|
Author
|
Topic: 351 SVO in a 66? is it possible
|
Dster
Journeyman Posts: 1
From: Mendon, IL
Registered: Nov 2001
|
posted 11-30-2001 07:18 PM
   
I have just recently thought of the concept of dumping a 351 SVO block in my 66. I just bought it.. it needs severe restoration, and I wanted to do some performance mods. I found a block at: http://www.oemfordparts.com/partdetails.asp?PartID=2105&CategoryID=12I was wondering if this would fit without shock tower modifications, I know a 351W will, but wasn't sure about this one. I'm also planning on backing it up with a Tremec 5 speed or T-56 (6 speed). Any insight will be GREATLY appreciated
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 17955
From: Saco, Maine MCA # 47773
Registered: May 99
|
posted 11-30-2001 08:00 PM
You can make it fit, but $2495 is pretty pricey for a bare block that's not finish machined.Especially since you can get a fully machined 302 Ford bare block from Summit for $200. Welcome to M&M ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 M code 351C 4V/FMX/3.25 open
'72 Mustang Sprint Coupe 351C 4V/FMX/4.30 Trac Lok
'94 F-150 XL 5.8L/E4OD/3.55 Limited Slip
'97 Probe GTS 2.5L DOHC
My Photo Page
Christmas shopping? Why not use the Mustangsandmore.com Bookstore?
IP: Logged |
SuperDave
Journeyman Posts: 69
From: Tacoma, WA USA
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 11-30-2001 08:37 PM
SuperDave's rule #6: "Given enough time and enough money, anything is possible."
IP: Logged |
SuperDave
Journeyman Posts: 69
From: Tacoma, WA USA
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 11-30-2001 08:40 PM
Corollary to SuperDave's rule #6: "The result is probably not worth the time and money."Seriously, what's wrong with a healthy 302?
IP: Logged |
65_289
Gearhead Posts: 298
From:
Registered: Jul 2001
|
posted 11-30-2001 08:58 PM
quote:
Originally posted by SuperDave:
...Seriously, what's wrong with a healthy 302?
More cubes = better!! 
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 17955
From: Saco, Maine MCA # 47773
Registered: May 99
|
posted 11-30-2001 09:22 PM
Alex holds his class record in both IHRA and NHRA with a 289.  ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 M code 351C 4V/FMX/3.25 open
'72 Mustang Sprint Coupe 351C 4V/FMX/4.30 Trac Lok
'94 F-150 XL 5.8L/E4OD/3.55 Limited Slip
'97 Probe GTS 2.5L DOHC
My Photo Page
Christmas shopping? Why not use the Mustangsandmore.com Bookstore?
IP: Logged |
SuperDave
Journeyman Posts: 69
From: Tacoma, WA USA
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 11-30-2001 10:06 PM
65_289: Ask any woman about your last statement.What is it with this fixation on cubic inches? The new Mustang Cobra Jet 5.4 (blown) turns the quarter in 13.4 and the Mustang Competition 4.6 N/A does 13 flat (Motor Trend magazine). Face it! Early Mustangs have hook-up problems. Just because you can do a massive burnout doesn't mean squat. The car has to be engineered for the power and that might be as expensive as the engine itself. Rule #6 is the result of many years of mechanical endeavor.
IP: Logged |
lyle29464
Gearhead Posts: 367
From: Mt. Pleasant S.C. C. S. A.
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 11-30-2001 10:32 PM
The 4.6 goes faster than the 5.4 I think I will pick up a 3.0 and kick *** .
(just kidding I thought it was time for a little humor)------------------
Lyle
69 rag top 435+ some warm up stuff
93 explorer
98 f 150
IP: Logged |
SuperDave
Journeyman Posts: 69
From: Tacoma, WA USA
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 11-30-2001 11:59 PM
Lyle: I found it hard to believe also but Motor Trend (June 2000) reviews both cars. Both were running 3:55 rears. Kind of blows off a lot of conventional thinking about cubes and ET's. With early Mustangs, I've always thought a high reving small-block would whup the "big boys" in the quarter. I have some experience with an authentic '67 Shelby 350GT that confirms my thinking.
IP: Logged |
TomP
Moderator Posts: 3010
From: Delta BC Canada
Registered: Dec 99
|
posted 12-01-2001 12:10 AM
Oh it'll fit, same size as a 351W block, 'cause that's almost what it is.I have got a better question... why the heck ya want a Nascar dry sump block for a street car? You'll have $20,000- in it by the time you put it together the way it should be.
IP: Logged |
lyle29464
Gearhead Posts: 367
From: Mt. Pleasant S.C. C. S. A.
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 12-01-2001 01:17 AM
I guess my wife was right  when she told me I was crazy to put in the big engine. O well gas is 89? Lyle------------------
Lyle
69 rag top 7126cubic centimeters
93 explorer
98 f 150
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 200
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-01-2001 09:10 AM
A 351W will go into a '65 or 66. It's not that difficult of a swap. If you want the Siameese bore SVO block, try a W351 wet sump block. Cost about $1600 plus machining. You could build a 440 pluch inch motor with that block. The problem becomes getting heads to feed it, while fitting the large tube custom headers (1 5/8" factory made won't be big enough) in the engine bay.
I would go the cheap way and build a 393 stroker. Stock 351W block, Scat crank, 351W rods, 302 pistons. Headman makes swap headers. 4-speed clutch linkage may be a problem. Go Cubes!
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Gearhead Posts: 1026
From: Reno Nv
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-01-2001 02:58 PM
I like my 351w,but if it ever gose down.I would really think of replacing it with a 302.A built up 302 will hold its own. My 351w is mostly stock high miles motor.With some simple upgrades I like that it is has torque then the stock 302 with the same add ons.So in my case cubes made a difference,but when you start to build up motors then things can become different.
Bigger is not always better,its the total package that matters.I use all the little add ons and tricks I can find.I have taken down many cars with more motor, and gears, and money.But if you get the package working together thats what its all about.If you want a 351w go for it,do a strker like Mpcoluv said.
And like Dave said every one knows that burn outs are for showing off,or warming or tires.But traction is the name of the game.SCOOP ------------------
65 Coupe with a 351w, RPM intake,carter625,shorty 1-5/8 headers,2.5 exhaust,Flowmasters,stock C4,peg leg 8" 2:80,Big Boss 429 hood scoop,Cragers SS,Black Suede finish.
MEM#1240 https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/Fastymz.html
IP: Logged |
65_289
Gearhead Posts: 298
From:
Registered: Jul 2001
|
posted 12-01-2001 03:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by SteveLaRiviere:
Alex holds his class record in both IHRA and NHRA with a 289.
And that car sees how many street miles?
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 200
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-01-2001 05:25 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Fastymz:
I like my 351w,but if it ever gose down.I would really think of replacing it with a 302.A built up 302 will hold its own. Bigger is not always better,its the total package that matters.I use all the little add ons and tricks I can find.I have taken down many cars with more motor, and gears, and money.But if you get the package working together thats what its all about.If you want a 351w go for it,do a strker like Mpcoluv said.
And like Dave said every one knows that burn outs are for showing off,or warming or tires.But traction is the name of the game.SCOOP
I am not slamming 302s but more cubic inches always mean more torque/hp given the same level of modifications. IHRA pro-stocs don't run 812 inch motors for nothing.
And yes, many small motored car win drag races due to better traction. You have to have a well sorted out or "Balanced" car to really compete at any level.
IP: Logged |
SuperDave
Journeyman Posts: 69
From: Tacoma, WA USA
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 12-01-2001 10:10 PM
[QUOTE You have to have a well sorted out or "Balanced" car to really compete at any level.[/B][/QUOTE] I COULD NOT AGREE MORE!!!!! Why do so many people NOT understand this concept?
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
