1995 F150 351W Build Thread - Page 2 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Notices
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 1987 - 1996 Ford F-150, F-250, F-350 and larger pickups - including the 1997 heavy-duty F250/F350+ trucks

1995 F150 351W Build Thread

 
  #16  
Old 03-27-2012, 05:43 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by 88dually View Post
subscribed
for low end tq, i'm using gt40p's
I really don't want to deal with the header issues associated with the P heads. Otherwise, I'd probably get them, since they are easier to find.
 
  #17  
Old 03-27-2012, 05:48 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by Conanski View Post
Well.. the Lightning guys usually end up advancing this cam 2-4 degrees because they complain it's weak at low rpms.. for what that's worth. Weak compared to what I don't know but any 5.8 will have more grunt than a 5.0 so it's all relative, but if you have one of these cams kicking around then use it with 1.7 rockers, but if not get the Comp 35-512-8 instead and install it straight up with 1.6 rockers.
I remember driving a friends 1995 Lightning when it was new and didn't think it had any sort of feeling of being weak in the low end.

I may advance the timing a hair anyway though.

I'm not a cam expert by any means. How much difference would there be between the HO cam with 1.7 rockers and the Comp Cams with 1.6 rockers?

My truck still has to pass sniffer test. Will this cam selection affect that any?
 
  #18  
Old 03-27-2012, 05:51 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by BRay09 View Post
I've been waiting for this thread Tex! Coming up to play with the big boys now, I see. I think you'll be satisfied with how this engine makes its power compared to the 5.0L.

What are you doing for the ecm? I would assume your truck is mass air. Custom tune or aftermarket tuning yourself?
Yeah, I can't wait to have the low end power. Our 85 F150 had the 5.8 HO with the factory 4v Holley. I miss the power it had. Yep, the truck is MAF. At first I probably will have to just run on the stock tune. There won't be any budget left for custom tunes etc.
 
  #19  
Old 03-27-2012, 05:53 PM
88dually
88dually is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ocean County, NJ
Posts: 731
88dually is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Gt40p heads work with 90* plug boots
 
  #20  
Old 03-27-2012, 05:54 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by Bob Gervais View Post
Subscribed, because I'd like to do a similar build for the Centurion eventually. Nice project!
That truck could definitely benefit from a bit more get up and go.
 
  #21  
Old 03-27-2012, 05:57 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by UNTAMND View Post
The op said it.
I have 2 kicking around my shop and doubt I'll ever use them in anything but a stock build that I don't get a cam for.
I'd never buy one on eBay or cl just cause a good new cam is darn cheap.
Granted, if you're only looking for minimal gain it's fine to use. Because its better then the stock cam in my 90 by far.
But again. If I have my motor all apart that far and have spent a bit of money on it already, I'd rather put in a cam that will work better and make me much happier.
I know its not the best cam in the world, but for factory its about as good as it gets. I am building on a budget and will not be racing my truck when I'm done with the swap. I probably wouldn't want to get a cam from Ebay etc though. I agree on that.
 
  #22  
Old 03-27-2012, 05:59 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by UNTAMND View Post
I just hate to see anyone go through all that work to build a nice motor with pretty matched parts and then bottleneck it with a cam choice.

Sorry for Going crazy on your topic tex. wasn't ment to be negative.
Conanski has a bit of experiance in the cam swap area. Listen to him and you'll be golden.
I'll be going with the comp cam if I stay with 351. If I go close to 400cid I'll be looking for something different though. Maybe not. I'm planning on a blower so that cam may work the way I want on a 400 with blower. We will see once I get closer.
No need to apologize. I see exactly what your saying. I also agree with you. I would prefer to build it once and not have to get back into the motor again.
 
  #23  
Old 03-27-2012, 06:02 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
I noticed something interesting about the fan shrouds. My 5.0 shroud is 7 inches deep, and the fan sits almost all the way inside the shroud. The one from the 5.8 truck is 5.5 inches deep, and the fan sits about half in and half out of the shroud. I noticed that the Lightnings I saw also seem to have the thinner shroud. I didn't measure those though. Which shroud is better. Why would there be a need to two different ones?
 
  #24  
Old 03-27-2012, 06:06 PM
Bob Gervais's Avatar
Bob Gervais
Bob Gervais is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Charlestown, RI
Posts: 2,403
Bob Gervais has a great reputation on FTE.Bob Gervais has a great reputation on FTE.Bob Gervais has a great reputation on FTE.Bob Gervais has a great reputation on FTE.Bob Gervais has a great reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by TexasGuy001 View Post
That truck could definitely benefit from a bit more get up and go.
Most definitely. From the very little I've driven it after getting the suspension done, it's not too bad, but more is always better. Especially on a budget.
 
  #25  
Old 03-27-2012, 06:06 PM
88dually
88dually is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ocean County, NJ
Posts: 731
88dually is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Are the 5.0 an 5.8 rad's the same thickness ?
 
  #26  
Old 03-27-2012, 06:09 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Is Motorcraft AWSF-32C the correct spark plug to use with a 351 with GT40 heads?
 
  #27  
Old 03-27-2012, 06:09 PM
TexasGuy001's Avatar
TexasGuy001
TexasGuy001 is offline
Post Fiend
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 10,800
TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.TexasGuy001 has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by 88dually View Post
Are the 5.0 an 5.8 rad's the same thickness ?
They look to be the same.
 
  #28  
Old 03-27-2012, 06:20 PM
UNTAMND's Avatar
UNTAMND
UNTAMND is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lansdale, PA
Posts: 3,599
UNTAMND has a great reputation on FTE.UNTAMND has a great reputation on FTE.UNTAMND has a great reputation on FTE.UNTAMND has a great reputation on FTE.UNTAMND has a great reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by TexasGuy001 View Post
Your right about that. The factory 5.8 intake is kinda inferior. I don't understand why the 5.0 truck one got such big runners and the 5.8 one didn't. It almost looks like the intakes should be the other way around.
ford didnt want to go above and beond to tune the 5.8 vs the 5liter.
so choke it down and put in a smaller cam to make it run like a 5liter and there you have it
i hated ford for doing what they did. the 5.8 didnt even get a knock sensor

the 5.8 has such a short lower in take because it seems as though they wanted the 5liter and the 5.8 to fit in the same height space. If you use the van for example, the 302 and the 351 dont have any more room at the top of the intake then each other. (thats my observation and conclusion)
the 351 definatly should have gotten at least the same size runners as the 302, but again, ford seems as though they wanted to restrict the 351 for some reason.
 
  #29  
Old 03-27-2012, 09:53 PM
donnor
donnor is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Missouri - Lake of the Oz
Posts: 584
donnor is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
"Shrouded" in secrecy...

Originally Posted by 88dually View Post
Are the 5.0 an 5.8 rad's the same thickness ?
Shroud depth is determined by the radiator thickness not the engine size. Both 302s & 351s came with the lighter duty (~1" depth) radiators as well as the heavy duty, sometimes referred to as "Super Cooling", (~2.5" depth). If upgrading the radiator on a truck with either engine try to locate the appropriate [shorter] shroud. Incidentally, 460s used the same radiator (the thicker one only) so a shroud from a 460 should also work... unless you to do an e-fan swap. Then you will not need a factory shroud.

dn.
 
  #30  
Old 03-27-2012, 10:38 PM
Conanski's Avatar
Conanski
Conanski is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 26,219
Conanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant futureConanski has a brilliant future
Originally Posted by TexasGuy001 View Post
I don't understand why the 5.0 truck one got such big runners and the 5.8 one didn't. It almost looks like the intakes should be the other way around.
Yeah it certainly looks like a F-up, but it could have been a deliberate attempt to strangle the motor to meet emissions as well.. that was the predominate modus operandi for domestic auto manufacturers through the '80's.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 1995 F150 351W Build Thread


Contact Us About Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.