Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,501 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Here's an article on how a guy (Dave Williams) was able to balance a 3.6" stroke crank (366ci) for a 289 block, and STILL retain the stock 28oz balance. He said he'll never do it again.


http://www.geocities.com/geo_42_99/sixto/sixto-0.htm

Here's the rest of his site... TONS of informative reading here!

http://www.angelfire.com/ar/dw42/

My $0.02... The 289 and 302 blocks aren't that strong. They have weak main webbing and 10 measly 7/16" head bolts. If I wanted that many cubic inches, it would come from a 351W.

A power adder makes it EASY to overcome the capacity of the stock block using the stock 3.0" stroke. Stroking it out past that only puts more stress on the bottom end, effectively REDUCING the power it will be able to safely handle. If the engine needs to make maximum midrange power, will never see a power adder, and MUST be built with a 302 block, stroke away.

My next engine will be a stroked 351W. Those beefy main webs, 1/2" main bolts, 1/2" head bolts, and 400+ cubic inch capacity make it a natural candidate for plenty of long lasting abuse.


I'm not bashing anyone who builds a 302 stroker... especially if you've already got tons of hotrod parts for a 302, just be aware of their limits.

Here's are a few great articles to check out. They are little old, but have some great info. This place used to specialize in blown 351W Fox body conversions, and still deal with a lot of the hardware.

http://www.alternativeauto.com/waterbox/wb-archives/347_vs_351.html

http://www.alternativeauto.com/waterbox/wb-archives/headgaskets.html

http://www.alternativeauto.com/waterbox/wb-archives/351_nut_bolt.html

Here's the home site...

http://www.alternativeauto.com/

Good Luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
407 Posts
N2o Mike, Thanks for your great input to this Webmag, you always give great advice and are dead on with your comments. Anyone who can should indeed choose the 351 as a base for a stroker combo,where you can. In many states you can't engine swap ,,,but a stroked 5.0 can slip by the smog Nazis. I would not stroke a 302-5.0 beyond a 3.25. As per AFR's web site 400 plus Hp is easy with a properly built 302 and GOOD heads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,501 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I don't live in one of those 'Smog Nazi' states... we don't really have any rules or smog checks to worry about, so I'm just being speculative here.

Let's say someone wanted to make 400 rear wheel horsepower... A rowdy 302 could be used, but the cam required would definitely put it out of contention for a smog certificate. On the other hand, a mild 351W could put out the power, and do it with a much milder tune, and therefore cleaner emissions.

Heck, it's hard enough for a FORD guy to tell the difference between a 302 and 351W at a glance... Do you really think the 'smog nazi's' who look at Hondas and Toyotas all day are going to be able to tell the difference? Do you think they are going to look THAT hard? I'd say, if everything looks good and it passes the 'sniffer' the car would get approved, and you'd be on your merry way. I'm sure that not all smog stations operate alike. Some are probably more observant than others... and it couldn't hurt to shop and ask around.


It sure is nice to NOT live in one of those 'smog nazi' states. If you want to drop a fire breathing 460 down in a 95' mustang around here, all that is stopping you is your wallet.


Good Luck!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,908 Posts
This is where I'm tormented in my decision making. I've got a light '61 Falcon (2700 lbs.) and want to keep it light. It is strictly a street car, which will very rarely rev above 4000 rpm, and never about 6000. I've got a T5-Z tranny and 8" rear end. I want as much low end grunt that I can get, without blowing up my brand new T5-Z, and I don't want to have to tub the car for traction (super sleeper). I've got a 302 and would like to use the MSD distributor, headers, intake and carb I've got on it. Can I live okay with a 347 built for bottom end, or do I need to go up to the 351W? If I stroked the 351W I think I'd be pushing the limits of the rest of the drivetrain. What do you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
I can add some to this. I had a 90 5.0 LX hatch and it was blown. I can say that I did change 2 head gaskets...pump gas blower cars are on the ragged edge
Now there are many reasons one can loose a head gasket but in general it was for the reasons Mike stated. Mike runs a 289 with n2o and knows how close he is to the ragged edge and has to keep on top of the "tune" or he will hurt head gaskets or the motor itself. The 1st time I rode in a 351W fox chassis stang I was stunned(A friend of mines 86 GT set up for Solo 1 IMSA fun)
Even though the cars 351W combo(its was NA) had less peak power then my blown 302 it had way more useable midrange torque and was very fun to drive. Now I know that Im talking about to engine combos only here but I owned at the same time the current stang a NA 351W/AOD 81 stang coupe and the supercharged 90 LX hatch 5 spd 5.0(mid 11's). On street tires it was very hard to beat the 351W coupe because the peaky 5 spd blower car was hard to handle. If the wife, who can drive the coupe real well
got out on me to far I cold not run her down
I agree with Mike that if you can swing it go 351W its just a better starting point and the old saying "you cant beat cubic inches" will always be true
plus 400+ cube W motor with alu heads wieghs no more that an all iron 289
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,501 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Oh, by the way, thanks for the kind words Tom! I enjoy reading your posts as well.

Hank, as far as your car with the small tires is concerned...

If you want the car to actually be quick on small tires (especially radials), and not just a burnout king... you've got your work cut out for you. An engine that has gobs of low-end power, generally 'wheezes-off' in the upper rpm range... so what happens, is the low end power tends to spin the tires excessively taking off, then the engine wheezes off as it goes through the gears. Back in my street racing days, I would try and get all the 406 and big block chevys to run on radials! They would generally burn up in the hole, while my low-torque 302 would hook up and scream away from them through the gears.


Of course installing a 3.25 gear or something would kill off some of that extra torque to the rear wheels and turn it into speed. This would have the same effect as building a 'high rpm' engine. 289's and 302's don't have a problem with revving to 6-7k rpm, and it's fun, so that's what I do. It's an excellent recipe for street racing with limited traction.


As for block strength, a 347 will be fine as long as you don't hit it with a big power adder. Coast High Performance offers a kit with a slightly shorter rod that keeps the pin out of the oil ring groove, and seems to be a good way to go to keep away from oil consumption problems.

If you plan on pushing an engine really hard, the stronger block is a necessity... but a naturally aspirated street car turning moderate rpm will be fine as a 347.

As for the sleeper aspect, most people can't readily tell the difference between a 302 and a 351W. A 393-408W between the frame rails of your car would DEFINITELY surprise most of the people in the opposite lane! Just be sure to make sure to have the carb, intake, heads and exhaust to move the mass quantities of air consumed by an engine that big.


As for hurting the rest of your drivetrain is concerned... It takes resistance (or traction) to put a strain on things. As long as you keep the slicks off the thing and/or avoid high rpm 'sidestep the clutch' launches and powershifts, the T5Z and 8" rear should be fine. Limited traction is a drivetrain's friend.


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

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: n2omike on 5/10/02 2:36am ]</font>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,908 Posts
Thanks you guys! Wow. What a fabulous wealth of information this FM is! It's great to live in the information age. Thanks again. (Of course, you've not made my decision any easier. It sounds like I CAN deal with a stroked 351W, keep the same weight I've got and drivetrain! It means more $ but more POWER! Good problem to have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
This is in reply to n2o mike's comments about the smog 'referees' (Nazi's). My carb guy set up my Holly for performance rather than emissions on my '66 Mustang w/351w. So naturally, it failed the smog test. Badly.

I had to go the a referee to get it checked. The referee was from India, so I thought he might not know what I have in it. Wrong. His initial response upon raising the hood was something like "Oh, I see you have put a 351 in. and with that Edelbrock Performer and Holly, you have something that may not pass visual." Fortunately, he was nice and by then I had re calibrated my carb. I passed the 1970 351w smog requirements, so he gave me a paper that said I had just put a replacement engine in. My angels were working that day.
So, don't think that all those referees are unknowledgeable. BTW: I live in Calif. and now I don't have to have it smogged...Until the reverse the laws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
my opinion on your falcon would be to go with a stock stroke roller 302 motor. rebuild/balance, a good set of aftermarket aluminum heads, e or b303 roller cam, rpm or stealth intake, 600-650 double pumper, between 9-10:1 compression, and full length headers with 2.5" exhaust with that T5 and set of gears between 3.5 and 4.11 with traction lock and the widest tires you can fit under there and youll be embarrassing most all cars on the street.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,908 Posts
Thanks Dave. Do have any idea what kind of torque around 3000 rpm a set up like that would yield? Also, I've currently got a Edelbrock Performer and 600 cfm carb. Would that be just as good or would the RPM be better?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,904 Posts
This was taken right after the car was painted and the motor hasn't been 'detailed' but what if I didn't have the size in my signature who would know? Put a 302 sticker on the air cleaner and just smile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,929 Posts
I've done both engines. The stroked 302 in my 85 is a sleeper for sure. It has a rough idle yet is easy to drive around town. Nobody suspects that it'll run 11.50's. The current project of a 375 stroker is not going to be so easy to fool people with. I need to find another 83 to 86 coupe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
any real ford guy worth his salt can tell a 351W from the 289/302....Especially when ther are no acc's blocking the view
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,904 Posts
I don't try to pass off the 351W in my Falcon as a 289/302 but you would be suprised how many people think it's a 302. Yeah even some "Ford Guys".

Headers made for an early Mustang will work on an early Falcon. My car has Tubular Automotive 351W swap headers which also are listed to work on a '65-'66 Mustang.The generic headers for a Mustang 289 will work good as 'swap headers' for an early Falcon 6 cylinder to a 302..

If it were me,rather than stroke a 302 to 347 if a 351W will fit then start with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
Jim

It is very cool that you got the motor is there
...as small as those engine compartments are. What changes did you make to make it work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,904 Posts
Qtrhors:
The early Falcon engine compartment is almost the same as an early Mustang so what ever will fit a Mustang will fit a Falcon. The 351W bolts in using early Falcon/Mustang V8 mounts and modified stock trans crossmember.Not much more work than a 289/302 swap really.
My Falcon has turned almost identical times to those of your Mustang except for a better 1.70 60foot,but with an AOD I'm sure yours gets better mileage.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,908 Posts
I'm lucky with fitment, since I've got a Rod & Custom Mustang II IFS kit and have cut out the shock towers. I could literally fit a 460 in there (tightly). So, size of engine won't be a problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,662 Posts
JustJim great picture but could you take one with a little more light?I am very interested to see how that thing fits at the shocktowers.And yes as I'm sure JustJim will tell you headers are available for this swap.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top