Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Performance & General Engine Building
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community 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 fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-1999, 04:10 PM
Reuel Reuel is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 84
Reuel is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

I have a question. What are the basic performance differences in low end HP and torque for the 351W vs 351C engines? Are they about the same? Are they substantially different? I have owned both engines in the past and realize the diferences in the head designs etc but how does this relate to the actual low end torque and HP?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-17-1999, 06:25 AM
Deen Hylton
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
351W vs 351C

I checked an older Motors Manual (1977-84) and came up with a couple of things: In 1978 Ford put the 351Ws and the 351Ms in their full size cars. The 351W speced at 144Hp @ 3200RPM with 277 lbs. torque at 1600 RPM. The 351M speced at 145HP at 3400 RPM and 273 lbs. torque at 1800 RPM. The year before that the 351M put out 16 more HP with a lower compression ratio, 8.3 verses 8.0, we'll have to ask Ford how they did that! My Ford SVO book says the 351C and the 351M were similar in design except for main bearing sizes and some block demensions. You had mentioned comparing to the 351C...it was only produced for 4 years 1970 through 1974...if you install a 1970 or 1971 it would have up to 10:1 compression and would probably produce more low end torque because of that. On the other hand the 351Cs with 4 bbl heads had larger valves and intake/exhaust passages which are fine for higher RPM usage but kill low end torque and HP. To sum it up...if your looking for low end alwys go for cubic inches...a 400M will move you quicker than a 351W-M-or C.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-17-1999, 06:45 AM
Reuel Reuel is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 84
Reuel is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

These numbers are rather dissappointing. I was really hoping for something in the 250 HP range. I guess there is a fundamental problem, trying to generate lots of torque at low (useable) RPM with a small block just is not going to happen. I guess i will start looking seriously at the mamoth 460 !
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-18-1999, 09:19 AM
ltd91_351 ltd91_351 is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 8
ltd91_351 is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

>These numbers are rather dissappointing. I was
>really hoping for something in the
>250 HP range. I guess there
>is a fundamental problem, trying to
>generate lots of torque at low
>(useable) RPM with a small block

Don't be fooled by these numbers.. It all depends on how the engine is built and what year it is.. For example, the 351w in my 1991 Crown Vic was 210 hp stock and 285 ft/lbs of torque.. with some new heads, different cam, new intake, etc, the engine easily makes 300 hp and probably almost 400 ft/lbs.. also, dont forget that this engine weighs less than a 351c or 351m and a lot less than a 460, which means your vehicle will get moving faster..

brent.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-02-2000, 02:15 AM
micah micah is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gustavus Township, Ohio
Posts: 52
micah is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

In 1971 the 351Cleveland 2V (that means 2 barrel carb)was rated at 240Hp.......I recall reading that in a Chilton's. If you have one--BUILD IT! The valves are big enough to handle a 4 barrel carb/intake and apropo cam.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-05-2000, 04:10 AM
Arthur Arthur is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5
Arthur is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

I had a 351c in a 71 Torino, 2v head model, ran nice. Put on a performance intake manifold, 4 bbl carb and try to get headers. You won't be disappointed. It'll rock plenty
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 05-15-2000, 12:58 PM
TBirdGuy TBirdGuy is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Wyomgin, Michigan
Posts: 221
TBirdGuy is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

Ok, I've had quite a bit of expierence with the different 351's. First of all, let me say this.....STAY AWAY FROM THE 351-M!!!!! A friend of mine built one very stoutly, and it was a dog compared to a mildly built 351-W! As far as between the Windsor and Cleveland, what you have to determine is do you want much more power or much more available parts. The Windsor has many different parts available to it because Ford produced it for a very long time, and, quite frankly, it is a VERY strong and reliable small block. You could even easily (Compared to the Cleveland) go with Fuel Injection. I've heard, don't know for sure, but I've heard that if you place a 400-M Crank into a Windsor, all you have to do is alter the finring order and your little Windsor will have 400 cubes at its disposal. However, the Cleveland will produce LOTS more power, providing you can get a set of 4 barrel heads. My dad built a Cleveland using 4 barrel heads and put a mild cam and good aluminum intake on it and it SCREAMED !! It really had alot of power. If I had to choose, I would definitely go with the Cleveland. I'll have to be honest with you though, when I built a motor for my Thunderbird, I had a choice between a stroked 302, a 4 barrel 351 Cleveland, or.....the Mighty 460. I chose the 460 because its lower end is designed alot like a small block Ford with it's simple design (only much larger) but the upper end (mainly the heads) are designed with the Cleveland types of chambers which produce LOTS of power. Hope this helps.

TBirdGuy
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 05-15-2000, 12:59 PM
TBirdGuy TBirdGuy is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Wyomgin, Michigan
Posts: 221
TBirdGuy is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

Ok, I've had quite a bit of expierence with the different 351's. First of all, let me say this.....STAY AWAY FROM THE 351-M!!!!! A friend of mine built one very stoutly, and it was a dog compared to a mildly built 351-W! As far as between the Windsor and Cleveland, what you have to determine is do you want much more power or much more available parts. The Windsor has many different parts available to it because Ford produced it for a very long time, and, quite frankly, it is a VERY strong and reliable small block. You could even easily (Compared to the Cleveland) go with Fuel Injection. I've heard, don't know for sure, but I've heard that if you place a 400-M Crank into a Windsor, all you have to do is alter the finring order and your little Windsor will have 400 cubes at its disposal. However, the Cleveland will produce LOTS more power, providing you can get a set of 4 barrel heads. My dad built a Cleveland using 4 barrel heads and put a mild cam and good aluminum intake on it and it SCREAMED !! It really had alot of power. If I had to choose, I would definitely go with the Cleveland. I'll have to be honest with you though, when I built a motor for my Thunderbird, I had a choice between a stroked 302, a 4 barrel 351 Cleveland, or.....the Mighty 460. I chose the 460 because its lower end is designed alot like a small block Ford with it's simple design (only much larger) but the upper end (mainly the heads) are designed with the Cleveland types of chambers which produce LOTS of power. Hope this helps.

TBirdGuy
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 05-15-2000, 01:00 PM
TBirdGuy TBirdGuy is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Wyomgin, Michigan
Posts: 221
TBirdGuy is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

Ok, I've had quite a bit of expierence with the different 351's. First of all, let me say this.....STAY AWAY FROM THE 351-M!!!!! A friend of mine built one very stoutly, and it was a dog compared to a mildly built 351-W! As far as between the Windsor and Cleveland, what you have to determine is do you want much more power or much more available parts. The Windsor has many different parts available to it because Ford produced it for a very long time, and, quite frankly, it is a VERY strong and reliable small block. You could even easily (Compared to the Cleveland) go with Fuel Injection. I've heard, don't know for sure, but I've heard that if you place a 400-M Crank into a Windsor, all you have to do is alter the finring order and your little Windsor will have 400 cubes at its disposal. However, the Cleveland will produce LOTS more power, providing you can get a set of 4 barrel heads. My dad built a Cleveland using 4 barrel heads and put a mild cam and good aluminum intake on it and it SCREAMED !! It really had alot of power. If I had to choose, I would definitely go with the Cleveland. I'll have to be honest with you though, when I built a motor for my Thunderbird, I had a choice between a stroked 302, a 4 barrel 351 Cleveland, or.....the Mighty 460. I chose the 460 because its lower end is designed alot like a small block Ford with it's simple design (only much larger) but the upper end (mainly the heads) are designed with the Cleveland types of chambers which produce LOTS of power. Hope this helps.

TBirdGuy
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 05-15-2000, 01:00 PM
TBirdGuy TBirdGuy is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Wyomgin, Michigan
Posts: 221
TBirdGuy is starting off with a positive reputation.
351W vs 351C

Ok, I've had quite a bit of expierence with the different 351's. First of all, let me say this.....STAY AWAY FROM THE 351-M!!!!! A friend of mine built one very stoutly, and it was a dog compared to a mildly built 351-W! As far as between the Windsor and Cleveland, what you have to determine is do you want much more power or much more available parts. The Windsor has many different parts available to it because Ford produced it for a very long time, and, quite frankly, it is a VERY strong and reliable small block. You could even easily (Compared to the Cleveland) go with Fuel Injection. I've heard, don't know for sure, but I've heard that if you place a 400-M Crank into a Windsor, all you have to do is alter the finring order and your little Windsor will have 400 cubes at its disposal. However, the Cleveland will produce LOTS more power, providing you can get a set of 4 barrel heads. My dad built a Cleveland using 4 barrel heads and put a mild cam and good aluminum intake on it and it SCREAMED !! It really had alot of power. If I had to choose, I would definitely go with the Cleveland. I'll have to be honest with you though, when I built a motor for my Thunderbird, I had a choice between a stroked 302, a 4 barrel 351 Cleveland, or.....the Mighty 460. I chose the 460 because its lower end is designed alot like a small block Ford with it's simple design (only much larger) but the upper end (mainly the heads) are designed with the Cleveland types of chambers which produce LOTS of power. Hope this helps.

TBirdGuy
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2000, 05:23 AM
TallPaul's Avatar
TallPaul TallPaul is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Metro Detroit (Redford)
Posts: 5,857
TallPaul is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
351W vs 351C

The hp and torque ratings vary considerably by year. In the 60's they usually advertized the highest rating they could to sell cars. Then when the the government and insurance companies threatened to quash the muscle cars they went to net horsepower which was a much lower figure. This began probably around 1970 and continues to this day. In the 70s and 80s hp was poor because of trying to meet pollution limits, but in the 90s things seem to have gotten better, esp with electronic fuel injection. Look at the '93 F150 with the 5.8 V8 (351) on MSN Carpoint it is rated 240 hp and 340 torque--plenty of power, expecially compared to the 1978 figures quoted above.
__________________

'01 Ranger, 2.3L, 5 speed, 83,000 miles. Redline MTL, Amsoil Signature 5w20, Wix Oil Filter, Dynomax Super Turbo muffler.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 05-16-2000, 06:18 PM
FTE Ken's Avatar
FTE Ken FTE Ken is offline
Founder ... Stay Tuned
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Enjoying the real world.
Posts: 23,171
FTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputationFTE Ken has a superb reputation
351W vs 351C

__________________
FTE Founder. Enjoying life, hitting the throttle and hearing my Ford squeal 'em....
Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2000, 06:18 PM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > Performance & General Engine Building

Tags
1971, 351, 351c, 351w, block, cleveland, diferencia, dimensions, entre, ford, horsepower, hptorque, rating, ratings, torque, versus, vs

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 02:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - 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. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup