Does a 351 Cleveland fit well in a 56 F100 or is a 351 Windsor a better fit?
 

I presently have a 302 Windsor in my truck, my mechanic thinks it is a smog era engine. I am considering fitting a 351 for some extra grunt. I see a lot of you use Windsor engines and I understand they are more compact than Clevelands. I believe I have occasionally seen Cleveland engined trucks on here.

I met a hotrodder with a 351 Cleveland for sale for $2500 that sounds good. I was after a Windsor but wonder if it is a problem with fit. He has a 48 Ford sedan and he can't get extractors to fit. So this is a worry straight off for me.

Are they longer as well as wider?

The truck has a 74 Nova front end and Chev steering box, left hand drive.

Does anyone have experience with this situation, any Cleveland owners have a comment?

I look forward to your comments.

I'm putting a 351m (a 351c derivative) in my 52 F-3. I'll have to take some pictures of the engine bay, but I have a ton of room. One argument though of a Windsor over a Cleveland is that performance parts tend to be more common and inexpensive.

Jon, thanks for your reply, I gather you mean there are more parts for Windsors available there. In Australia the Cleveland is considered higher than Windsors, some suggesting the Windsor is only good for a boat anchor. A great deal of Cleveland hot up stuff available here, and Windsor stuff is available also. I am concerned about fitting extractors as I don't seem to have a lot of room available now.

I am concerned if I had to shift the engine forward to fit, the new driveshaft I just had made up to fit my 8.8 rear end will be a problem for length. I guess once you change something there is always something else you have to worry about

351m? Oh gosh, please make it warmed over 400. 137 horse is just not enough.....

The 351C actually has a slightly lower deck than the 351W. 9.206" for the C, 9.503" for later model W's. The 302 is 8.206".


(The 351M/400 is 10.297, almost as high as a 429/460.)

http://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/EngineDimensions.html

JMO, but if I had a smog era 302 but was otherwise happy with the installation, I'd beef it up, and consider a stroker for it. Can you get 302 parts any easier than 351w stuff?

my motor is pushing 300hp, and very close to the same in torque. I chose the 351m for its lower end, low rpm power range. Building a it for work truck, not speed. I do have a second motor and a 400 crank ready for a future project


Aus56 sorry didn't pay attention to your location when you posted. Yeah, I know the Cleveland engines are popular down your way, and I think size wise you could readily fit one in.

On a side note, as far as the Cleveland series of engines (351C and M, and the 400M) the Australian 351C v4 heads are the top of the line for performance building and bring a pretty penny here in the states.

Thanks for your replies again fellas. Jon it is funny that the Clevelands get so much attention here and the Windsors in the US.

The Cleveland has a rich racing history here and it was in one of our most loved local muscle cars, the Falcon GT/GT HO, at the time the fastest four door in the world as we liked to say.

I am no hot car guru by any stretch, I would just like to have a good reasonably powerful motor to sound good and the pleasure of driving a powerful car, even if I don't need a street fighter. The sort of figures you are talking Jon would probably be great.

My old bus sounds OK and with the previous 3.92 gears was OK around town, but it would be great to have a good sounding/performing motor. I wouldn't expect to compete with the street monsters at the local Friday and Saturday night car meetings but still a nice note would be good.

It should drop straight in using the same transmission and using the same engine mounts !
Only minor changes would be needed as in exhaust and rad hoses etc .
I would leave the Windsor in there if it's a good runner .
Just for the record I've had both engines fitted in my 53 when I had it and I now have a Windsor in the 56 i'm building and these engine bays have a ton of room . .

Thanks Scott I appreciate your experience with this situation. My engine does run ok but as a smog era engine doesn't have a lot of grunt. I would like some more power. I don't want to spend money on my motor as it seems that blokes pull out good motors to put in something else/ hotter etc.and their motor often goes cheap. I don't want to spend $8,000 on building a good motor IF I can get a good 2nd hand one that will do what I want and has good life left in it.

Thanks for the info about fit. So you have had no problem fitting extractors?

No problem at all with the 53 , that had a worked 351 clevo in it with block hugger headers .

I'm putting a Cleveland in my 54. I have had no issues with space yet. Long tube headers might be a pain to figure out. I have had no issues finding Cleveland parts on the internet either. At the shows is a different story...

Thanks Aaron and Scott for your help. One way or another I will get a good motor, Windsor or Cleveland, nice to know a Cleveland is a real contender for what I need as so much is available for them.

Aaron yes headers have worried me as I have seen some blokes tie their pipes up in knots just about to get clearance. I am assuming block hugger headers are not as effective as you don't have the long pipes to get the exhaust pulses equalised or is that not correct?

Correct, shorty headers are not as effective but I would assume still a nice improvement over manifolds. As even still the collection area for the pipes is far enough away so that one piston isn't robbing another.

Thanks Aaron, appreciate your comments. I have been a bystander all my life, now I am trying to get involved as well as I can. It's enjoyable, the forum is great from the advice, to the humorous posts and I look forward to getting my truck sorted. Looking for 17" mags and radial WWW's to suit, then finish some things off in the cab and somewhere along the way upgrade my engine.

Not sure if this helps but we all like pictures. My co-worker had a 351C in his 56 F-100.

Stephen, thanks for the pictures, looks good, and seems to be a reasonable space on the left for pipes at least.

Cheers