Ford Truck Enthusiasts, The Internet's Leading Ford Trucks Resource, F150
 
Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Other Fords > Ranchero & 1961 - 1967 Econoline
Reload this Page

351w in a 69 chero

Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Check out what's the hottest!
Register - Join us, its Free! Albums FAQ Members Tech Guides Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read VendorsUsed CarsGarage
Welcome to Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums
Welcome to Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums


You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

TRENDING PICTURES





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2006, 08:49 PM
randy64 randy64 is offline
New User
Garage is empty, add now 		 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3
randy64 is starting off with a positive reputation.
351w in a 69 chero
What problems might I run into swapping the 302 in a 1969 Ranchero with a 351w?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2006, 10:20 PM
85e150six4mtod 85e150six4mtod is online now
Post Fiend
Garage is empty, add now 		 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 14,222
85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.85e150six4mtod has a spectacular reputation.
Seems like that would have been a factory option, so it should be pretty easy.

Little stuff like linkages, radiator hose locations, exhaust manifolds exiting at the correct point might be things to look out for.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-04-2006, 06:00 AM
IB Tim's Avatar
IB Tim IB Tim is offline
Site Administrator
1989 Swift DB4
  
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 92,995
IB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputationIB Tim has a superb reputation
...Welcome Randy to Ford Truck Enthusiasts!

…..See you on the boards.
__________________
Administrator
tim.lamkin@internetbrands dot com
Life is not only time……paradoxically, it is the denial of time!
What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.

When you are down...look up...get up...and don't ever give up....
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 05-04-2006, 08:25 AM
ncranchero's Avatar
ncranchero ncranchero is offline
Postmaster
1994 Ford F-150
  
Join Date: May 2003
Location: E.Lincoln County, NC
Posts: 2,697
ncranchero has a good reputation on FTE.ncranchero has a good reputation on FTE.
steve.mckellop
The 302 was the most popular option and you will have no interchange issues at all. Think about going the 5.0HO EFI route, more power and better fuel mileage.
__________________
Steve,
'94 F150 4x4 4.9L/5-speed/3.55(H9)
'02 Sport Trac 4x4 (lowered 2") FOR SALE
'10 TRANSIT Connect
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 05-08-2006, 10:34 AM
65rancheroguy 65rancheroguy is offline
Junior User
Garage is empty, add now 		 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Union Grove, Alabama
Posts: 52
65rancheroguy is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncranchero
The 302 was the most popular option and you will have no interchange issues at all. Think about going the 5.0HO EFI route, more power and better fuel mileage.
Maybe better mileage, but definitly not more power!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 05-08-2006, 12:25 PM
ncranchero's Avatar
ncranchero ncranchero is offline
Postmaster
1994 Ford F-150
  
Join Date: May 2003
Location: E.Lincoln County, NC
Posts: 2,697
ncranchero has a good reputation on FTE.ncranchero has a good reputation on FTE.
steve.mckellop
Quote:
Originally Posted by 65rancheroguy
Maybe better mileage, but definitly not more power!
Power of the 351W or the 5.0 HO depends on the year and mods.

With gas @ $3.00 a gal and rising fuel injection is a big plus.
__________________
Steve,
'94 F150 4x4 4.9L/5-speed/3.55(H9)
'02 Sport Trac 4x4 (lowered 2") FOR SALE
'10 TRANSIT Connect
Last edited by ncranchero; 05-08-2006 at 12:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2006, 12:25 PM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Other Fords > Ranchero & 1961 - 1967 Econoline
Reload this Page 351w in a 69 chero

Tags
69, chero

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:17 AM.

Guidelines - Contact Us - Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Archive - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.



 
vbulletin Admin Backup