[67GTO4SPEED]

I am getting ready to send my 428 block to the machine shop and I cannot decide whether I want to put a 455 crank or the 428 crank in it. I already have both cranks. I haven't ordered pistons yet, so I can go either way. I know that the 455 should better low end torque and bigger engines seem to be the trend, but I also know that the 428 has a better rod to stroke ratio, and should rev a little better. I have no experience with either, so I'm torn which way to go.

This engine is going in a '67 GTO with a 4 speed (will probably end up being a 5 speed eventually), 3.55 posi. The engine is going to be stock appearing with a Q jet, ported intake, and RA/HO manifolds. The car has Ram Air. Before I bought the 428, I had planned on going with a 455 with the Crower 60919 cam. SD Performance recommends a cam with at 112 degree LSA with the RA manifolds. My heads have been ported to flow 265/208 and has new Ferrea valves and Crower springs. I'm going with forged pistons and rods either way. It is going to a street driven car, but I will occasionally take it to the track.

I guess my question to people who have experience is how does a 428 work with that cam and how much difference in power would there actually be? Which one would be more fun with a straight shift? I've seen a lot of people have favorable things to say about 428's, but I've never been in a car with one.

[tom s]

As this is the street section,455 all the way.I have both and the little added TQ is nice.Tom

[Cliff R]

I would build the 428 for the 4 speed application and 3.55 gears. They are a tad easier on bearings than the 455, and love high rpm's. The big 455's are great engines, but really try to throw all their power at you early in the rpm range, and too much of it for most set-ups.

We did a 428 engine a few years ago, using stock/unported (about 260cfm) KRE aluminum "D" ports. It was headed for a 67 GTO with 3.73's and 4 speed transmission.

We used a custom ground hydraulic roller cam in it, 236/242 on a 110LSA., static compression ratio was apprx 10.6 to 1.

The 428 made very similar power to a 455 using about the same parts and a little less cam.

540ft lbs peak torque, and 497hp at 5600rpm's. That was using my iron intake and Q-jet on it.

We dyno'd the same engine with a ported HO "re-pop" intake and power fell off to 487hp. Next we bolted on a stock RPM intake with a gasket match, and it made 491hp......Cliff

[FrankieT/A]

What about the 455 block bored .060 over with the 4" 428 crank?

[torqjunki]

I would have to vote for the 428, but really, there will not be a LOT of difference in the power curve. The shorter stroke may be a little more forgiving with real street tires.

[Singleton]

I built a very similar motor for my 66. 428+.065, RA manifolds, 6X heads ported to 260, 4-sp, 3.90. Runs well, but a bit over cammed (252/262@.050 solid ft).
If I could do it over again I would go with a 4.25 stroke, or even better, a 4.5 for 494 cubes

[Skip Fix]

With a stick I'd stay with the 428-and it will still be strong enough to break stuff!

[straycat]

Bore .060 with the 4" crank for a 4/5 speed. 455 w/Auto and 3:55s.

[PunchT37]

I kinda like the 428 with the 4 speed. I like to stretch out the gears some and it`s nice to have the engine comfortable at higher rpm`s. We used to buzz my buddies 428 with rubber rods to 7000 many times in a `79 GP.


That said, I like the 400/4speed combo also.

[Scarebird]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

I would build the 428 for the 4 speed application and 3.55 gears. They are a tad easier on bearings than the 455, and love high rpm's. The big 455's are great engines, but really try to throw all their power at you early in the rpm range, and too much of it for most set-ups....Cliff

Concur - love the 440 I have; seems much happier winding than the 462

[Half-Inch Stud]

455 4-speed combos in my teens: treacherous clutch pedal mechanics.

428 4speeds is funner

400 4-speed likely funner yet. Better longer wide-outs.

[Ventura455]

I would run the 455 hands down then you don't need 3.55 gears...you can run 3.08 and it will kickass on the highway and have plenty of torque to hallass stop light to stop light in town. I do not agree that a 428 is easier on bearings ...thats hog wash.

[Don Chapman]

What cc d port heads do you have?

[Scarebird]

Originally Posted by Ventura455

...I do not agree that a 428 is easier on bearings ...thats hog wash.

*



where:
R = Rod strength
M = mass of reciprocating parts
S = Stroke
ILF = Inertial loading factor
F = Factor of safety

for a given RPM, simple math says you don't know what you speak of...

*Courtesy of Wallace Racing

[geeteeohguy]

My '65 GTO had a '69 428 with tripower in it when I got it in '82. The car has a 4 speed and had 3.55 gears at that time. It was fast, but didn't run as strong as the fresh 389 TP in my identically equipped '66 GTO. The 428 had a crane fireball cam and stock 46 heads. It would rev to the moon, though, and was strong on the top end. I ended up breaking a bunch of piston lands (stock cast) and hurting the crank (stock rods) by buzzing it to 7000 rpm in 3rd gear and detonation that I didn't hear. Personally, I like the 428, and , like a 421, just sounds cooler than '455'. I ended up putting the built 389 in the '65 and it's there today. And still runs harder than that 428 did. I figure the 428 was a low budget rebuild at best, so it was not running at its full potential.

[67GTO4SPEED]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

I would build the 428 for the 4 speed application and 3.55 gears. They are a tad easier on bearings than the 455, and love high rpm's. The big 455's are great engines, but really try to throw all their power at you early in the rpm range, and too much of it for most set-ups.

We did a 428 engine a few years ago, using stock/unported (about 260cfm) KRE aluminum "D" ports. It was headed for a 67 GTO with 3.73's and 4 speed transmission.

We used a custom ground hydraulic roller cam in it, 236/242 on a 110LSA., static compression ratio was apprx 10.6 to 1.

The 428 made very similar power to a 455 using about the same parts and a little less cam.

540ft lbs peak torque, and 497hp at 5600rpm's. That was using my iron intake and Q-jet on it.

We dyno'd the same engine with a ported HO "re-pop" intake and power fell off to 487hp. Next we bolted on a stock RPM intake with a gasket match, and it made 491hp......Cliff

Have you ever used the Crower 60919 in a 428? If so, were the street manners similiars? I think I saw where you said you had used the 60243 in a 428 - if so, what were numbers on it?

Originally Posted by Singleton

I built a very similar motor for my 66. 428+.065, RA manifolds, 6X heads ported to 260, 4-sp, 3.90. Runs well, but a bit over cammed (252/262@.050 solid ft).
If I could do it over again I would go with a 4.25 stroke, or even better, a 4.5 for 494 cubes

Have you ever ran it at the track?

[67GTO4SPEED]

Originally Posted by Don Chapman

What cc d port heads do you have?

I haven't cc'd them, but with dished head Ferrea valves, the deshrouding on the intake, and the valve job, I expect them to be 76 - 77 cc. I work in a machine shop, so I have a capability to dish pistons on either engine to achieve my desired CR, so that's not really an issue for me.

Originally Posted by Scarebird

Concur - love the 440 I have; seems much happier winding than the 462

What is your combination, and have you ever ran it at the track?

[b-man]

I had a nearly stock 455 and my buddy had a mild 350. I was chasing him around a few sharp corners and it took me a while to catch up once we hit the straight sections, the 455 always lost traction while the 350 was putting the power down early.

I'd build the 428, I'm putting together a 421 for my next street engine.

[i82much]

I vote 428 as well, particularly if you are going to an OD trans. Most of those have a steeper first gear than the wide ratio muncies, that 428 will love all that gear.

[gtofreek]

I had a 428 in my 4 speed, 65 GTO. It ran super strong and put a few 455's to shame. It was a very mix-matched combo also.

I built a 428 for a friends 68 GTO and it absolutely screams. I also built a 428 for a friends 65 GTO. It is mild mannered but rips it hard when stepped on. Pulls very easily past 6000 RPM's without batting an eye. Breaks the tires loose instantly in 1'st and 2'nd gear, maybe even 3'rd gear[hadn't tried that] when the secondaries start to open. I love the 428's. They get my vote, especially when stock'ish iron heads are used. The 455's are too big for iron heads, unless they are heavily ported. But that's what it takes to make the 455's run as good as a 428. Both 428's I mentioned above had VooDoo cams in them. The 68 had 233/241 VooDoo, and the 65 had 227/233 VooDoo.