Brought to you in part by:

.


  Mustangsandmore Forums
  Ford Racing
  302 vrs. 351

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   302 vrs. 351
SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-09-2003 03:59 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It has always seemed to me that if you take a stock stroke 302 and a 351 and install the exact same parts ie. same cam, same intake type, same carb, same headers, same heads. The 302 makes the same or more power?

I don't mean to bag on 351's, but out of the several hundred examples of the two motors I've seen in person race, this always seems to be true with a few exceptions.

So opinions/discusion on 302 vrs. 351.

And forget the big blocks rule crap, cuz we already know that!

IP: Logged

Mpcoluv
Gearhead

Posts: 1333
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-09-2003 09:43 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mpcoluv   Click Here to Email Mpcoluv     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Maybe all the examples you see are using stock heads.
A 351 should ALWAYS run better than a 302 given the same level of modification simply because it is 49 inches larger.

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-09-2003 09:55 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Mpcoluv:
Maybe all the examples you see are using stock heads.
A 351 should ALWAYS run better than a 302 given the same level of modification simply because it is 49 inches larger.

Exactly.

A 351 is a stronger block also.

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-09-2003 10:33 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Compare 302, 351, and 392 FRPP engines all with the same head. They produce 345hp, 385hp, and 430hp respectivly.

At the track you will not find 2 identical cars or 2 identical drivers.

IP: Logged

indyphil
Gearhead

Posts: 2690
From: Senoia, G.A. USA
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 10-09-2003 10:46 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for indyphil   Click Here to Email indyphil     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would go with the 351 for ease of power production (as the above posts mention), but if you consider stroke/bore ratio and weight, the 302 does have some things going for it. Potentially you can make a 302 rev higher becuase of the shorter stroke. See Alexs' 289. That way you can go some way to making up for its lack of displacement.

Anyway I still think displacement rules.

------------------
'68 coupe 289 C code
66 heads, edel 600cfm carb, performer intake, dual exhaust

IP: Logged

steve'66
Gearhead

Posts: 9489
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 10-09-2003 12:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for steve'66   Click Here to Email steve'66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
At my track I always noticed that a comprably built 351w is equal to the 347 strokers. All things being equal a 302 won't run with a 351w.

SteveW

IP: Logged

Fastymz
Moderator

Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-09-2003 12:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fastymz   Click Here to Email Fastymz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Would the same hold true for a 351w VS a 392 stroker. If both motor were set up the same heads, cam, compression ect.Would the 392 out do it just because of size.
The way I understand it and correct me if I'm wrong. A motor is a just a pump, pumping in fuel and air and out exhaust. The larger the size motor the more it can pump through it for each cycle. So it would make sense that a larger motor would also make more power at a give RPM.

------------------
SCOOP

2.26 60'S
14.9 @ 90.86MPH

65 coupe,351w,C4,Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc.

My Pics

IP: Logged

Mpcoluv
Gearhead

Posts: 1333
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-09-2003 01:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mpcoluv   Click Here to Email Mpcoluv     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Fastymz:
Would the same hold true for a 351w VS a 392 stroker. If both motor were set up the same heads, cam, compression ect.Would the 392 out do it just because of size.
The way I understand it and correct me if I'm wrong. A motor is a just a pump, pumping in fuel and air and out exhaust. The larger the size motor the more it can pump through it for each cycle. So it would make sense that a larger motor would also make more power at a give RPM.


Yep, bigger is generally better.

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-09-2003 03:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Mpcoluv:
Yep, bigger is generally better.



as long as the heads/intake/exhaust used are not restricting the largest engine. Otherwise the big cube will be starved for flow where the smaller will be quite happy still

almost guaranteed that the 351 will make a decent amount more of torque at every rpm

[This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 10-09-2003).]

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-09-2003 05:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm saying exact same combos every part the same. The head flow would definately be a factor in the power production of the 351 though. I also belive that the flater intakes of the 351 hurt flow potential too.

See in Chevy land they have the same strange deal. A 302 makes squirt for power 327 is better a 350 better still but a 383 stroker and a 400 small block generaly get beat by the smaller 350's. Again same parts for all the engines.

Just curious if it's because of the over square bore and stroke? Or is it that more people run 302 Fords and 350 Chevy's?

I always considered a Chevy 350 to run better (more horse) then a Ford 351. But the 351 from a design stand point should be superior?

I've seen what I've seen. I wanted to debate the fact because I am contemplating building one or the other.

IP: Logged

Fastymz
Moderator

Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-09-2003 05:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fastymz   Click Here to Email Fastymz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The 350 with the exact same run of the mill stock parts.May have alittle more power because they have a better flowing head.But the 351w is still a better motor.
I think it's because you see more 302's and 350's.
I still think ever thing the same which is hard to do.The bigger motor will make more power.But will run out of RPM quicker.
My pops has a mostly stock 88 GT 5.0 with a cold air system a 2.5 complete exhaust system with hi flow cats.5spd and 3.08 gears good wires ect he keeps it tuned. My car has a high milage 351w, C4 2000 rpm stall, 3.40 rear gears.Motor has a rpm intake 600 holley and headers and mild rv cam and a 2.25 exhaust system. I think that pretty close.I beat him in any type of race,rolling,1/4 mile, up hill, he does getting better milage then me.

------------------
SCOOP

2.26 60'S
14.9 @ 90.86MPH

65 coupe,351w,C4,Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc.

My Pics

IP: Logged

kid vishus
Gearhead

Posts: 6405
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 10-09-2003 06:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for kid vishus   Click Here to Email kid vishus     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
All things being equal, the only way the smaller motor will make more power is with more rpm. The bigger motor will make more torque down low in almost all cases.
If both motors have heads that will support the hp goal, the bigger motor is better.

Trying to compare sbc motors is hard to do. A properly built 400 will run away from a similarly built 350. A properly 327 will also run with a 350, but it will require at least a thousand more rpm than the 350 to make the same power.

The one problem with your comparison is, the bigger motor will need a bigger cam than the small motor. So if the cam is optimum for the small motor, it will be too small for the bigger motor hurting power production. Heads that work best on the bigger motor will be too large for the small motor. Basically, if you build each motor with parts specific to each motor, the big motor will win.

The cases you see at the track are more than likely guys who throw random parts at motors and then wonder why they dont run as well as smaller, but better thought out combos do.

IP: Logged

steve'66
Gearhead

Posts: 9489
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 10-09-2003 06:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for steve'66   Click Here to Email steve'66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:

I always considered a Chevy 350 to run better (more horse) then a Ford 351. But the 351 from a design stand point should be superior?

The short block of a 350 chevy and a 351w Ford are similar in bore and stroke. The Windsor is a stronger block, and the W has a larger crank too. Some 350 chevy engines were available with better heads and didn't have the narrow engine compartment that the Fords did (due to Fords shock towers) so the headers don't have to make a serious 90* turn at the exhaust ports.

The aftermarket has always supported the 350 Chevy better than the 351w Ford, until recently. We're catching up thanks to the popularity of the 5.0's.

As far as a 350 making more power than a 383, that would only happen if all the guy did was put a 400 crank in his 350 with no other changes. More cubes need more cam and better heads. And to spin the longer stroke the same rpms as the short stroke engine you'll need a better reciprocating assly if you want it to last.

Also, a 351w is a stroked 289/302! It's just packaged in a taller stronger block.

SteveW

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-09-2003 07:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
some of the 350's came with 4 bolt mains tho correct?? that should make them able to handle more power

(although i've never heard of ANY motor blowing off the crank)

IP: Logged

jsracingbbf
Gearhead

Posts: 2904
From: Batesville,MS. , U.S.A.
Registered: Mar 2002

posted 10-09-2003 08:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jsracingbbf   Click Here to Email jsracingbbf     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
this is a VERY entertaining thread!

I only can add one thing to this wonderful thread, a small piece of advice for sundanace. Try to look at a few more examples before you make a final decision. I think you have had some bad examples swaying your opinions somewhere down the line.
Check out a few more race cars then the answer to the bigger cubes question will become clearer.
Take Care and good luck!

------------------
JS
69 Mustang Pro ET Drag

IP: Logged

steve'66
Gearhead

Posts: 9489
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 10-10-2003 01:12 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for steve'66   Click Here to Email steve'66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by jsracingbbf:
this is a VERY entertaining thread!
Check out a few more race cars then the answer to the bigger cubes question will become clearer.
Take Care and good luck!


Yep,

Come to SearsPoint/Infenion raceway and check out the field. Melissa's stang with a 408w is whooping a bunch of BBC's and there isn't a 302 in sight. And this motor is layed back and looking for consistancy, not best et. Some of the competition run stroked chevys, 406s etc. and they are usually in the 11's. 347 strokers are usually 12.0 runners. (unless they are in lightened race cars) And 350 chevys are anywhere from 18 seconds to 11 seconds depending on what they weigh. The 408 is a square motor, 4" bore 4" stroke. They can push a light race car into the low 9's. Not bad, huh?

SteveW

IP: Logged

Fastymz
Moderator

Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-10-2003 01:34 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fastymz   Click Here to Email Fastymz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Steve if I get my motor done.And we race you better have that thing running as fast as it can.

------------------
SCOOP

2.26 60'S
14.9 @ 90.86MPH

65 coupe,351w,C4,Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc.

My Pics

IP: Logged

Fastymz
Moderator

Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-10-2003 01:39 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fastymz   Click Here to Email Fastymz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I notice that a lot of bigger motors.Have a ton more torque but not always more HP.Is that do to the fact that some small blocks can out rev the larger motor and hit the bigger HP numers.

------------------
SCOOP

2.26 60'S
14.9 @ 90.86MPH

65 coupe,351w,C4,Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc.

My Pics

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-10-2003 03:35 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I totaly agree a larger engine "should" make more power. On paper, physic wise, Mathematicly. The larger should make more power.

Steve, the fact your 408 is whoopin on the big blocks is another strange happenstance I notice regularly.

Now I did not say there was a limit on RPM and that is one of the keys to why a smaller motor can match a larger.
The 327's used to hit 7000-7500 when I was shifting around 6500-6700 with my 350.

I agree the 351 has a stronger block then a 302 but would disagree that a 351 is a stronger block then a four bolt main chevy 350.

Torque production/RPM realy is another arguement all together, I was more refering to HP and et.

Also, why is it all the car mag wizzards can make a 302 with 400+ hp every time, but can't seem to make a 351 best 370ish horsepower? Not that I've ever belived a car mag, but it realy begs to question!!

I'll admit I am biased to smaller engines (less then 400) I used to have a 350 Chevy that strait whooped on everything, the closest competition I had were those damn 5.0's lol this includes a good lot of cars and engines.

My 350 and those 5.0's where faster then:

440 six pack roadrunner
360 Duster
383 Roadrunner
Ferarri Testarosa
502 72 Chevelle
327 67 Camaro
427 67 Chevelle
Blown 383 66 Nova
SB 406 69 Camaro
Dual quad 289 65 Mustang
454 74 Corvette
96 V10 Viper
440 Coronett Super Bee
455 70 Buick GSX

Those are some of the cooler cars of memory

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-10-2003 03:56 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:

Also, why is it all the car mag wizzards can make a 302 with 400+ hp every time, but can't seem to make a 351 best 370ish horsepower? Not that I've ever belived a car mag, but it realy begs to question!!

I'll admit I am biased to smaller engines (less then 400) I used to have a 350 Chevy that strait whooped on everything, the closest competition I had were those damn 5.0's lol this includes a good lot of cars and engines.


Mags can't do it because most of the sbf heads are made for the 5.0 not the 5.8. also the 5.0 is a roller cammed engine, where the 5.8 is not, so unless you do a retrofit, which little to none of the mags do, you don't get that power benifit

and your list has nothing to do with equality of engines. They are not all running the same comp, running with the same technology, using heads that work best for their application, same design of intake, cams that are suited to thier application, ect. And were you racing these people on the track, i doubt a 450+hp 500ft-lb viper lost to a NA 350 in a car of equal weights

so much more than the engine size deals with how fast the cars are. Not all cars are set up for 1/4 and not all people know how to drive. If you raced the ferrari to top speed you would have lost horribly

and you beat a Blown 383 66 Nova, unless the car was set up horrible, you would have stood no chance at all.

[This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 10-10-2003).]

IP: Logged

Dave Gibson
Moderator

Posts: 9873
From: Norfolk, Virginia, USA M&M#166 MCA#47921
Registered: Aug 99

posted 10-10-2003 04:30 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dave Gibson   Click Here to Email Dave Gibson     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Great thread with many different views. Another point that is missing, is drive train. You can have all the power you want under the hood, but you got to get it to the rear wheels and the pavement. Also factor in what kind of car are you building? Stricktly 1/4 mile car, top end, street/strip. There are numerous combonations you can build.
As mentioned above, there has always been more aftermarket go fast parts built for 350 engines, until recently. Now 5.0 and 351W parts are more common.
Car magazines are always partial to the sponsor of the mag. In other words BIASED.

Dave & Terri

------------------
'65 Mustang Fastback
'02 Explorer XLT
I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it!
We have enough youth, how about a fountain of smart?
Common sense is not so common anymore.

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-10-2003 07:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:
Mags can't do it because most of the sbf heads are made for the 5.0 not the 5.8. also the 5.0 is a roller cammed engine, where the 5.8 is not, so unless you do a retrofit, which little to none of the mags do, you don't get that power benifit)

351's can be had with rollers, even so a roller cam only frees up a little horse power. Last time I checked AFR 185's seem to do ok?

quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:

and your list has nothing to do with equality of engines. They are not all running the same comp, running with the same technology, using heads that work best for their application, same design of intake, cams that are suited to thier application, ect. And were you racing these people on the track, i doubt a 450+hp 500ft-lb viper lost to a NA 350 in a car of equal weights

Your right, it has absolutely nothing to do with the original question or equality. I was mearly stating why I was biased to small engines apposed to large ones as I was asked earlier in a previous post. I did race those cars and won. I never said my car was of equal weight either.

quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:

so much more than the engine size deals with how fast the cars are. Not all cars are set up for 1/4 and not all people know how to drive. If you raced the ferrari to top speed you would have lost horribly

I understand, again I'm talking motors to motors not chassis and motors combined. The Ferrari story (one of my favorites) involves a rich store owner that couldn't drive for sh!t even if he could I would have beat him till 90-100 or so then he would have ate me for lunch. Same would hold true of the viper...which I raced right after he pulled of the lot. (he was very dissapointed!)

quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:

and you beat a Blown 383 66 Nova, unless the car was set up horrible, you would have stood no chance at all.

I raced this guy every weekend for three years. He was close but not close enough. He never did get even a bumper on me.

If you realy want to get down to it all my combination was so dialed in that even with my little 350 that I rebuilt for a wopping 200.00 I was able to desimate some pretty cool machinery.

I started this thread to explore bore to stroke ratios, oversquare engines and how it effects power production, engine weight comparisons, prices, RPM to power comparissons ect. Not to get into a bench racing session. Cuz honestly I hate bench racing, that's why I rarely participate in it.

Thanks for your input

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-10-2003 08:06 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'd also like to know in series where there is no motor size cap. Why do roadrace cars also preffer smaller displacement motors with higher revs and more gears? Seems like a larger displacement engine would have a larger powerband?

IP: Logged

jsracingbbf
Gearhead

Posts: 2904
From: Batesville,MS. , U.S.A.
Registered: Mar 2002

posted 10-10-2003 08:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jsracingbbf   Click Here to Email jsracingbbf     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The longer this thread goes the funnier it gets.

round track cars are a completely different scenerio. BTW NASCAR did run Big blocks until they were limited by rules. You dont seriously think they would leave the cubic inches at 358 if nascar would allow them to run 400 do you? weight isnt an issue if money is no object, ever hear of aluminum? they have been making aluminum big blocks for years.
I love the list of cars
some expensive iron in that list. a viper huh? impressive 350 you had there for 2 bills.


HEY I just remembered! I whooped John Force last week too! with a $150.00 dollar rebuilt old 390 Fe motor in a 65 LTD LOL( I had him by a car length because of the 3 deuce set up on the LTD

man that was easy to type!

I hope some of you dont seriously believe a smaller motor set up the same as a bigger motor would win? No really? LOL this thread should be on Jay Leno, or DRR forum.

Some body better call Warren Johnson and tell him to stick a 350 SBC in that Hass body cuz it'll whoop the pants off the twin dominator 500 cid BBC motor

I guess if you tell yourself something enough it starts to sound true? (shrugs)

Yanno there is a simple way to solve this
---- anyone who wants can go to the track and try to back it up with REAL timeslips. Just make sure there is a good representative of a big block there and not some broke down old car with a worn out motor.

PS. if you cant find one I can round up a volunteer or two.



JS--- tellin it like it is ----
layin the smack down.

Hey T-Bird are you reading this thread!!!! LOL

HINT #1 typing is easy, timeslips & win lights are a little harder.
HINT #2 quit tryin to re- invent the wheel, there are some things where SIZE really does matter.

------------------
JS
69 Mustang Pro ET Drag

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-10-2003 08:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
......Thanks for your input

edited : too nasty

[This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 10-10-2003).]

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-10-2003 09:06 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I give up.... *pissed off*

I hate people that tell stories to make them sound better, when there is alot more to the story than they tell

The only think i hate more is people who argue irrelevant points, when thier statements have nothing to do with the real comparison

[This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 10-10-2003).]

IP: Logged

BLstangin
Gearhead

Posts: 817
From: St. James, MN
Registered: Apr 2002

posted 10-10-2003 09:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for BLstangin   Click Here to Email BLstangin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My opinion. I built a 306. I know, I could have had more power out of a 351w, but a 306 is small, light, and gets better gas mileage than a 351w. I built my car for the street/strip purpose. I have fun with it, and everyone tells me how fast it is, and to tell you the truth, I don't think it is that fast. I haven't even raced anyone yet, but when I do, it will be just for fun. I may loose, but I want to be able to say, look how close I came with "only" a little 306. I want to be able to say, ya you bet me, but I just about got you with a smaller motor. I wanted to challenge myself to build a fast street car. One that I could drive on the street, but when I wanted to, I could run with the 351w 351c, and the smaller big blocks, and most importantly beat the 350 sbc! I also wanted to say I'm only 18 and I built one of the faster small blocks around, and it is the smaller of the small blocks. Just my 2 cents. And also, I hate bench racing, my friends talk trash to people all the time, but puss out when it is time to race, shut up or race!

------------------
1970 coupe restored with the help of my dad. 306 with 600 holley, Weiand Stealth intake, headers, Comp cam, harland sharp roller rockers, kb pistons, 11:1 compression ratio, pertonix ignitor 2 with matched coil, lakewood bellhousing, 4-speed toploader, and 2.79 open 8" rear. Soon to be 9" 3.50 trac-lok
1986 f-150, 5.0, factory towing package with original c-6 trans

IP: Logged

n2oMike
Gearhead

Posts: 2694
From: Spencer, WV
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 10-10-2003 11:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for n2oMike   Click Here to Email n2oMike     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The only time a smaller engine will make as much power as a larger one, is when the cylinder heads are WAY undersized.

If a stock set of heads are used on a 351W, the engine will be wheezing anywhere above 4k rpm... where a 302 will turn around 5k rpm before it is completely out of breath. When racing, (especially traction limited street racing) the lower torque of the smaller engine can help it launch without blowing the tires off... and the extra rpm range will allow it to pull better down track. This is how I won so many street races back in the day. Those stock headed 400's would blow the tires off on the line with all their torque, then wheeze out once they started to rev through the gears.

Nowadays with all the aftermarket heads out to support those extra cubes, all bets are off! There are heads and intakes out there that will allow these big engines to spin high enough to fling parts into the next state! The 351W was a DOG until aftermarket became available. If you wanted to go fast with a 351 ford... it was the 351C! Either that, or a 351W with 351C heads bolted to it. The aftermarket didn't come to our rescue in a big way until the mid 90's. The Alan Root (later sold by Ford as the J302) head was the first, but sold for around $1600/pr. bare BACK IN THE LATE 80's! They weren't that common. The World Products and TFS Hi-Port heads came next, and were what ignited the performance revolution of Ford small block. By the mid 90's, things had really started to take off. Today there are more cylinder heads out there that you can count! H*ll, it wasn't too long ago, there wasn't even a decent intake out there for the 302. The best availale forever was the Offy Port-O-Sonic. The Victor Jr 302 didn't even come out until around 1991. The 351W unit was quite a bit later.

The heads that came on a 351W were too small for a 302, let alone a 351ci engine. Small block fords were at a MAJOR disadvantage to the chevy and dodge camp before the aftermarket heads became common. If you wanted to go FAST, you did a LOT of studying, and a LOT of porting! Most chevy boys saw fords as 'easy money'. Ones that actually ran GOOD were few and far between. Since mine was a sleeper FORD, I was able to make a lot of money with that 302 powered mustang back then. Racing another ford was a near guaranteed win... as were the vast majority of chevys. One guy with a nitroused big block chevelle SOLD his car a week after losing to a certain 4-speed NON-nitroused (at the time) 302 mustang. If you wanted to go fast back then, you spent MANY hours holding onto a die grinder. You had to EARN it.

But, as an answer to the question.... If you've got the airflow to support those cubes, you WILL make plenty more power. The next engine build for the mustang will most likely be a stroked 351W. They just make too much power!

Good Luck!

------------------
Mike Burch
66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads
10.63 @ 129.3
http://www.geocities.com/carbedstangs/cmml_mburch.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/healey/367
http://www.mustangworks.com/cgi-bin/moi-display.cgi?220

[This message has been edited by n2oMike (edited 10-10-2003).]

[This message has been edited by n2oMike (edited 10-11-2003).]

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-11-2003 01:04 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:
I give up.... *pissed off*

I hate people that tell stories to make them sound better, when there is alot more to the story than they tell

The only think i hate more is people who argue irrelevant points, when thier statements have nothing to do with the real comparison

[This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 10-10-2003).]


Damn dubz, Ya'll need to calm down bud! I do not disagree with you at all, I'm trying, maybe unsucessfully, to see the other side of the arguement. I have absolutely nothing to prove to anyone especialy to a bunch of people I more then likely will never meet!

If I was telling stories to make myself look better I'd probably not be telling the ones I've told here...ever thought of that?? No, I sound like I'm full of sh!t...belive what you will? I care less?

The rebuild was 104.00 from PAW included bearings, rings, oil pump, gaskets and seals. the headers I bought for 20.00 Hooker super comps I found on the floor of my auto shop class. They cleaned up well. The cam, lifters and valve springs I bought for 75.00 from a guy named Chris Nielson that did custom cam grinds out of a little shack about 20 miles from my home at the time. An Edelbrock intake and a rebuilt QuadraJet round out the killer monster I built...lol Oh, and there was some serious head porting I did myself with the help of my shop teacher. 350 Nothin special!
Oh, and when I beat the Viper, I had 3.08 gears to add insult to injury.


Is there anyone willing to debate the other side?

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-11-2003 10:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:

The rebuild was 104.00 from PAW included bearings, rings, oil pump, gaskets and seals. the headers I bought for 20.00 Hooker super comps I found on the floor of my auto shop class. They cleaned up well. The cam, lifters and valve springs I bought for 75.00 from a guy named Chris Nielson that did custom cam grinds out of a little shack about 20 miles from my home at the time. An Edelbrock intake and a rebuilt QuadraJet
Oh, and there was some serious head porting I did myself

Oh, and when I beat the Viper, I had 3.08 gears to add insult to injury.


There is NFW you beat a Viper (that was actually racing you) with stock pistons, ported stock heads and 3.08 dog cogs.


The fact that you have 3.08s tells me you have an open dif. A Viper has an LS dif and tires as wide as my ass. For reference, I'm 6'1", 210lb.


[This message has been edited by 68DARKHORSE (edited 10-11-2003).]

IP: Logged

69_sportsroof
Gearhead

Posts: 223
From: Camino Calif (yeah, it does snow here)
Registered: Aug 2000

posted 10-11-2003 12:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 69_sportsroof   Click Here to Email 69_sportsroof     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hey guys quit wastin your time the young-un has already made up his mind and is not about to LISTEN to the voice of experience> To each his own...Jay

------------------
ALL THROTTLE NO BOTTLE !
.....proudly keeping the neighbors mad for over 30 years
Run what ya brung, and hope like hell ya brung enough
69 sportsroof(351 C)
65 Ranchero(200)now 351W
72 Ln 700 (361)

IP: Logged

69_sportsroof
Gearhead

Posts: 223
From: Camino Calif (yeah, it does snow here)
Registered: Aug 2000

posted 10-11-2003 01:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 69_sportsroof   Click Here to Email 69_sportsroof     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hey Jerry why not send him over to DRR...love to see what shooter , Goob Beau$ & company have to say...........Jay

------------------
ALL THROTTLE NO BOTTLE !
.....proudly keeping the neighbors mad for over 30 years
Run what ya brung, and hope like hell ya brung enough
69 sportsroof(351 C)
65 Ranchero(200)now 351W
72 Ln 700 (361)

IP: Logged

N266fords
Gearhead

Posts: 1652
From: Sierra Vista ,Az USA
Registered: Apr 2003

posted 10-11-2003 03:14 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for N266fords   Click Here to Email N266fords     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am not siding with anyone one, but I can tell you this, a drive is more apt to win a race with experience, then one with horsepower and no experience..bruce

IP: Logged

JCQuinn@work
Gearhead

Posts: 899
From: Lakewood, CO, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 10-11-2003 03:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for JCQuinn@work   Click Here to Email JCQuinn@work     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
First- N20Mike has written some very good advice regarding heads and power results. Always remember the manifold is a very important part of the airflow package. 60's technology won't work as well as the more modern designs. Performance engines are packages of components selected to complement each other. If you just buy the parts without a good master plan you will be one of the guys wondering why your car isn't as fast as you want.

Second, why do you guys care if someone claims to beat a viper and you don't believe it? There are llots of race stories that may be hard to believe. So what. I'll tell you one of mine so you can call me a liar too. At a test and tune night in the early seventies I beat a big block Corvette two out of three runs with a 2.0 liter Pinto. Of course my car was the national record holding stock eliminator car in its class and the Corvette was straight from the dealer. If you don't believe me don't feel alone, the Corvette driver didn't believe it either and he was there.

John

IP: Logged

CHIPSBAD67
Gearhead

Posts: 396
From: LOU,KY;USA
Registered: Sep 2003

posted 10-11-2003 10:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for CHIPSBAD67   Click Here to Email CHIPSBAD67     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
without the 5.0 there wouldnt be near the market there is now for ford high perf. parts. the 408 is about the baddest total package ive seen/read about thus far.

------------------
306, 4speed, 4.11's....best 1/8 mile 7.58 at 92mph with 1.72 60ft. PUMP GAS/NO ADDERS/STREET TIRES

IP: Logged

steve'66
Gearhead

Posts: 9489
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 10-11-2003 10:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for steve'66   Click Here to Email steve'66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CHIPSBAD67:
without the 5.0 there wouldnt be near the market there is now for ford high perf. parts. the 408 is about the baddest total package ive seen/read about thus far.


Yep,

That's the truth.

SteveW

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-12-2003 02:06 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thank you for those trying to help me out instead of focusing on my "BS"

I guess there realy isn't much to discus or debate then?

I started this thread to see other peoples opinions and thoughts. All I ended up doing is discrediting myself and getting flammed by others...hmmm Nice.

Hey Steve, I still have some questions to bounce off of you would you mind if I e-mailed you?

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-12-2003 02:56 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 68DARKHORSE:

There is NFW you beat a Viper (that was actually racing you) with stock pistons, ported stock heads and 3.08 dog cogs.


The fact that you have 3.08s tells me you have an open dif. A Viper has an LS dif and tires as wide as my ass. For reference, I'm 6'1", 210lb.


[This message has been edited by 68DARKHORSE (edited 10-11-2003).]


K, sorry I had to reply to this one.

Stock pistons? No flat top pistons that netted 9.5:1 compression. with a .030 over bore. It was a freshening up after I purchased the car.
If you look at the package you will notice that the car was not built with high RPM peak power, but with a larger torque band within the middle of the RPM range.

What does this tell you? It tells you when I switched to 4.11:1 gears on my Auburn LSD I lost a few tenths.

Can you guess why?

Can you understand the use of higher gears in the first place?

If you can't understand either of those questions you are unqualified to have a qualified opinion.

Also lets understand in full what your tire comment means.

At the time if memory serves your ass is 315mm wide with a side wall of 35% it's width....what does that mean your ass is gonna do when a shock load from an estemated 5000-6000 RPM drop is gonna do to said wide ass?? Spin and spin alot! Also at the time (1996) Vipers were rated at 450 hp. (while impressive not that big a deal)

My adjusted track times indicated that I had somwhere inbetween 400-425 at sea level. A Viper of that vintage also weighs an awefull lot more then my 2600 lb. with me in it car...are things starting to add up??

We haven't even mentioned how wide my tires were (how much narrower then your ass that is.)
They were 265's made by BFG, they were brand new on the market at the time, they were called "drag radials" They were one of the first of their kind.

I remember at that time M/T's street tires were your only other choice...and they sucked.

Nice and sticky BFG's with lots of soft side wall to flex worked well when combined with said BS engine makeing BS power and hooked to a BS manualy shifted TH350...

Personaly the only thing around here full of sh!t is your aforementioned wide ass.

LOL, I swear you mention a car like a Viper or Ferrari...and people seem to have some mystic about the car. That 1. Instantly makes my story unbeliveable. 2. Makes that story one of the funner stories to tell to people who havn't the faintest clue what an actual fast car is.

Also, to all those that doubt my stories...you would have to know me, to know that I do not Bull Sh!t!
Also you assume alot and we all know what that does.

I asked an honest question looking for an honest answer. Instead I recieved the same sort of crap that goes on at any given honda site...tsk tsk..

Sorry for the waste of bandwidth.

[This message has been edited by SundanceKid (edited 10-12-2003).]

IP: Logged

69redmach1
Journeyman

Posts: 11
From: Central NH
Registered: May 2002

posted 10-12-2003 09:51 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 69redmach1   Click Here to Email 69redmach1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm running a 393W stroker in my '69 Mach 1. The car looks all orginal and weighs 3520 lbs with me in it. At the track yesterday I pulled [email protected] driving it to the track with Hoosier DOT slicks and uncapping my cutouts. I raced a '66 Mustang coupe w/ a 347 stroker and he pulled 11.5 but weighed in at 3000 lbs with him in the car, it was stripped with a tubular front frame. I'm amazed at how few guys run 351W based strokers, It didn't cost me anymore to build than the 302 based strokers.

IP: Logged

Buster
Gearhead

Posts: 1553
From: Hurricane alley
Registered: May 2002

posted 10-12-2003 12:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Buster   Click Here to Email Buster     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
It has always seemed to me that if you take a stock stroke 302 and a 351 and install the exact same parts ie. same cam, same intake type, same carb, same headers, same heads. The 302 makes the same or more power?

First off if you?re comparing the two engines you can?t make an accurate comparison if you?re using the same head and same headers. If you going to make a true comparison you?ll need to build two engines that will turn the same RPM. Therefore, the heads will need to flow more on the 351W and the headers will need to be larger as well.

Then if you end up making the same horsepower per cubic inch, say one horsepower per CID, your 302 would end up producing 302 HP and the 351W would make 351 HP. Simple math.

Even if you used the 302 heads and headers on the 351W and it made less horsepower per cubic inch, for the sake of argument lets say .9 hp per cubic inch, it would still make more horsepower then the 302.

Now the 351W is a little heaver then the 302, somewhere around 50 pounds I think is the difference, not that big a deal.

However, when you go to a 358 series engine the weight difference is much greater. Although if your making 1 horsepower per cubic inch, 460 hp, the added weight is overcome buy the added horsepower.

An engine is nothing more then a pump and if you restricted the larger pump using less flowing heads it will hurt its power output. Doesn?t matter if it?s a Ford or something else.

When you make a comparison you need to compare apples with apples and not apples and dump trucks.

IP: Logged

jsracingbbf
Gearhead

Posts: 2904
From: Batesville,MS. , U.S.A.
Registered: Mar 2002

posted 10-12-2003 12:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jsracingbbf   Click Here to Email jsracingbbf     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
[B] K, sorry I had to reply to this one.

What does this tell you? It tells you when I switched to 4.11:1 gears on my Auburn LSD I lost a few tenths.

Can you guess why?

Can you understand the use of higher gears in the first place?

If you can't understand either of those questions you are unqualified to have a qualified opinion.

Also lets understand in full what your tire comment means.

At the time if memory serves your ass is 315mm wide with a side wall of 35% it's width..

My adjusted track times indicated that I had somwhere inbetween 400-425 at sea level. A Viper of that vintage also weighs an awefull lot more then my 2600 lb. with me in it car...are things starting to add up??

Personaly the only thing around here full of sh!t is your aforementioned wide ass.

Also, to all those that doubt my stories...you would have to know me, to know that I do not Bull Sh!t!
Also you assume alot and we all know what that does.

I asked an honest question looking for an honest answer. Instead I recieved the same sort of crap that goes on at any given honda site...tsk tsk..

Sorry for the waste of bandwidth.

[B]



I am sorry you wasted bandwidth also, that was just plain rude. He has a right to not believe you. I don't think he made any rude comments. I think you went a little beyond rude. Sarcastic is one thing, I posted sarcastic remarks but you were just plain rude to Darkhorse.

I posted that I beat John Force to prove a point, I didn't say I doubted what you said, but it does seem a bit farfetched. Without proof you must admit it would be hard to belive I beat John Force. Same thing applies to your post. If you want folks to belive an outrageous claim back it up with some proof.

I would like to remind you that their are REAL people behind these screens with REAL feelings and just because your typing stuff doesn't make you superman or credible.

If you really want to prove everything you say, do what I suggested, build you a 350 and a 351W or a 302 or race a viper, whatever makes your crank turn, and then post some time slips. Take some pics, hell make a movie, that way no one can cast doubt on your story. You might want to consider that the more outlandish the tale the less likely folks will believe it in print. And do us all a favor and apologize to darkhorse, man that was uncalled for. I thought folks here were better than that. I guess not.
Have a nice day!

------------------
JS
69 Mustang Pro ET Drag

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-12-2003 12:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I do appologize, I am sorry.

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-12-2003 01:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
I do appologize, I am sorry.

I recall somewhere you asked which would make more power with "stock-stroke" with the same performance parts (see first post)

However, in your lengthy amount of arguing that the smaller displacement engine is better because in a lighter/better set up car it beat cars with "MORE POWER", do you ever actually make a valid point about smaller displacement engines making "more power"

Now, if you want to compare engines, you would need someone with the same mods done to your 302 on his/her 351. The engine would need to be fitted in YOUR car, because only it is exactly setup the same as itself, and then find which makes better times. Since as you allready stated cars with more power arn't allways setup to get down the 1/4 fast, and car weight (including driver weight) plays a large role.

You have in no way argued that the smaller displacement engine would provide more power. You have argued that we are being ignorant because we belive that cars of more power (ie the viper) were beat by your car(which you never listed mods for), while ignoring the fact yourself that this defeats your whole standpoint in your argument. That your engine makes more power because it beat said cars that have larger displacement.

[This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 10-12-2003).]

IP: Logged

JCQuinn@work
Gearhead

Posts: 899
From: Lakewood, CO, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 10-12-2003 05:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for JCQuinn@work   Click Here to Email JCQuinn@work     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Sundance, keep heart some of us believe you. Your detractors don't seem to understand that what matters is the power to weight ratio and hosepower applied to the ground via traction.

In my Pinto story above (yes it's true) I would be foolish to believe that my pinto made more horsepower than the Corvette. My Pinto made 106 HP at the rear wheels and weighed about 2100 lbs. That would be a power to weight ratio of about 19 lbs/hp. Just guessing on the Corvette He might be around 3700 lbs and would be making about 195 hp to have an equal lbs/hp. I would guess that he was a little higher than that and should still have beaten me three out of three. But (and this is a big one) my car was set up for competitive drag racing and launched very well. No 60 foot clocks then so I have no numbers. His car was street driven so I had a huge traction advantage and was able to turn on the win light two out of three times.

The point of all this is that the individual car set up is a whole lot more important than advertised horsepower.

John

IP: Logged

Buster
Gearhead

Posts: 1553
From: Hurricane alley
Registered: May 2002

posted 10-12-2003 08:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Buster   Click Here to Email Buster     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You got it Steve...

*Edit* [/flames]

[This message has been edited by Buster (edited 10-13-2003).]

IP: Logged

CHIPSBAD67
Gearhead

Posts: 396
From: LOU,KY;USA
Registered: Sep 2003

posted 10-12-2003 11:17 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for CHIPSBAD67   Click Here to Email CHIPSBAD67     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
its getting to the point that i prefer beating myself. its doesnt matter who's in that other lane or what he's got, dont even think about it. dont care if its 500 cubes, or its stroked, blown, sprayed, or dried. drive against the clock and give it your A game. we are brothers seeking the same rush. just because mike has a bottle or alex runs a destroked 302 doesnt mean we cant get along. we might disagree on something but thats as far as it goes. these guys in here are my friends and would help me out and i would help them if i could. this is a great site, and the one guy you turn against you might be able to help you with some info someday so even if you hate his guts be nice and kiss his butt. they say you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, that may be true. but you catch even more flies with b.s. my point is theres nothing to see here. please people, go about your buisness, nothing to see here.

------------------
306, 4speed, 4.11's....best 1/8 mile 7.58 at 92mph with 1.72 60ft. PUMP GAS/NO ADDERS/STREET TIRES

IP: Logged

steve'66
Gearhead

Posts: 9489
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 10-13-2003 12:16 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for steve'66   Click Here to Email steve'66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Buster, Dubs and others,

Sundance has been around a while. He was a chebbie guy, but now he's building a Mustang for road racing. He's not trying to stir the crap, just offering a question to have us clear up in his mind. I do not think it warrants any flames! His past experiences were at hi altitude and probably on the street. So, take it for what it's worth and don't let it ruin the thread. The thread is a good one, debating cubes vs. rpm.

SteveW

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-13-2003 12:17 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Steve you must have posted just before I did...thanks.

LOL, bag on Sundance...WTF..? LOL First off if I was a Chevy guy trolling for giggles...I would have done it sooner then three years and 1,000 post later?? LOL

These are observations I've made over 20+ years I've been into the car hobby. I "was" a Chevy guy. Now I have a 65 Mustang that I love and spend time on. Even when I was a "Chevy guy" I was probably the most un-biased Chevy guy there was. I was very impressed by what a "little" 5.0 could do which may have perpetuated my liking for small displacement engines.

What on earth made you think that I was agueing any one side? I was mearly pointing out the other side of the debate because no one else was..not much to a debate if it is only one sided? Hell, I might just build a 302 up so I don't get all touchy when anyone might not like my 351 based motor...sheeez?

Dubz, I fully understand that a properly prepaired chassis makes a big differance on how a car launches the driver makes even more of a differance. It's the part in the middle of the race that tells you what car is making more power. The 502 powered Chevelle I mentioned earlier would be "pulled" by my 350 and the 5.0 crowd especialy strong after 2nd gear for me and third for the 5.0 manual guys.

BTW I've been a member of this forum community longer then most of you all?

I usualy stay srtictly to technicle posts and very rarely post on the chat style forums like Sams place...I've never even asked for a password to the bodyshop. I avoid bench racing like the plege! Bench racing is like argueing about religion.

When my integrety is questioned I did get a little irked. When the focus of the tread went to crap and was highjacked by flammes I strait got pissed, unfortunatly I replied in a negative manner.

I appologized and now I still have questions.

I have a 351 standard bore block and a set of Speed Pro flat top pistons P/N H273CP .040 bore. Can I use those pistons to build a 393? Will these pistons deck to high? What is the rod length I need and what is the concensus on cranks? Who makes the best one? I'm not planning on anything more then what a cast crank can handle. I was looking at AFR 165's if I went with a 302, and AFR 185's If I built a 351? That all sound about right? What are your thoughts on Canfield heads? Will a 351W have too much torque for the Tremec TKO I already have?

Now my intended purpose for my Mustang will not be for drag racing, As Steve stated above I am a road racer that primarly races at high altitude. Weight is a super big deal when you road race. 50 more lb's in the front of a drag car might not be much but 50 lbs. of weight in a track car can make a huge differance. I've spent so much time on my Mustang (short of a tube frame) to make it as light a possible. Once finished I should be several hundred pounds lighter then a factory car.


Can we keep the reply flames down to a minimum on this post? I'd hate to have you pick these paragraphs apart...LOL

Also, 69redmach I'd like to hear more about your setup, where you purchased parts ect.

[This message has been edited by SundanceKid (edited 10-13-2003).]

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-13-2003 02:55 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
We all have days where we get defensive about stuff and go overboard with our responses. No harm done, we realize that you are not as ignorant as we took you to be, and from your last post you realized that we are not ignorant in this buisness either. Now that we have the bickering out of the way, let's get down to buisness.


Where do you road race primarily?? is it long straights, or all in the twisties? What's the cars current weight distribution (guesses are allright too)

What kind of rpm range are you wanting? are you wanting more top end power, or more torque for coming out of the corners stronger?

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-13-2003 04:14 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I race two series (IVR and SCCA) and may race the Silverstate classic once I get the car sorted.
The IVR events are long roadraces that top over 120-130 mph and have corners that stop you to 15-20 mph basicly drag racing with turns.
The SCCA events are auto cross events and rarely top 50-60 mph lot's of skill testing corners.
And of course the Silver State classic is all out top speed event with long sweeping turns.
The weight distribution I am aiming for is a nominal 55/45. But we will see. I am contemplating lightening the rear even more. Which may cause a balance closer to 60/40.
So far I have gone to a MII tubular front suspension, moved the engine back and plan to use aluminum and fiberglass through out.

I also have a question for anyone willing to answer; Does flexiform make springs for a track car with a slightly higher rate then the usual drag Mustang? I'm thinking the fiberglass equivlent to a 5 leaf spring.

IP: Logged

CometGT1974
Gearhead

Posts: 413
From: Asheville, NC USA
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 10-13-2003 09:00 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for CometGT1974   Click Here to Email CometGT1974     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Why not lose the weight and gain some power with a nice 302 stroker, maybe a 331.(I would go with a cast steel crank and a good internal balance) Good torque with no need to spin the crap out of it. Flex-a-Form springs would probably be a good choice for what you are doing but it may require a custom set.....I would also look at some of TCP's stuff to get the weight out of the front end and suspension components. OH, I see you've already got the MII front suspension so you just need to make sure it's all nice and stiff up front.....Depending on how deep your pockets are TCP does offer a coil over rear suspension for road racing......

[This message has been edited by CometGT1974 (edited 10-13-2003).]

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-13-2003 10:22 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
Stock pistons? No flat top pistons that netted 9.5:1 compression. with a .030 over bore.

If you look at the package you will notice that the car was not built with high RPM peak power, but with a larger torque band within the middle of the RPM range.

What does this tell you? It tells you when I switched to 4.11:1 gears on my Auburn LSD I lost a few tenths.

My adjusted track times indicated that I had somwhere inbetween 400-425 at sea level. A Viper of that vintage also weighs an awefull lot more then my 2600 lb. with me in it car...are things starting to add up??


In the post I responded to, you made it sound like you beat a Viper with a buget rebuild and 3.08 gears.

I couldn't look at the package or the track times as they were not posted.

Sorry, I did not intend to flame you personally(I'm not a flamer). I was being emphatic, but could have phrased it better.

I have no problem believing that a 2600lb Mustang putting out 400hp with 4.10s can beat a Viper.

The 331 mentioned above will sounds fun.
Use SIR rods with a cast crank. SIR rods are plenty strong for an NA motor. Because they weigh less than H-beams, they will rev quicker, and put lees stress on the crank.

[This message has been edited by 68DARKHORSE (edited 10-13-2003).]

IP: Logged

kid vishus
Gearhead

Posts: 6405
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 10-13-2003 10:39 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for kid vishus   Click Here to Email kid vishus     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
BTW I've been a member of this forum community longer then most of you all?


That proves nothing other than you found the site earlier than other members. It does not add to the quality or credibility of your posts, or anyone elses for that matter, including mine (I've been here longer than you.)

quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
I have a 351 standard bore block and a set of Speed Pro flat top pistons P/N H273CP .040 bore. Can I use those pistons to build a 393? Will these pistons deck to high? What is the rod length I need and what is the concensus on cranks? Who makes the best one?

I do not beleive those pistons will work. Most of the 393's I have heard about, or seen built use a 3.85 stroke crank, stock length windsor rods, and stock pin height 302 .030 over pistons. To make the pistons you have work (if it could be done at all) would require an extremely short rod.

A lot of them use Scat cranks. Scat offers several different levels of crankshafts. If I were to build a 393 (and I might in the near future), that's what I would use.

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-13-2003 11:04 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
I am contemplating lightening the rear even more. Which may cause a balance closer to 60/40.
So far I have gone to a MII tubular front suspension, moved the engine back and plan to use aluminum and fiberglass through out.



I am removing a bunch of unsprung weight from the rear by replacing the 9" with an 8.8" from a '98 Explorer. This rear come from Ford with 31 spline t-loc, 3.73s, and disc brakes.

Did you make your own motor mounts?

------------------
68 GT FASTBACK

www.imboc.com/phpBB/Uploads/1020432917.jpg

01 GT BULLITT

www.imboc.com/phpBB/Uploads/1020440453.jpg

96 OJ BRONCO

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-13-2003 11:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If your piston will not work for a 393, consider a 408. The 408 has a better rod/stroke ratio and the SIR rods are stronger than stock or sportsman rods. 408s tend to run about $200 more than 393s.

------------------
68 GT FASTBACK

www.imboc.com/phpBB/Uploads/1020432917.jpg

01 GT BULLITT

www.imboc.com/phpBB/Uploads/1020440453.jpg

96 OJ BRONCO

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-13-2003 02:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
I race two series (IVR and SCCA) and may race the Silverstate classic once I get the car sorted.
The IVR events are long roadraces that top over 120-130 mph and have corners that stop you to 15-20 mph basicly drag racing with turns.
The SCCA events are auto cross events and rarely top 50-60 mph lot's of skill testing corners.
And of course the Silver State classic is all out top speed event with long sweeping turns.

Well if you are going to need a top speed that is that high, but still want to be able to rip it out of the corners i would go for the bigger cubed engine, should allow you to run taller gears in the rear without loosing acceleration out of the corners.

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-13-2003 02:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
With a .68 5th he can run 4.10s and never go over 5000rpm.

IP: Logged

68DARKHORSE
Gearhead

Posts: 445
From: Austin, Tx
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-13-2003 03:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68DARKHORSE   Click Here to Email 68DARKHORSE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
With my .59 5th, I can run 76mph @ 2500rpm with 4.30s.

IP: Logged

Dubz
Gearhead

Posts: 1890
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 10-13-2003 03:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dubz   Click Here to Email Dubz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
true

IP: Logged

CHIPSBAD67
Gearhead

Posts: 396
From: LOU,KY;USA
Registered: Sep 2003

posted 10-13-2003 07:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for CHIPSBAD67   Click Here to Email CHIPSBAD67     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
347 with afr185's. i got the 165's on my 306 but the 185's are the same price and would work better with the stroker. ive talked to an outlaw/nmra racer who said the canfields cost him big time when the cheesy freezeout plug in the back of the head popped out between rounds.

IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-14-2003 04:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by kid vishus:
I do not beleive those pistons will work. Most of the 393's I have heard about, or seen built use a 3.85 stroke crank, stock length windsor rods, and stock pin height 302 .030 over pistons. To make the pistons you have work (if it could be done at all) would require an extremely short rod.

A lot of them use Scat cranks. Scat offers several different levels of crankshafts. If I were to build a 393 (and I might in the near future), that's what I would use.


Thanks for the Scat recomendation. I've read and have been told that the Scat cranks require alot of balancing. I've also heard they have lessened the amount of mallory in their latest run of cranks? Any truth to any of that?

I was under the impression that a 393 used 302 pistons. I may have read wrong?

The pistons I stated above are stock height but do not have the inverted dome of a stock piston? They are of the 4 valve relief variety.

I am seriously considering a larger engine for the mild manners and performance ratio.

One of my concerns other then weight is the low RPM torque is will provide. I have thought about muteing the low RPM torque by using a single plane intake, but otherwise build it as a mild engine ie. 270 280 cam ect.
Any thoughts on that?


IP: Logged

SundanceKid
Gearhead

Posts: 1273
From: UT
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-14-2003 04:38 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SundanceKid   Click Here to Email SundanceKid     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 68DARKHORSE:
With a .68 5th he can run 4.10s and never go over 5000rpm.

It's the very low first gear that stops me from going to a lower gear. I have a set of 2.50:1's for the Silverstate. I have a set of 3.50:1 for street and the IVR races.

I may purchase a set of 3.70:1 gears for SCCA, any lower and I wouldn't be able to use 1st on the realy tight dead stop turns.

That is realy the hardest part to making desicions on how to setup my Mustang. If I was drag racing again, I would have an unlimited pool of knowledge to build upon. Here I am making a track car and there's not many people who do it with a 65 Mustang.

[This message has been edited by SundanceKid (edited 10-14-2003).]

IP: Logged

Kellxr7
Gearhead

Posts: 679
From: Canada
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 10-14-2003 06:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Kellxr7   Click Here to Email Kellxr7     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What does it mean when the 408 has better rod/stroke ratio? I have heard this before, but I dont understand it, that is , better than the 392

------------------
http://mustangsandmore.50megs.com/MembersPics/Kellxr7.html

[This message has been edited by Kellxr7 (edited 10-14-2003).]

IP: Logged

kid vishus
Gearhead

Posts: 6405
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 10-14-2003 06:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for kid vishus   Click Here to Email kid vishus     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:
I've read and have been told that the Scat cranks require alot of balancing. I've also heard they have lessened the amount of mallory in their latest run of cranks? Any truth to any of that?


I don't know if they changed them or not. I know the shop I used to use liked to grind the counterweights down to balance them. Saved on the expensive mallory metal, and also cut down on the weight of the crank.

I beleive there are a couple of other companies making that same style crank, but I don't know anything about them.

quote:
Originally posted by SundanceKid:

I was under the impression that a 393 used 302 pistons. I may have read wrong?


You read correctly. If you use a stock length 351W rod, then you can use 302 pistons in it. That's what makes them so affordable to build. The only non-"factory" piece you have to buy is the crank. Everything else is easily available.

Of course, you can put longer rods in it, but then you get into more expensive parts.

IP: Logged

All times are ET (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Mustangsandmore Front Page

Copyright 2005, Steve LaRiviere. All Rights Reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47d

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

[Acronyms][Calendar][Chat][Classifieds] [Members' Pics]

[ Mustangsandmore.com Bookstore] [ Smokin' Fords] [Tech Articles]