besides cubes, how are they different?

the 429 is the biggest version of the old331/365/390/429 engines. Designed in 1949 as the first mass production high-comp OHV engine.

the 472 was a very new engine at the time, then became 500, then downsized to 425 and finally 368

the 472 is more powerful, more reliable, parts are more easy to get, there are after market parts for it... it is just an updated engine.

Perhaps someone that knows more about the 429 can pitch some info in... there aren't many 429 owners around here...

About parts - for 429cid you can find lots of parts from www.kanter.com

The 42 had a horribly innefficient oil system. I' a bit fuzzy on the details, but it had a convoluted path from the sump to vthe filter to the pump.

The 472 was designed with the power accessories in mind, the AC comptessoe bolts directly to the intake manifold, no vibrating brackets to wobble loose, etc.

The power steering pump is simarly mounted.

Big Rochester Quadrajet with a 650CFM rating.

There's more, but I'm 500 miles from home at an Army inprocessing facility at the moment

the 472 has to have more then a 650cfm carb...

my 425 has a 800cfm... I thought the 472/500 were very similar to that?

I believe they were 750 CFM on 472s and 800 CFM on 500s and 425s, although the jetting was way lean on 425s.

the 429 is the biggest version of the old331/365/390/429 engines. Designed in 1949 as the first mass production high-comp OHV engine.

Perhaps someone that knows more about the 429 can pitch some info in... there aren't many 429 owners around here...

Night Wolf;
I gotta disagree with you, a bit, about the 429 being "the same" as the 390 and earlier engines..
Up to the '62 390, I'll agree these Caddy engines were basically all the same.. The '63 390 was a totally redesigned block, the most notable feature was the front distributor.. made tune-ups a helluva lot easier.. The 429 was the evolution (bored out) version of this 390 and these two engines share a number of common parts, I used a '63 390 Front Timing Cover, Oil Pan and Oil Pick-up Tube to "make" the 429 to "fit" in my Landcruiser!
"Back When".. in 1978 to be exact, I grew tired of doing valve jobs on my purchased new '74 Toyota Landcruiser (five valve jobs, all with the same burned #4 exhaust, in four years!) so I opted to install a "bulletproof" engine.. The 429cid Caddy V-8 was selected as it was only an inch wider, longer and taller that the commonly used than the (dare I say it) small block Chevy.. Plus I didn't want an "RPM" engine but one that had "get down grunt" bottom-end torque.
I had to use the TH400 as I could get an adapter to mate it to the Toyota's Transfer Case, retaining the 4WD & PTO Winch was of prime importance.
The only "downside" to the 429 engine was the 4.10 rear gears, I ran out of RPM (peaked at 5000!) at 100 miles per hour, which, in the Toyota Landcruiser was like flying a brick! However, there wasn't anything I couldn't pull or climb, and I did it at idle speed, or slightly off idle! I pulled loaded 18 wheelers up ice slick hills, pulled tow trucks, with a cars attached, out of muddy fields, towed my 6000 Lb, 23" travel trailer all over the place (once thru hubcap deep muddy county roads during a hunting trip-- we had record amounts of rainfall for several days.. and I had "street" tires fitted at the time!).. AND when I "lit the wick" on the engine, it would actually pull the front wheels off a paved road.. If I had any more horsepower, I really would be a danger!!
Besides, the 472 & 500 engines would not fit in the engine bay of the Landcruiser. However, if I had a Caddy with a 472, I would not "revert" to the "smaller" 429.
I wore out the rebuilt 429 engine after "only" 110,000 miles (it started burning oil and the blow-by forced oil out the breather (oi filler) tube.. made a real mess..
Least ye think that 110K rather low mileage for a Caddy engine to give up the ghost, let me remind you that the 4.10 gears allowed the engine to run about twice the RPM it would have with stock Caddy gearing.. I figure it was equal to at least 220,000 plus miles.. and those miles were not "tender" miles, either!
In the fourteen years that I drove "The Beast" on a daily basis, the only "non regular maintainence" item I had to replace was the Accel Pump
diaphragm on the Holley replacement for the "Quadra-Junk" carb.
I'd say it was a very dependable "work-horse" for me...
And speaking of which, does anyone know where "Engine Rebuild Kits" can be obtained for the '67 429 engine?? I've sourced a pair of Dana 2.80's for both diffs and would like to put the nearly 400 horse Four Wheel Drive back to work!!
Charles.

The 42 had a horribly innefficient oil system. I' a bit fuzzy on the details, but it had a convoluted path from the sump to vthe filter to the pump.

The 472 was designed with the power accessories in mind, the AC comptessoe bolts directly to the intake manifold, no vibrating brackets to wobble loose, etc.


Cadillac Mike;
I dug out my "Motors Manual" that shows the "path" the oil takes in the '62 390, the '63-'67 Front Dist Block (390 & 429), and the '68 472.
While these renderings are "typical", not specific, all three show the oil being picked up at the strainer, going to the pump, then the oil filter then to the two "main galley lines" down both sides of the block to feed the Main Bearings and Rocker Shafts.
I can tell you that the 429 has a "Low Pressure, High Volumn" oil pump.. a whopping 35psi max pressure, but it can pump all five quarts thru the engine in a matter of thirty seconds at about 2500 RPM.. I know, before I changed to the '63 Front Timing Cover I had a "Remote Oil Filter" set-up attached to the oil filter boss on the 429 in my Toyota Landcruiser, I hit a serious chug-hole, bottoming the suspension causing the front diff came up and hit the adaptor, breaking the "out" line!! It dumped ALL the oil out of the engine before I could get the engine shut-down (expensive "engineering failure"!)
I can also tell you that the oiling method to the rockers is different on the '66 (and earlier?) front distributor block(s) than it is on the '67 429's.. In the former, the upper oiling is fed thru the block to the rocker shafts, then out to each rocker (tends to under oil the outer most rockers).. the latter routes the upper oiling up thru each individual lifter and push rod to get to each of the rockers more uniformly. The Valve LIfters are NOT interchangable between the '66/earlier engines and the '67 429. I don't know how the 472 is set-up..
Charles.

Also, FWIW, the early 472 blocks ('68 and '69) had less efficient oiling systems than the '70 and up blocks. Smaller passages or something along those lines... I will take the parts availability of the 472 any day though...

I would guess that the smaller oil passages on the '68 and '69 472's would only be a concern on an "all out" engine. As a street motor, it will be fine.