|
Author
|
Topic: 351C swap into a '68 Mustang
|
Javelin360
Journeyman Posts: 14
From: Marlton, NJ 08053
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 01-10-2003 12:03 PM
   
Are there any modifications needed to fit a 351C into a '68 Mustang?Shock tower clearance?
Custom headers? Thanks in advance, Fran
IP: Logged |
steve'66
Gearhead Posts: 6768
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 01-10-2003 12:15 PM
Fran,It's a pretty easy swap, read this. https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/DanJonesEngineSwap.html SteveW
IP: Logged |
Rustang
Gearhead Posts: 531
From: Clarion PA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 01-10-2003 01:14 PM
BTW Hooker headers Super Comps (#6210 I believe, for 4V heads) fit well in the'68 ------------------
'68 mustang 351 clevor- 10.92@124
'67 Stang, 351W -11.18@118
'69 351C Torino-14.90@100
'78 Pickup 351W-15.56@88
'79 Pickup 460 ET=??
IP: Logged |
Hemikiller
Gearhead Posts: 404
From: Clinton, CT
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 01-10-2003 06:40 PM
The swap is definitely pretty simple. The motor mounts are the same for small block and Clevelands. Hooker makes two sets of headers that will fit the 67-70 chassis. http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLine/Products/ES/ESHHCH/Comp.html 6913 for 2v heads
6920 for 4v heads
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 1004
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-11-2003 09:15 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Javelin360:
Are there any modifications needed to fit a 351C into a '68 Mustang?Shock tower clearance?
Custom headers? Thanks in advance, Fran
I swapped in a 351C into a '69 which has the same engine compartment more or less.
I have the Tubular automotive headers which suck as far as ground clearence goes.
You never said manual or auto. This makes a big difference as far as header cost goes.
Only Hooker, Tubular Automotive and Ford powertrain (www.fordpowertrain.com) make headers for manual apps. You can get some cheap dynomax headers for auto applications.
I have a good set if you need them 
BTW later this year I'm swaping the Tubular automotive headers for a set of the Ford powertrain headers......
IP: Logged |
Javelin360
Journeyman Posts: 14
From: Marlton, NJ 08053
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 01-13-2003 08:54 AM
Thanks for the info.Steve:
Reading that link, I noticed it's geared more towards a '64-66 car. Is the '68 engine bay larger? Would the 351C fit more easily in a '68 as opposed to the earlier car? Mpcoluv:
I'm planning on using a C4 or C6. All:
I'd rather not have to take a sledgehammer to anything, so if that's the case, then maybe I should reconsider a 351W? I'm not dead set on using the Clevland, I've just got one laying around on my patio, but I can probably find a Windsor pretty easily. Again, thanks for the info! -Fran
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 34763
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-13-2003 09:09 AM
In '67, the Mustang was redesigned to accept the 390, so the 351C fits easily. It's tight, but possible to drop a 351C in an earlier Mustang, but I'd go with the 351W if I had a choice. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 Please remember our sponsors,
Mustangs Plus, NPD, Osborn Reproductions, MyFordPerformance.com, and FordRamAir.com
IP: Logged |
67coupe
Gearhead Posts: 418
From: dallas NC usa
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 01-13-2003 08:53 PM
simple unbolt 289 bolt up 351 and get approtite headers and enjoy . oh but dont expect to change the plugs as easily  ------------------
Josh
67 coupe with 351c
8.41 in the 1/8
1.90 60'
at 82.03 mph
94 Explorer
30 model A currently rustbucket
in process 67 convt with efi 5.0 and t5
IP: Logged |
tininjun68
Journeyman Posts: 14
From: Middlesex, NJ
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 01-16-2003 10:42 AM
For a 351W into a '68 Mustang swap, what headers can you use? Or will the stock manifolds fit? Also are there any clearance problems up top with the intake/carb/hood? Any particular combo work well and fit under a stock hood? ------------------
My interests? Finishing first w/o breaking out
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
