351 W vs 351 C
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
From: FT POLK LA
351 W vs 351 C
What are the differencs between the 351 Cleavland and the 351 Windsor.
What are their best applications.
Also which is/was the most economical and least problem prone, the 351m or the 400.
What are their best applications.
Also which is/was the most economical and least problem prone, the 351m or the 400.
Postmaster
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,496
Likes: 0
The coolant passages are different on the windsor and clevelands. You can install the cleveland heads on the widsor but you must modify the heads slightly, due to the coolant passages.
The cleveland heads in stock form, are a lot better than the windsor. The cleveland weigh more. Either motor would fit any application, except the 4v headed cleveland, it would be best suited for a light car. I know nothing about the modified motors...later
The cleveland heads in stock form, are a lot better than the windsor. The cleveland weigh more. Either motor would fit any application, except the 4v headed cleveland, it would be best suited for a light car. I know nothing about the modified motors...later
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 908
Likes: 4
351W is a do all passenger car/truck engine. 351C is a high revving performance engine.
You would not be happy with a 351C in a truck, since it doesn't have the low end torque you'd want.
They both have the same tranny bolt pattern and will generally interchange without issues.
As far as the 351M/400 question, they are the same engine except for stroke. They are both reliable, and if you have a 351M and like it, you'll like the 400 more. I don''t know any engine you can get more from with less investment. It's a monster just waiting to be unleashed.
http://www.geocities.com/styleline58/400.html
You would not be happy with a 351C in a truck, since it doesn't have the low end torque you'd want.
They both have the same tranny bolt pattern and will generally interchange without issues.
As far as the 351M/400 question, they are the same engine except for stroke. They are both reliable, and if you have a 351M and like it, you'll like the 400 more. I don''t know any engine you can get more from with less investment. It's a monster just waiting to be unleashed.
http://www.geocities.com/styleline58/400.html
Last edited by scroob; Mar 17, 2004 at 01:59 PM.
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 627
Likes: 1
the 351M and 400 aren't economy engines, terrible gas mileage , but a good head versus the windsor , larger canted valves, but a huge heavy motor for the displacement, equal in size in fact somewhat larger in some areas than a 460 and they bolt up to the same bellhousings.
New User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Red
The 351m/400m Motors were an attempt by ford to make a more enviornmentaly friendly engine, yet produce a good amount of power. To do this they retarded the timing, reduced compression and a couple other things that I cant remember off the top of my head. Needless to say in their stock configuration they failed. If you are looking for performance, the 460 is probably the best bet. I purchased a 400m, and then discovered what I had. It took a new cam, timing gears/chain, intake and 4bbl carb to get a real screamer. It would have been alot cheeper to get a 460.
The 351m/400m Motors were an attempt by ford to make a more enviornmentaly friendly engine, yet produce a good amount of power. To do this they retarded the timing, reduced compression and a couple other things that I cant remember off the top of my head. Needless to say in their stock configuration they failed. If you are looking for performance, the 460 is probably the best bet. I purchased a 400m, and then discovered what I had. It took a new cam, timing gears/chain, intake and 4bbl carb to get a real screamer. It would have been alot cheeper to get a 460.
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 908
Likes: 4
Keep in mind that through most of it's run, the 460 was also detuned the same way the 351M/400 was. You'd have to do the same mods on one of them to unleash it's real potential. So, just dropping in a 460 is not necessarily a cure.
For example, the 1977 460 was a 195 HP gas guzzling, smog choked behemoth. You'd have to do a new cam, timing gears, intake and 4V carb on it also to get anything out of it.
Weight: 351M/400 - 575 pounds. 460 - 720 pounds.
Point being, if you already have a 400, you might as well keep it unless you are really into doing the swap.
400s are no more gas guzzlers than any other engine the same displacement. It all depends on the engine's efficiency and application. No engine is going to get good gas mileage in a big truck. The 460 will drink just as much, maybe more.
I have a 400 in my '71 Galaxie, and it gets 17.5 MPG. My '69 Galaxie with the 429 gets 15.5 on it's best day. Both are 2V and bone stock.
For example, the 1977 460 was a 195 HP gas guzzling, smog choked behemoth. You'd have to do a new cam, timing gears, intake and 4V carb on it also to get anything out of it.
Weight: 351M/400 - 575 pounds. 460 - 720 pounds.
Point being, if you already have a 400, you might as well keep it unless you are really into doing the swap.
400s are no more gas guzzlers than any other engine the same displacement. It all depends on the engine's efficiency and application. No engine is going to get good gas mileage in a big truck. The 460 will drink just as much, maybe more.
I have a 400 in my '71 Galaxie, and it gets 17.5 MPG. My '69 Galaxie with the 429 gets 15.5 on it's best day. Both are 2V and bone stock.
Last edited by scroob; Mar 20, 2004 at 01:04 PM.
Trending Topics
Cargo Master
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,735
Likes: 38
From: Sunny Florida
I disagree about the 460 getting the same or worse than a 351M/400. When I owned the 78 and 79 4X4 trucks I had the all got 460 motors in them and my MPG went up and I had much better performance to boot. This could have been due to some tired motors but i saw much better results from the 460 than I ever had gotten from the 351M/400 motors.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now
Brett Foote
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 627
Likes: 1
I'm not sure where the weight figures came from but my listings tells me that the 351M/400 and 429/460 are within 35# of each other. Another factor might be that the 460 oils better and normally (there are always exceptions) a 460 will last longer .
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 908
Likes: 4
The engine weights came from a list on Dave Williams web site, which for some reason is not allowing me access right now.
http://www.bacomatic.org/~dw/engfyi.htm
There is another list circulating around which lists the 429/460 as weighing 640 pounds. This figure was proved to be erroneous after much discussion and debate on the old mailing list. Someone put a freshly yanked 460 on the scale and it weighed 725 pounds.
http://www.bacomatic.org/~dw/engfyi.htm
There is another list circulating around which lists the 429/460 as weighing 640 pounds. This figure was proved to be erroneous after much discussion and debate on the old mailing list. Someone put a freshly yanked 460 on the scale and it weighed 725 pounds.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
gettler
335 Series- 5.8/351M, 6.6/400, 351 Cleveland
46
Dec 16, 2019 02:51 PM
429 merc
Manitoba / Saskatchewan Chapter
21
Jun 30, 2015 06:37 PM
rsalter66
335 Series- 5.8/351M, 6.6/400, 351 Cleveland
1
May 28, 2007 01:35 PM
canadianfordman
1980 - 1986 Bullnose F100, F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
4
Jan 22, 2001 12:40 AM