Both used the same block, only thing different between the two (351M & 400) is the crank and pistons. The 351C used a shorter deck block. Back in 1975 after Ford killed the Cleveland production here, they simply destroked the 400 to make the 351M. If you have a 351M, all you need to do to convert it to a 400 is replace the crank and pistons.

 

[v8nick]

The 351M and 400 are good for a boat anchor and that's about it.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The 351M and 400 are good for a boat anchor and that's about it.

The 400 is a pretty good truck engine, the Ranger just isn't enough of the right kind of a truck to utilize it. Pretty much the opposite of a 302 in a fullsize, where you have too much truck and not enough whoopie to do anything with it.

 

[baddad457]

The 351M and 400 are good for a boat anchor and that's about it.

The 351M? Yea. But the 400? Tell that to the winners of the Engine Masters competition the last couple years. They're "only" making 650+HP with 400 Fords.

 

[fordmike1]

The 400 is a good engine to make some easy HP/TQ for a truck. We built a very mild 400 for a friend of mine and that truck ran VERY WELL for what we had in it. As for as doing one in a Ranger that might be some work to make it fit and the Ranger would be very front heavy for a prerunner. 302 Stroker would be alot easier but would take a little more to make the power that the 400 will make easily.

 

[mattswan267]

Yes its a heavy sob. But I plan on shifting the engine back around 4 or 5 inches. I test fitted it earlier today and it should work...maybe. I know a late model 302 is plug and play pretty much but they lack in torque. If it was.easy everyone would be doing it. Hence why everyone runs the 302. This dumb 400 terd is just too wide I think. I think a 351 Windsor would be pretty badass. Not as heavy.duty and the Cleveland or modified but a ranger is light and I'm not goin balls out with power, just gonna put headers and an aluminum intake on it, possible cam down the road. I just wanna turn some good.size paddles, I need something with gobs of torque so I can run relatively tall gears to retain wheel speed.

 

[baddad457]

Yes its a heavy sob. But I plan on shifting the engine back around 4 or 5 inches. I test fitted it earlier today and it should work...maybe. I know a late model 302 is plug and play pretty much but they lack in torque. If it was.easy everyone would be doing it. Hence why everyone runs the 302. This dumb 400 terd is just too wide I think. I think a 351 Windsor would be pretty badass. Not as heavy.duty and the Cleveland or modified but a ranger is light and I'm not goin balls out with power, just gonna put headers and an aluminum intake on it, possible cam down the road. I just wanna turn some good.size paddles, I need something with gobs of torque so I can run relatively tall gears to retain wheel speed.

Do a 331 or 347 stroker. No lack of torque there. Lighter weight package, lots of torque, easy to fit. Best of all worlds there. Or if you really want something special, do a Boss 302 based stroker topped with Cleveland style heads.

 

[fordmike1]

Yea them 400 are a big size engine to deal with. It sounds like a stout 302 would fit the bill for your build. You said that you are not looking for balls out power but you want some torque. A 302 could be a low dollar build and give you good torque if you keep that in mind when you build it. A good aluminum dual plane intake, 4 barrel carb, 1 1/2" long tube headers and a cam designed for torque. Add all of that to a flat top pistoned short block with a set of GT40 heads and I bet you would be happy with it. At least for a while then like all of us we want more..........

 

[RangerFabWorks]

Who told you all that ? The 351M is simply a destroked 400. If one had overheating or bearing problems, they both would have. The only difference between the two is the crank and pistons. As for what you want to use it for, you're far better off going in with a (lighter weight)302 based stroker. The 351M/400 uses the same bell pattern as the 429/460. There was a small bell 400 block but these are a rareity, being a one year only, one application only deal.

sounds like the same clown who told me the 272-312 y blocks were s&!t motors.

 

[baddad457]

sounds like the same clown who told me the 272-312 y blocks were s&!t motors.

Yup, but they were far from being Ford's finest creations.