Please do not repost, forward or otherwise publish messages
contained in these archives without consent from the respective
author(s). These archives may not, in whole or part, be stored on
any public retrieval system (FTP, web, gopher, newsgroup, etc.) by
individuals or companies, without consent of the respective authors.

Received: with LISTAR (v0.128a; list perf-list); Mon, 22 May 2000 10:31:59 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 10:31:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ford Truck Enthusiasts List Server>
To: perf-list digest users>
Subject: perf-list Digest V2000 #66
Precedence: bulk

Ford Truck Enthusiasts Performance, Hot-Rod and Custom
Truck Mailing List

Visit our web site:

To unsubscribe, send email to: with
the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of the

perf-list Digest Fri, 19 May 2000 Volume: 2000 Issue: 066

In This Issue:
Re: Carb Q
Re: Carb Q
Re: HO or NO?(351W)


Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 20:53:48 EDT
Subject: Re: Carb Q

Id go with the 390, that will suit your needs best, as the 500 will allow for
no torque, and the 600 is just too big. That lil 390 is a helluva carb, got
one on my bros 300, works great, good cruise mileage too.

Darrell Duggan
74 F-350 "Tweety" 460 4 speed


Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 20:33:42 -0500
From: Buck Shoff>
Subject: Re: Carb Q

I think it would be hard to get the 600 E-brock lean enough for the
little 2.8. Just my 2 cents. Buck Shoff

Tim Turner wrote:
> '85 2.8; beter to use a 390 4-V Holley (ugh..), retune a 600 4-V Edelbrock or
> 500 2-V Holley for a stock to near stock engine that sees some use requiring
> low RPM oopmh in the sand?


From: "wish">
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 14:31:47 GMT
Subject: Re: HO or NO?(351W)

>I have a 1987 351W in my 1984 F-150.
>it is a fuel injected engine with all fuel injected and computer parts taken
>it has a edelbrock600,mallory ignition and distributor,K and N filter.
>would this engine be an HO with the slightly proted heads or what since it
was an
>fuel injected engine.

I don't remember an HO Fuel Injected 351, unless you want to count the 95 Cobra
R's as being HO's and not Cobras ... the only other "high performance" 351 really
was the Lightning ... at least that I remember right now, there may've been
a PI version in the Crown Vic's, but that was likely a very short lived motor

> WAIT, i just though of something didn't the injected 351Ws not come out till

Define injected ... the throttle body injection system wasn't on the 351 that
I've ever seen, but multi port came with all the others in 87 as far as I know

> i know the 302 were in 84 i think but when were the windsors

Uhm, the 302 is a Windsor and it didn't get multi-port until 86 in the Mustang's,
maybe 85 in the trucks ...

> and would a 87 be an HO becuase this motor will fly it had

No, like I said before HO's were 302's, they had a different intake manifold
and cam, you can identify them quickly by the firing order, if you put the wrong
order on there it won't run quite right ...

>84 351W 2V that was good but nothing like this motor.

The 4V modification alone is probably making it run harder, if you changed the
cam, there's your answer entirely ... also what shape is the new motor in compared
with the older one, the compression ratio's might've even gone up a bit because
of the addition of fuel injection ... all kinds of variables in here, and since
you've added stuff you've really mixed the thing up ...

Just my $.02

96 Mustang GT 5spd 4.6L
73ish 1/2ton 4x4 6.4L

Ford Truck Enthusiasts


End of perf-list Digest V2000 #66
Ford Truck Enthusiasts Performance, Hot-Rod and Custom
Truck List

Send posts to

If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing
list, send an email to:

with the words "unsubscribe perf-list" in the subject of
the message.

Visit Our Web Site:

ENDTAG; } ?>