[Rastus]

followup post from pcc4x4 about wanting a ford motor
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Link from TX-Zuki about 351 & 400's


http://home.earthlink.net/~bubbaf250/history/history03.html

My question is how do you tell the difference betwee naa 289 & 302? or a 302 and a 351 cleveland by looking a them? I know a 289 and 302 are small block fords, but what's the 351C? and what's the difference in a 302 anda 351c?

 

[Cody]

the 351c and 351m are bigblock. the 351w is smallblock.
the best way is by the valvecover.
you have to know the bolt pattern of the valve cover to get the family of blocks then go off the numbers to find out what it is.
The quick way to tell on a big block is the valve cover is flat at top and the intake goes under the valve cover.
but to tell the diff. between the 289 and 302 not much really diff i dont think so it would have to be varified by numbers again.
It's been awhile since i went through this so i might be off alittle

 

[TX_ZUKI]

the 351c and 351m are bigblock. the 351w is smallblock.
the best way is by the valvecover.
you have to know the bolt pattern of the valve cover to get the family of blocks then go off the numbers to find out what it is.
The quick way to tell on a big block is the valve cover is flat at top and the intake goes under the valve cover.
but to tell the diff. between the 289 and 302 not much really diff i dont think so it would have to be varified by numbers again.
It's been awhile since i went through this so i might be off alittle

Actually that is wrong, 351C, 351M,351W, and the 400M are all small blocks, with big block bell housing pattern.
To answer your question Rastus, this information below should help you out.


221/260/ Early 289

Although the 221 served duty as a reliable grocery-getter and was never known as a performance engine, the 260 and 289 engines changed how small-block Fords were viewed, first in the Falcon Sprint and later in Hi-Po Mustangs. These early engines can be identified by their unique five-bolt bellhousing pattern.

Late 289/302

The small-block that solidified Ford's reputation for performance was the Hi-Performance 289 4V. Produced from 1963-67, its distinctive idle, and the cacophony of its mechanical valvetrain coupled with ferocious rear tire shredding potential, made its presence known. However, of all the small-block engines Ford has produced, the most popular and frequently modified are the 302, or the 5.0L, small-blocks.

Introduced in 1968, the most desirable of these for street rod use are the hydraulic roller tappet engines. First seen in the '85 GT Mustangs, roller blocks have taller lifter bosses, and the cam bearing bores are bigger to accommodate the shaft's larger diameter bearing journals and base circle. But the real icing on the cake came the following year when electronic fuel injection was added. Unquestionably, for street rod applications, these are the most desirable of the Ford small-blocks.

302 Boss

One of Ford's most famous engines, the 302 Boss was a hybrid produced in '69-70 to compete in Trans-Am racing. They featured canted-valve heads (Cleveland style) solid lifter cams, stamped rockers with threaded, adjustable studs and guide plates, four-bolt mains, special rods, and forged pistons.

351W (Windsor)

Because they look virtually identical, 351W engines (so named because they are built in the Windsor engine plant) are often mistakenly identified as a 289 or 302. In fact, the 351W is based on an entirely different block that is stouter and has greater deck height than the 289/302 (289/302 is 8.206 inches while the 351 is 9.480 inches for '69-70 and 9.503 for '71-current). However, both series of engines use the same bore spacing and the bolt patterns are the same, so 289/302/351 heads will interchange. But, because the increased deck height puts the heads further apart, the 351W requires a unique intake manifold.

Other differences between these similar-looking engines are main bearing diameters (289/302s measure 2.25 inches, 351Ws are 3 inches); slightly larger rod journals (2.1232 inches compared to 2.311 inches), and the the fact that the 351W uses a longer connecting rod (5.956 inches compared to 5.1550 inches for the 289 and 5.0900 inches for the 302).

When swapping parts between these engines, the most confusion surrounds the camshafts. Camshafts will interchange, but the 351W has a different firing order (1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8) compared to the 289/302 (1-5-4-2-6-3-7-8). Compounding the situation, the '82-and-later 302 HO engines use the 351W firing order.

The 335 Series Small-Blocks

351 Cleveland

These unique engines were only produced for four years. They featured canted-valve heads that provided excellent breathing. Heads for the 2-V engines were open chamber with round ports, while the 4-V heads had a quench chamber and huge ports.

351C Cobra Jet

Appearing in 1971 and carrying through to 1972, these engines were an improved Cleveland design with four-bolt main caps. Heads were the 4V open chamber design.

351C-Boss

Also debuting in 1971, these engines had four-bolt mains, 4V heads with quench chambers, and Boss 302-style valvetrain components including solid lifter cams. For 1972 open chamber heads were used and the name was changed to 351C H.O.).

351M/400

Clevelands and 351M (Modified) and 400 engines are similar in appearance because they all use canted-valve heads, but there are some significant differences in the blocks. The deck heights of the 351M and 400 are 1.100 inches greater than the Cleveland's, and while the heads will interchange, the intake manifolds are different. In addition, the main bearing journals are larger, the engine mounts are unique, and the bellhousing bolt pattern is the same as the Lima series

 

[Rastus]

Cool, thanks TX_ZUKI.

Now I know why I saw a 351w intake on a 302

 

[trey aka superbronco]

maybe I overlooked it, but the 351 c has the same bellhousing and motor mount patterns as the 289,302, and 351w. I found and bought one of the 351CJ cleveland engines in the early 80's, wish I had hung on to it now.

 

[Cody]

here is what i know for sure,
the bellhousing on the 351c and the 351w are small block pattern, but the 351c intake goes under the valve cover like a big block. the 351m has big block bellhousing bolt patterns and the intake goes under the valve cover.
351w intake doesn't go under the valve cover.

that is why most people call the 351c and 351m a bigblock cause of the intake setup. on all of the big block i seen you have to take the valve cover off to take the intake off. but the small block you don't.


also that is why MOST people look for a truck with the 351w or 351c so they can have the 351w transmission. i have seen alot of bad things about the 351c and 351m.
only one 351m i ever seen that was good and it was a very strong motor. but other then that i stay away from the "big blocks" cause i can make enough power with a small block and doing it cheaper and lighter.

There is a book out there with the diffrents of the motor and that might be my next book i am buying.

 

[TX_ZUKI]

here is what i know for sure,
the bellhousing on the 351c and the 351w are small block pattern, but the 351c intake goes under the valve cover like a big block. the 351m has big block bellhousing bolt patterns and the intake goes under the valve cover.
351w intake doesn't go under the valve cover.

that is why most people call the 351c and 351m a bigblock cause of the intake setup. on all of the big block i seen you have to take the valve cover off to take the intake off. but the small block you don't.


also that is why MOST people look for a truck with the 351w or 351c so they can have the 351w transmission. i have seen alot of bad things about the 351c and 351m.
only one 351m i ever seen that was good and it was a very strong motor. but other then that i stay away from the "big blocks" cause i can make enough power with a small block and doing it cheaper and lighter.

There is a book out there with the diffrents of the motor and that might be my next book i am buying.

I would have to disagree on the 351M/400M not being a good motor, they can be had very cheap and also built right for such a low cost. I had one bad a$$ 400M motor in my bronco. Also, most 351M/400M motors had a C6 transmission, one of Fords best transmissions.
What things have you seen that was mbad on a 351M motor? Please explain.

 

[Cody]

well to start off i guess is the fact i am not a big block fan.

But with the problems my cousin had with his 351m (not familiar with the 400 since i never dealed with them) He couldn't find alot of performance stuff for it, not a big aftermarket, could be that he didn't know where to look. and when he did find something it cost a arm and a leg.
Then there is the dependablity of the 351m. for some reason the cam bearings would dryout and freeze causing the cam to break. he never did figure out why he was going through 4 block with the same things happening and they was always stock never touch. mileage not sure about that.
one of them had a rocker arm problem always causing the pushrods to get messed up or the thin arms breaking.
these are based off what my cousin been through. but me personally i just stay away from bigblock cause i just don't like them lol.
I would rather have a 302 or 351W.

But i will give this though. the 351m i had got to play with was bad to the bone. it would get up and go with a manual trans. i tried getting that truck figured if i ever wanted to i could swap for a 351w when the 351m worn out enough.

also am i right about the intake setup, the big block being under the valve cover?
is there a big block that didn't do this??

 

[Mudd-Dawg]

Cool, thanks TX_ZUKI.

Now I know why I saw a 351w intake on a 302

ummm, i dont think the 351w intake will work on a 302? the deck hieght on a 302 is 8.2 and the deck hieght on a 351w is 9.2. and then there were late model 351w's with a deck hieght of 9.5. therefore the 351w intake would be wider and would not seat all the way down into the heads on the 302. .......unless im' just having a brain fart


this was an added note you left off TX_ZUKI from the article you found.....

Interestingly, some aftermarket suppliers don't classify the 351 Cleveland or the 351M/400 engines small-blocks, presumably due to the large, canted-valve heads. But since they feature the same 4.380-inch bore spacing as the Fairlane and Windsor engines, they are still small blocks.

289-302????? here ya go

The bore is the same 4 inches. The stroke is different. but all the other parts will interchange, unless you have a very early 289. The early 289s have a 5 bolt bellhousing pattern while the later one have a 6 bolt pattern. The crankshaft is the only differnt part. Because the stroke is longer on a 302, they put a shorter rod in it. This lowers the rpm range of the torque curve slightly.

 

[TX_ZUKI]

well to start off i guess is the fact i am not a big block fan.

But with the problems my cousin had with his 351m (not familiar with the 400 since i never dealed with them) He couldn't find alot of performance stuff for it, not a big aftermarket, could be that he didn't know where to look. and when he did find something it cost a arm and a leg.
Then there is the dependablity of the 351m. for some reason the cam bearings would dryout and freeze causing the cam to break. he never did figure out why he was going through 4 block with the same things happening and they was always stock never touch. mileage not sure about that.
one of them had a rocker arm problem always causing the pushrods to get messed up or the thin arms breaking.
these are based off what my cousin been through. but me personally i just stay away from bigblock cause i just don't like them lol.
I would rather have a 302 or 351W.

But i will give this though. the 351m i had got to play with was bad to the bone. it would get up and go with a manual trans. i tried getting that truck figured if i ever wanted to i could swap for a 351w when the 351m worn out enough.

also am i right about the intake setup, the big block being under the valve cover?
is there a big block that didn't do this??

You are dead right on after market parts for "M" motors, there ain't crap out there for these motors, but it's getting better.
As for the cam bearings drying out, I had 2 broncos with one over 180,000 miles and one at 120,000 without a problem.
There are Myths out there that I have heard.........
All 351M/400's have problems with cracked blocks and heads
This nasty rumor got started because there were water jacket cracking problems associated with certain "M" block engines that were cast at Ford's Michigan (Code MCC) foundry prior to March 2nd, 1977. All "M" blocks that were cast at the Cleveland (Code CF) Foundry are okay.
It is impossible to build these engines for high horsepower due to inherent design flaws
The only possible basis I can think of that may have got this rumor started is the fact that "M" blocks have longer connecting rods for greater torque than the 351C. It is true that the 351C will rev a little quicker than an "M" engine, but the "M" engine will develop more torque, and this is exactly what you need in a heavy vehicle that is driven on the street. In other words, if you are building a 2,300 Lb Mustang, then use a 351C, if you are building a 5,500 Lb Bronco, then use the "M" engine. But just to set the record straight, there are no "design flaws" in the "M" engines that would hinder a performance build up.
Most 351/400's were fitted with severely retarded timing chains and camshafts to help meet stringent pollution control standards Yep. This is true too. After 1973, Ford started putting the retarded "smog" camshafts in the 400 and the 351M had the "smog" camshaft throughout it's entire production run. But come on, who do you know that would actually put a 100% original Ford timing chain and camshaft back into their engine during a rebuild? There are many quality aftermarket cam shafts out there by companies such as Comp Cams, Crane, Wolverine, Isky, and Edelbrock. Again, Problem solved.
The 351M/400 engines have "thin wall" castings and can not be safely over-bored beyond .040" -- Okay. Don't let this scare you away from "M" block engines. Ford did this to save weight. An "M" block engine is good for one or two complete rebuilds before you have to sleeve the block. All this means is that you can't over bore an "M" engine much beyond .040". As an example, when I had my engine rebuilt, the shop found that the #1 piston's wrist pin came loose and scored the block. A .030" over bore would not clean this cylinder up, so they had to put a sleeve in it. Big deal. It cost me $75.00 to fix it.

 

[TX_ZUKI]

ummm, i dont think the 351w intake will work on a 302? the deck hieght on a 302 is 8.2 and the deck hieght on a 351w is 9.2. and then there were late model 351w's with a deck hieght of 9.5. therefore the 351w intake would be wider and would not seat all the way down into the heads on the 302. ....... .

You are correct Mudd Dawg, the intake will not work, the 351w is wider then the 302. Now the heads are another story, they will work. But that would be a waste of money when you can get new 302 heads cheaper then rebuilding 351w heads, plus get more bang for your buck.

 

[TX_ZUKI]

PS I love these engines! Here is my 400M I built.

 

[trey aka superbronco]

also am i right about the intake setup, the big block being under the valve cover?
is there a big block that didn't do this??

Nope, sorry, you missed this one too. Only Ford's FE series big blocks did this, 352,360,390,427,and 428. The 360 and 390 were the main big block engines used in the trucks until 1977-1/2, when they started using the 351M/400. The 460's came in during the 70's but I'm not sure exactly which years, but they only came factory in the 2wd trucks.
The 351C was only produced four years, ending about 72 or 73, It was basically a small block (even though it shared a few traits with the big blocks)designed to take advantage of the big canted valve heads designed for the Boss 302. It was never used in the truck line. The Pantera sports cars utilized these engines also.

 

[trey aka superbronco]

I myself am a big fan of the Ford small-blocks, but given the same amount of money to spend I'll invest mine in a nearly stock 460 that'll blow the doors off your small block, especially when pushing a 6000lb truck!

 

[Cody]

There is a book out there with the diffrents of the motor and that might be my next book i am buying.

Read my own quote!!!
Still learning about ford but what my pea brain is telling me seems to be a lie.

 

[TX_ZUKI]

Read my own quote!!!
Still learning about ford but what my pea brain is telling me seems to be a lie.

:rofl:
I wheel a Zuki, but 70's Ford are my passion! I just love those trucks and Bronco's.

 

[Pcc4x4]

thanks for the tips !

Well i seem to have opened a big can of worms ! While some of the things that were posted were very helpful there are a couple things i wanted to point out . First that there are no performance parts was not totaly correct , the 351m motor shares alot of internal parts from the cleveland . yet the 351m motor is considered a big block it is the same motor as the 400. The only differeance is the crank and i believe piston rings , but i have heard from someone that the 351m motor was nothing but a windsor motor with cleveland heads but i beg to differ because the blocks when compared and tested are a much different motor .My 351m before i decided to switch to rock crawling instead of mudding hit the dyno at right about 420 hp and about 375 lbs of torch , yet another reason why i am crying for another motor . A 351 w will do me even better if you have one because i would rather have one because of its RPM range . Another big problem with the 351m is it has a big problem with rod knock even a good rebuilt 351m with some time will rod knock th cure is to put a 400 crank and basically make it a 400.

 

[Mudd-Dawg]

actually with heads.....i know the 302 heads take a 7/16" bolt and the 351w heads take a 1/2" bolt so if your using the 302 heads you have drill out the bolt holes to take the 1/2" bolts and when using 351w heads you have to have some pieces that go in there so that you can use the 7/16" bolts......





at least with aftermarket heads, and i'm pretty sure the stock heads would be the same.....?

 

[Pcc4x4]

I thought the 78 and 79 broncos had a 351 c thats what made them popular with people 80 was i believe the first year of 351 m, i built mustangs for years for the drag strip and for restoration so the truck end of it is still a little greek to me , but that 351c sitting in my original 71 mach 1 4v, 4barrel is looking mighty good to me right about now ! I just want to get back on the trails ! its killing me

 

[4x4Freak]

PS I love these engines! Here is my 400M I built.

Huh, I dont see anything. :?