big block vs small block?

[sm3570]

Ima gonna leave this right here: http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-331-main/item/ford-331-base

Edit: do you see what I see? http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-347-main

 

[Finmach]

Ima gonna leave this right here: http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-331-main/item/ford-331-base

Edit: do you see what I see? http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-347-main

You mean this?

 

[sm3570]

Ima gonna leave this right here: http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-331-main/item/ford-331-base

Edit: do you see what I see? http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-347-main

You mean this?

Yessir

 

[hyena429]

Btw...If we wanna get technical about what people call things...Calling a 351 a "Windsor" is wrong....Calling a 351 "Modified" is wrong too...Ford if you noticed only used FE, MEL, Y, and such to describe motors...351 was orginaly only called a W...and same with 351M...Nicknames caught on quick with them...And i dont consider a 351 a mid block..But i do consider a 351 M and 400 M a true mid block...It is too small to be a big block..and way to over built to be a small block..I'll stand by that one.

Just to nitpick some more: Calling a 400 a "400M" is wrong too. Only the 351M carries the designation. The 400 is simply the "400."

-Kurt

You mite be right...think the 400 come out first.....Ford mostly use alphabet letters but not always...300 six is a good point on that.....Just making a point on nit piking.."which i rarely do" unless some one starts it first...Alot of things..Just like Motor and Engines is just silly to argu over...We all know what some one means when they say either...Same with a 351 Windsor..I don't go around reeming people for calling it a Windsor or a cleveland...even know ford never called them either

 

[goodnigh]

All I know is when you park my 351C 4V next to a shevy 350,

the Cleveland looks a lot bigger.

mike

 

[hyena429]

All I know is when you park my 351C 4V next to a shevy 350,

the Cleveland looks a lot bigger.

mike

Yup..The heads make the chevy look small...Even know the chevy has a heavier block and bigger crank...Same with my cousins pontiac 400...The heads are so small..My cleveland looks kinda big compared too it..lol

 

[goodnigh]

All I know is when you park my 351C 4V next to a shevy 350,

the Cleveland looks a lot bigger.

mike

Yup..The heads make the chevy look small...Even know the chevy has a heavier block and bigger crank...Same with my cousins pontiac 400...The heads are so small..My cleveland looks kinda big compared too it..lol

And don't forget the reason(s) they built the Cleveland;

NASCAR, economy and possibly passenger car use.

mike

 

[Finmach]

And don't forget the reason(s) they built the Cleveland;

NASCAR, economy and possibly passenger car use.

First Clevelands came in 1970 and the big teams started to use Clevelands in Nascar as late as 1972? Now why would Ford manufacture tons of nascar engines just to start using them not until 1972?

I'll believe that Ford made nice affordable hiperf passenger engine for between the big engines and the smaller ones. Bringing a competitor for chebby 350 cid - which Ford did and did with style.

351c is beautifull engine to look at, chebby looks next to Cleveland as scrappy as it is.

 

[cazsper]

I know how wide the Windsor is. I have a 393w stroker with AFR-205 heads in my '68 coupe. It fits well in my '68 and assume it would only fit better in the '71-73. As far as width goes, how would you compare the Windsor to the 4v Cleveland to the 460?

With an aluminum headed/intake 460 being so close in weight to that of an all iron Cleveland, could I assume that whatever suspension I have on my car now, will work well with a 460?

 

[Tubo]

Ima gonna leave this right here: http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-331-main/item/ford-331-base

Edit: do you see what I see? http://www.blueprintengines.com/index.php/products/bp-ford-crate-engines-landing/ford-347-main

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, They like big girls too!!

 

[Mesozoic]

The big block is a pig in weight. Seriously, 250-300 lbs more than a 351W. I'm churning out over 700 hp out of a supercharged 302 and it handles pretty sweet too. If you want displacement, you can get a Dart small block and stroke it up to 500 cid if needed, without the weight penalty of the big block.

 

[cazsper]

I hate to say it but I'm really considering the stroked Windsor route. I really did want a 460 based motor but (for my purpose), I just don't see the benefit. I just finished building a 415w fir my '68 coupe using a Dart block and AFR heads. With a fairly mild cam and 10# of boost, not only will it idle nice, it will easily make 600 rwhp (with similar torque). Better yet, I won't have to wind it up past 6000rpm. I may just something like this with the Mach-1.

 

[Mesozoic]

My Mustang isn't a Mach 1, but if it were, I think I would stick with the original engine, whatever that may have been. Since mine is merely a Sportsroof fastback, I didn't hesitate to drop a 351W stroker in there!

Just beware of the header situation... OMG it was not fun dealing with that.

 

[cazsper]

I certainly understand keeping it "original". But when I bought it, the original engine wasn't in it anyways. It was originally a 2v Cleveland and the previous owner changed them for 4v heads and an Edelbrock Victor intake. I hate the intake. It's my next big item to deal with. I'll see how it goes.

 

[pegasus]

I'm looking at one of these for my 66 falcon project, a good in between motor with all that you are looking for,

http://www.summitracing.com/dom/parts/fms-m6007z427frt/overview/

 

[Mesozoic]

I'm looking at one of these for my 66 falcon project, a good in between motor with all that you are looking for,

http://www.summitracing.com/dom/parts/fms-m6007z427frt/overview/

I'm pretty certain you can build one up yourself for cheaper than that price tag. Then again, there's something to be said for having the convenience of a crate motor.

Those Boss 351 blocks are seriously wicked and attractively priced, though. That's the real ticket for a hot street setup.

 

[cazsper]

For a little less, I built basically the same motor with AFR-205 heads and the Trick Flow box intake..

 

[Mesozoic]

For a little less, I built basically the same motor with AFR-205 heads and the Trick Flow box intake..

I'm running a C90E casting 351W (1969) and have had it line honed and girdled. The 4 bolt setup would probably have been a better setup, though... and then I could've run the windage tray for my Milodon pan. Not planning on tearing the motor apart for a long while, though.

I'm pretty happy with the power and economy of the small block Ford. With my carb'd setup I got 22 mpg on a recent highway trip. Should be a bit better with EFI.

 

[Finmach]

The big block is a pig in weight. Seriously, 250-300 lbs more than a 351W. I'm churning out over 700 hp out of a supercharged 302 and it handles pretty sweet too. If you want displacement, you can get a Dart small block and stroke it up to 500 cid if needed, without the weight penalty of the big block.

Seriously, based on what knowledge? You must have scaled and owned many 429/460 engines? By saying that a 351w weights 225 lbs to 245 lbs? – that surely is hard to beat since I've seen ready to run 460 big block to peak 530 lbs with 0,080" overbore. On www.460ford.com forum a 545 cid was scaled to 576 lbs (4.500" crank adds up weight). Aftermarket blocks like A460 can loose app. 50 lbs only by going to 4.600" bore - long cylinders (to accomodate 4.500-4.750 stroke) and plenty of meat to bore from.

So how much weights your 302 with supercharger, I would like to educate myself and I am hoping to hear the true weight and instead of assumption but a scaled firsthand information about the SC 302 weight.

BTW, I calculated the MPG wrong from the 429 Galaxie I mentioned earlier, it’s actually the same as Mesozoic’s 22 mpg (needed to search a convertor...) but instead of a carb it was ol school Holley Commander – ’61 Gal is heavy girl though. My Mach 1 made 19 mpg with a 580 hp n/a 460 cid and the tour included two 125 mph blasts on fourth gear and few smoky lift-offs… It’s about the tune and the overdrive gears to bring the rpm down to get good mpg.

What comes for the engine choice, it’s something that man got to do what man got to do. You’ll be happy with any of the engines once it’s done correctly. One thing that you should really think about… make a plan, stick to the plan, stick to the plan, stick to the plan. I don’t know anybody who would have managed to stick to the plan though…

---------

edit: corrected the 545 cid weight to 576 lbs.

 

[mdan575]

One thing that you should really think about… make a plan, stick to the plan, stick to the plan, stick to the plan. I don’t know anybody who would have managed to stick to the plan though…

Man speaks the truth no doubt with that statement. For the record at this point I am sticking with my plan. Slowly collecting necessary parts on a budget when they show up. Cash is king and people will deal when cash is in hand. But it is taking patience.