Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
Classic Cars Do you just love the classics? |
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread |
|
Thread Tools |
08-04-2003, 09:29 AM | #16 | |
AF Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 29
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Keep the original heads, unless you are building some ultra-high performance car. The heads that go with the 4 barrel have ports that are oversized for a smallblock engine. The 351 Cleveland was built to be a performance engine, but they went overboard
__________________
Serious Wheels Quality images of collector cars, both classic and modern. |
|
08-25-2003, 12:38 AM | #17 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 1,132
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
Quote:
|
||
08-25-2003, 03:33 AM | #18 | ||
AF Newbie
|
Re: Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
Quote:
first the 351c is not a big block as stated. second the 351c DOES NOT use a big block bellhousing pattern. it uses the same pattern as the 351w. the 351m/400 does however use the 429/460 bellhousing bolt pattern.
__________________
64 falcon 66 mustang 83 grand marquis dont just believe in miracles, rely on them! |
||
08-26-2003, 12:31 PM | #19 | |
AF Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 43
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
i could be wrong
I could be wrong, but as far as i know the 351 cleveland was never offered with a 2 barrel. It`s a performance motor. NOTHING that was built for performance came stock with a 2 barrel.
|
|
08-27-2003, 01:09 AM | #20 | ||
AF Newbie
|
Re: i could be wrong
Quote:
__________________
64 falcon 66 mustang 83 grand marquis dont just believe in miracles, rely on them! |
||
08-31-2003, 08:11 AM | #21 | |
AF Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 43
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
i stand corrected
|
|
01-01-2004, 11:59 PM | #22 | |
AF Newbie
|
The 351 cleveland was avaliable with a 2 and 4 barrel carb. 71-73 mustangs that came with the 351c were built stock with a 2 barrel carb and 2v heads unless you went up to the Q-code option that upgraded to a 4 barrel carb with 4v heads and a optional C6 automatic transmission. Options for different models of cars or different years might be different but that what i know about 71-73 mustangs.
*Im restoring a 73 mustang mach 1 Q-Code option with a 351c 4V HO, 4 barrel carb, and a C6 automatic transmission. |
|
01-04-2004, 04:38 AM | #23 | |
AF Newbie
|
74 was the last year for the Cleveland. offered both in 2v and 4v models.
weather its a 351 cleveland, 351M or even the 400. they share distributors, timing chains,cams, heads and aghaust manifolds 2v aghaust manifold and 4v aghaust manifols 4v's work great on 2v heads but are getting hard too find 2V heads are good up too 450HP have 2.04/ 1.65 valves have open chamber 76cc except the alstralian version which has closed chamber 64cc usually 1.5 points of compression difference. 4V heads have huge ports are good up too 600+hp but poor low end torqe have 2.19/1.71 valves in the closed chamber heads 2.04/1.65 in the open chambers usually. parts they also share are rocker arms and distributor with the 429/460 rocker's will even swap with a BB chevy if you have screw in studs installed the 71 BOSS named Cleveland was the most powerfull small block in its time. I forget fords rating but it made over 370hp yes faster than a 70 LT1 camaro!!!!! half a car lengh in the qaurter mile 13 something on stock tires. and weighting about 400 pounds more. no matter which motor you have they all can make a easy 400hp with todays cams and such. sense your car is a 74 it has 2v open chamber heads get the 2v alstralian one's will raise your compression from its 8to1 compression too 9.5to1 perfect for the street have them machined for screw in studs if they dont already have them. add a 4v intake for 2v heads a set of header's or 4v aghaust manifolds and a cam with 225 intake 235 aghaust duration @.050 and there's your 400hp and no clevelands are not big blocks although they are called that a lot as the heads make then look big |
|
02-26-2004, 07:56 PM | #24 | ||
AF Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 118
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
Quote:
The engine does not know if it is a 351M or a 351C. The same 2V heads are found on both. The same cam/intake/carb, etc. will make near the same power on a 351M or a 351C. Both are 4.00" bore and 3.50" stroke. The largest differnce is the intake manifold availability. You can use the 351C intakes on 351M/400 engines with Weiand or Price Motorsports adapters. |
||
02-26-2004, 07:59 PM | #25 | ||
AF Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 118
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
Quote:
The 351C shares the small block bell pattern. |
||
02-26-2004, 08:02 PM | #26 | ||
AF Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 118
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
Quote:
|
||
02-26-2004, 08:08 PM | #27 | ||
AF Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 118
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
Quote:
|
||
02-26-2004, 11:47 PM | #28 | ||
AF Regular
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Iwakuni
Posts: 353
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
Quote:
I know this because I had one, and built the engine to 420hp/435ft.lbs of torque back in '93 for a Fox Body Mustang I was building. Here's a full list of all the parts that I used... - Crane Fireball 5200 cam. - Edelbrock Performer Intake gasket-matched to ported heads. - Holley 750 Mechanical Secondary Carb - Heddman Headers for '71 Mach one. (took some modifying to get to fit in a '80 Fox Body) - Port/Polish/Shave/3-Angle Valve Job on stock 2 barrel heads - New Valves, seats and pushrods - Forged Ford Motorsports pistons and rods (12.5:1) - Factory Nodular Steel Crank - MSD Electronic Ignition - 1.6:1 Rocker Arms - Solid Lifters - FluidDampr Harmonic Balancer (NOTE: Don't attempt to run an this setup on pump gas with less than 92 octane fuel or you will open the gates of detonation hell!) This engine lasted me 4 years of daily driving plus two trips to California from Seattle not to mention racing at Seattle Int'l Raceway and Sears Point during the seasons. The low end torque generated by the 2 barrel heads is unreal from idle but it does fade rather quickly though higher in the rpm ranges and IMHO the redline 5400rpms is a bit too soon for my taste. Rev it any higher than that without some serious valve-springs and roller rockers and the valves float like you wouldn't believe. Just my experiences with the motor. |
||
02-27-2004, 12:00 AM | #29 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 118
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Re: Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
[quote=GTR2b]Not true either. The 351C's that were available in the trucks and the 351C equipped Mach1's in '71 were available in the 2bbl configuration. QUOTE]
I never said that the 351C was not available in a 2V configuration. The Mustang 2V Cleveland was the H code. There was no 351C 2V truck motor. The 351M was used in trucks and cars. My quote that you replied to is 100% factual. Here it is for you again. It only speaks of the 4V heads which were used exclusively on 4V motors. Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally Posted by Mercracer All 4V 351C heads (open and closed chamber ) including the Boss came with 2.19 intake and 1.71 exhaust valves until late 1973 into 1974 model when they went to the 2V valve sizes (D3ZE casting number head). |
|
02-27-2004, 12:14 AM | #30 | ||
AF Regular
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Iwakuni
Posts: 353
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: 351 Cleveland, am I screwed??
[quote=Mercracer]
Quote:
Sorry about that, long day at work today. You are correct about the valve sizes. Also, don't forget to mention about the Compression Ratio drop in '72 to 8.5:1 I believe. |
||
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
|
|