Crate motor
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Crate motor
Hello. I’ve had a 1977 F-150 Custom for nearly 20 years and have devided to finally upgrade the motor. Currently it has a 302 and, honestly, limits certain routes I take as it barely - and quite inefficiently - moves this steel beast. My mechanic is suggesting a 351 Windsor. I’m hoping to get some advice or tips from anyone willing to share. What I should look for or be aware of or on the lookout for, etc. I plan to move forward with this over the Christmas break so need to solidify plans ASAP. Thanks for any help.
Logistics Pro
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,217
Likes: 154
A good aftermarket intake manifold and 4 barrel carb might wake it up some. And if you were to put a set of Explorer GT40 or GT40P heads on the little 302, it should output more power - and you might need those same parts on a 351W. The E7TE heads are said to be an improvement over older SBF heads too, but I know firsthand that the GT40s are an improvement over E7TEs.
A Holley 4160 carb and Performer RPM intake made a nice difference on the 289/302 in my old '68 Cougar, even with its puny single exhaust and tired engine. And the Explorer/Mountaineer GT40P heads made an equally nice difference on my '88 Mustang 5.0, which already had all of the supporting modifications to take advantage of the heads.
Your truck's performance sounds like mine - but mine has a 240 with a not-so-healthy McParts store carburetor. I've got a 2150 2 barrel waiting to go on there. Even with having to keep the accelerator on the floor to keep up with uphill interstate traffic, that 240 still returns some not-too-bad MPGs. Mine has a 2.75 or 2.80 rearend gear, which begs for a granny-gear 4 speed to get moving on an uphill grade.
What is your gear ratio? If it's too numerically low, it might be the more significant contributor to tepid performance.
A Holley 4160 carb and Performer RPM intake made a nice difference on the 289/302 in my old '68 Cougar, even with its puny single exhaust and tired engine. And the Explorer/Mountaineer GT40P heads made an equally nice difference on my '88 Mustang 5.0, which already had all of the supporting modifications to take advantage of the heads.
Your truck's performance sounds like mine - but mine has a 240 with a not-so-healthy McParts store carburetor. I've got a 2150 2 barrel waiting to go on there. Even with having to keep the accelerator on the floor to keep up with uphill interstate traffic, that 240 still returns some not-too-bad MPGs. Mine has a 2.75 or 2.80 rearend gear, which begs for a granny-gear 4 speed to get moving on an uphill grade.
What is your gear ratio? If it's too numerically low, it might be the more significant contributor to tepid performance.
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
A good aftermarket intake manifold and 4 barrel carb might wake it up some. And if you were to put a set of Explorer GT40 or GT40P heads on the little 302, it should output more power - and you might need those same parts on a 351W. The E7TE heads are said to be an improvement over older SBF heads too, but I know firsthand that the GT40s are an improvement over E7TEs.
A Holley 4160 carb and Performer RPM intake made a nice difference on the 289/302 in my old '68 Cougar, even with its puny single exhaust and tired engine. And the Explorer/Mountaineer GT40P heads made an equally nice difference on my '88 Mustang 5.0, which already had all of the supporting modifications to take advantage of the heads.
Your truck's performance sounds like mine - but mine has a 240 with a not-so-healthy McParts store carburetor. I've got a 2150 2 barrel waiting to go on there. Even with having to keep the accelerator on the floor to keep up with uphill interstate traffic, that 240 still returns some not-too-bad MPGs. Mine has a 2.75 or 2.80 rearend gear, which begs for a granny-gear 4 speed to get moving on an uphill grade.
What is your gear ratio? If it's too numerically low, it might be the more significant contributor to tepid performance.
A Holley 4160 carb and Performer RPM intake made a nice difference on the 289/302 in my old '68 Cougar, even with its puny single exhaust and tired engine. And the Explorer/Mountaineer GT40P heads made an equally nice difference on my '88 Mustang 5.0, which already had all of the supporting modifications to take advantage of the heads.
Your truck's performance sounds like mine - but mine has a 240 with a not-so-healthy McParts store carburetor. I've got a 2150 2 barrel waiting to go on there. Even with having to keep the accelerator on the floor to keep up with uphill interstate traffic, that 240 still returns some not-too-bad MPGs. Mine has a 2.75 or 2.80 rearend gear, which begs for a granny-gear 4 speed to get moving on an uphill grade.
What is your gear ratio? If it's too numerically low, it might be the more significant contributor to tepid performance.
oh. You asked about gear ratio. I have no idea. I’m barely mechanical enough to hold a hammer.
Logistics Pro
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,217
Likes: 154
If your 302 is original, then the flywheel/flexplate should work. But if it's a 1981 or later 302, then the flywheel/flexplate will not work because 302/5.0s were balanced differently around 1981. The imbalance factor went from 28 ounces to 50 ounces.
But the 351W never changed. Those were 28 ounce from 1969 or whenever, until 1996 or whenever.
You will most likely need a new bracket for the AC compressor, as well as for the alternator and any other accessories. The 351W block is slightly taller, and hence wider at the top, than the 289s and 302s.
But the 351W never changed. Those were 28 ounce from 1969 or whenever, until 1996 or whenever.
You will most likely need a new bracket for the AC compressor, as well as for the alternator and any other accessories. The 351W block is slightly taller, and hence wider at the top, than the 289s and 302s.
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
If your 302 is original, then the flywheel/flexplate should work. But if it's a 1981 or later 302, then the flywheel/flexplate will not work because 302/5.0s were balanced differently around 1981. The imbalance factor went from 28 ounces to 50 ounces.
But the 351W never changed. Those were 28 ounce from 1969 or whenever, until 1996 or whenever.
You will most likely need a new bracket for the AC compressor, as well as for the alternator and any other accessories. The 351W block is slightly taller, and hence wider at the top, than the 289s and 302s.
But the 351W never changed. Those were 28 ounce from 1969 or whenever, until 1996 or whenever.
You will most likely need a new bracket for the AC compressor, as well as for the alternator and any other accessories. The 351W block is slightly taller, and hence wider at the top, than the 289s and 302s.
Thank you for the info. I'll be printing all this out for my mechanic - which I'm sure will annoy him, but I'd rather he get everything we need in advance so I'm not waiting forever!
Laughing Gas
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 1,244
Likes: 12
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Psycho_bob_1977
Small Block V8 (221, 260, 289, 5.0/302, 5.8/351W)
11
Oct 4, 2008 03:32 PM
Mauserbob
Performance & General Engine Building
4
May 5, 2002 09:41 PM
wl_keller
1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
12
Apr 5, 2002 01:30 PM
