351C into a 86' 4x4...
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 0
From: Parma, MI
351C into a 86' 4x4...
Hey everyone here is the deal. I built my first motor about 1 year ago, its 302 roller block, stock bottom end, heads ported and milled, edelbrock intake & carb, eaders, and a complete msd 6 ignition. All mated to a brand new c6. Love this motor it pulls hard even with 35's and as beaten any tbi 350 chevy i have ran against. The thing is I love building motors and I love Ford. So when I get back home(attending mmi) I am going to build another motor for this truck. As of right now I am 90% sure I want to go with a 351c. It will be unique and no one else will have one, and I like that. I do plan on using the 2V heads. What I am asking is perhaps what recipe could I use to get this motor to perform it best in 4x4 truck. As far as pistons and cam goes, any head work, intake and carb combos that would work the best?? Any pointers will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 0
From: Parma, MI
if you are refering to a 351M/400 that is out of the question. I am not changing transmissions, mine is brand with shift kit and all. The C6 stays. I asked about the 351C not the 400. Does anybody have any opinions on what could be done the 351C to make it a good truck motor?
Posting Legend
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 30,255
Likes: 37
All 400's do not have the large bell pattern.
For a 351C run a diff to keep your RPM's up. Build a 351C for torque which it is not really good for. The 2V heads and a small cam would be a good start. The 351C was a good engine for light vehicles like mustangs. They were used in trucks in Australia.
Do you already have a 351C? Otherwise do something really different get a 400 with a small bell pattern to fit your transmission. Check with TMI, they just built a 434 stroker with a small bell pattern for a Pantera. You may need to go with a different cam to move the peak torque lower.
For a 351C run a diff to keep your RPM's up. Build a 351C for torque which it is not really good for. The 2V heads and a small cam would be a good start. The 351C was a good engine for light vehicles like mustangs. They were used in trucks in Australia.
Do you already have a 351C? Otherwise do something really different get a 400 with a small bell pattern to fit your transmission. Check with TMI, they just built a 434 stroker with a small bell pattern for a Pantera. You may need to go with a different cam to move the peak torque lower.
Last edited by Torque1st; May 27, 2006 at 01:34 AM.
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,003
Likes: 2
From: chicago burbs
there's nothing wrong with a Cleveland for torque. the 351M is a truck engine, what's the bore and stroke? what's the bore and stroke of the Cleveland? same heads. does a heavier crankshaft and longer rods make more torque in an otherwise nearly identical engine? the width of the intake must be what does it, or the length of the pushrods? wrist pin diameter?
with the right pieces for the desired outcome a Cleveland will make torque, with less reciprocating weight and rotating mass. don't believe the magazine articles.
with the right pieces for the desired outcome a Cleveland will make torque, with less reciprocating weight and rotating mass. don't believe the magazine articles.
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 0
From: Parma, MI
everyone says 351C's dont make good torque. but 302's do? I am sure a stock 351C is putting out as much or more torque than a stock 302 and ford used 302's in millions and millions of trucks. I want to eventually build a 400 for a 73'-79' F150 4x4 that I would one day like to also own. I have heard a 400 with a small block bellhousing are really hard to find if not impossible??? No I do not already have the block but no many people that would have a few laying around.
Posting Legend
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 30,255
Likes: 37
I have driven many different 302 and 351C and 351M builds and I am not a fan of those engines in any heavy vehicles (large cars or trucks). They just have no low end grunt to speak of. This is personal experience not magazine articles. In fact I can't recall reading any magazine articles on the subject. I don't like wheezers either but feel they at least have some potential and are readily available unlike the 351C. To each his own tho, have fun!
Trending Topics
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,931
Likes: 12
From: SW Michigan
351C in a truck
BlueBleeder, I have to agree with EricTorque on this one. and if you start reading some of our forums, you'll see that he and I usually are on the opposite sides of an issue. yes, the 351C can do what you want it to do. If you think you just have to have one, get some flattopped pistons and use the 2V heads and a dual plane intake and headers on the exhaust, with a healthy hydralic cam. But the guys who have a 400 and do the same things are going to be faster than you are. The guts from the C6 you have now could be put into another patterned case, or you could search out an earlier 351M/400 that has the smaller bell pattern on it. Yeah, Ford put the 302 into millions of trucks, but that doesn't mean that we should do it. before you choose the 351, drive some other trucks that already have a built 400, and see if they don't offer the feel that you want. DF, @ his Dad's house
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 0
From: Parma, MI
I dont know what the hell you people did not understand about what I said. I said I AM going to be using a 351C. Did you not read this? Do you just like to argue which is better?? I DID NOT ask you which motor you would use or which you think is better. I understand the 400 is torque motor. OK. I just asked what could be done to the 351C to make good torque. Was it that confusing????
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0
Actually you said 90% sure, which left 10% doubt.
If you're willing to spend the money you can have your cake and eat it too. Have you considered a 393/351C stroker? Compared to a 400, the power difference would be negligible.
It may be helpful to read this article from KEC.
Torqueing Sense
http://www.kec.com.au/articles.html
If you're willing to spend the money you can have your cake and eat it too. Have you considered a 393/351C stroker? Compared to a 400, the power difference would be negligible.
It may be helpful to read this article from KEC.
Torqueing Sense
http://www.kec.com.au/articles.html
Last edited by Brian S; May 28, 2006 at 02:25 AM.
Postmaster
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,270
Likes: 5
From: Delaware
I think that a 351C would make a respectable truck engine. Of course cubic inches are King. A 460 or similar motor will make loads of low RPM torque, but there are many 351W powered trucks on the road.
If I wanted to build a 351C truck motor, I would not use 4V heads. My first choice would be an alloy head like the CHI-2V. Next would be an Aussie 2V head, and third would be a 351C-2V open chambered head.
The 351C examples in the link in Brian's post haqve way too much cam duration for a truck motor. I would selact the venerable Comp cams 255DEH or a Hydraulic Roller with similar timing.
To tie it all together, I would pick pistons that gave me a reasonable DCR. These would have about 15cc dish/valve relief, to give ar CR of 9.27:1 and a DCR of 8.0:1. This is a conservative CR for alloy heads and quench chambers. I would really like to get more lift out of the 255DEH cam with CHI-2V heads. A hydraulic roller would help.
If I wanted to build a 351C truck motor, I would not use 4V heads. My first choice would be an alloy head like the CHI-2V. Next would be an Aussie 2V head, and third would be a 351C-2V open chambered head.
The 351C examples in the link in Brian's post haqve way too much cam duration for a truck motor. I would selact the venerable Comp cams 255DEH or a Hydraulic Roller with similar timing.
To tie it all together, I would pick pistons that gave me a reasonable DCR. These would have about 15cc dish/valve relief, to give ar CR of 9.27:1 and a DCR of 8.0:1. This is a conservative CR for alloy heads and quench chambers. I would really like to get more lift out of the 255DEH cam with CHI-2V heads. A hydraulic roller would help.
Postmaster
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,270
Likes: 5
From: Delaware
Originally Posted by danlee
I.
To tie it all together, I would pick pistons that gave me a reasonable DCR. These would have about 15cc dish/valve relief, to give ar CR of 9.27:1 and a DCR of 8.0:1.
To tie it all together, I would pick pistons that gave me a reasonable DCR. These would have about 15cc dish/valve relief, to give ar CR of 9.27:1 and a DCR of 8.0:1.
If you have some particular combo in mind, let me know and I'll run a few simulations.
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 0
From: Parma, MI
thank you danlee for your responses. I will write them down. Just out of curiosity when were the small bellhousing 400's made? I would like to build one, but figured i would wait till I got an older truck.