351 Boss Oil Pan

[6972boss]

It says production pan with welded in windage baffle 4V and CJ for 71. Isnt that what the others are or did I miss something....again?

 

[secluff]

I know you can step into a dark nasty mud hole when you start discussing camshaft selections, what qualified a 71-73 to receive a Mach1 hood, what is the Government really hiding in Area 51, etc. Oil pan discussions for the 351C cars seem to be another one of those category's. As I had posted before, Ford was in the business of building cars and trucks globally, and providing parts and service support. The powertrain engineers were responsible for the design of these engines right down to the fasteners required to assemble a running engine. Did they all leave the plant in the configuration the engineers had designed and intended? Of course not! The 351C was a very popular engine choice that was utilized in several car lines with Ford and Mercury. With such a high volume engine there was always going to be the occasional shortage of certain components and certain parts could be substituted to keep the line running. It was always said ( and David-Carolina_Mountain_Mustang will agree) in short of a direct nuclear bomb hit, the assembly line shut down for nothing.

The 65-72 final edition of the Master Ford Parts Catalog indicates the D1ZZ-6675-C double baffled pan for 1970/ 351 4bl, 351CJ, and Boss 351. The Mercury catalog shows the same info for the Cougar/Montego-Cyclone cars. The 73-79 Ford and Mercury catalogs show the same pan listed for the final two years (73-74) of the Q engine. Around 1975 the DOAZ-6675-A standard 2bl pan replaced the performance oil pans. In 1979 that pan was replaced by the D7AZ-6675-A 351M/400 oil pan since the 351C, 351M/400 shared the same pan shape/bolt configuration.

The excellent illustration Chuck provided is how the M,Q, and R engines were intended to be production built. There again, good chance they didn't all leave that way. Unless you are the original owner or knew the original owner you can't be certain of your cars history. Damaged pans, warranty repaired/replaced engines, out of warranty customer repairs and salvage yard engines also come into play on what you find on your cars 40+ years later.

Hopefully this has provided some useful info and not made things worse! Lol

 

[tony-muscle]

However it happens at least I have the double baffled oil pan, which seems to be a good thing.

In regards to the 6qt of oil for the Boss in comparison to 5qt for the other engines, can you just add 6qt to a non-Boss engine? Or will it affect its functionality/power due to splashing? Is it fair to assume that that's the function of the second baffle, to limit the amount of splashing when 6qt are added? Since the oil pans are the same size, I am trying to understand the design difference between 6qt vs 5qt.

 

[6972boss]

Very interesting info::thumb:: I have learned something new. Thanks for all in the input. You can run 6 qts, there is no difference in volume between the pans. The windage baffle is a good thing and does provide protection from splashing by the crank rotation and the more oil that is in the pan the greater the splash thus more reduced power. A windage baffle is usually a good idea in any engine.

 

[secluff]

Tony, the pan shape/capacity was the same on the Cleveland oil pans. There was not a separate pan listed for additional oil capacity. The problem with these street engines was some oil starvation problems resulting in some damaged/blown engines. When people like myself tried to kill their car every time they drove it, the oiling problems became more apparent. On a typical Saturday night these cars were being flogged within an inch of their lives. The warranty claims on blown engines on Monday morning was proving that out. The only difference on the Boss 351 was the dipstick calibrated to show full with the extra oil. Ford did come out with extra oil capacities for the Boss 302, 428 CJ/SCJ and 429 CJ/SCJ.They did not change the pans, but released revised dip sticks to reflect the new capacity requirements. If you go back to post #4 and click on Chucks link you will see some additional info on the oil capacity question and a illustration of Ford's bulletin.

Although not Cleveland related, I had a 72 N code (stock 429) Gran Torino I transplanted a 429 CJ/Police Interceptor into. With the revised oil requirements I actually had to run 8qts of oil. 7qts with filter plus 1 additional quart for the 70/71 SCJ Torino engine oil cooler I was running. Never had any oiling problems with her, and I can guarantee that one was rode hard and put up wet!

 

[Hemikiller]

Interesting.........appears 4V also had the "B" baffle. I wonder some of those on eBay listed as BOSS 351 with a hefty cost might just be a std 4V pan. Good to know.

I have hunch my 2V 351 will not have the "B" plate so I will run a bolt-on windage tray with 6 quarts.

I have a 1971 M-Code, 351-4V, and the oil pan has both, the "A" and "B" baffles.

Tony, now that is strange!! I have absolutely no doubt that the one on my engine is the original standard no baffle oil pan. This engine was built Jan 12 71. Could it be that baffles were added after that date to M code oil pans? I wish I did have a baffle in mine as I love to 'corner' it pretty hard sometimes just for fun. Something to look for at the junk yards etc.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mor-20558/

Just sayin'