5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

331 vs. 347

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 16, 2005 | 08:35 PM
  #1  
nick366's Avatar
nick366
Thread Starter
1st Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 70
Default 331 vs. 347

I know this subject of 331 vs. 347 has been beaten to death, but is there any advantage of one of these size motors over the other when considering subercharging? For those of you with personal erxperience can you give pros or cons to either one of these supercharged motors. Thanks guys.
Old Aug 16, 2005 | 11:38 PM
  #2  
99saleen351r's Avatar
99saleen351r
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,899
From: Assachusetts
Default RE: 331 vs. 347

There is no replacement for displacement....Id get a 347...The oil issue was resolved years ago so dont listen to anyone about that.My good friend has a 347 with a s-trim and it made 586 rwh its a very nice motor and has not burnt a drop of oil.If I was building one I would go 347 cause the bigger the better
Old Aug 17, 2005 | 02:20 AM
  #3  
Pure5.0's Avatar
Pure5.0
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 699
From:
Default RE: 331 vs. 347

Well there is still oil issues with 347s but only on some of the brands.

Example...I called around DSS and CHP and DSS says no oil, but CHP says that their cheapest kit does have oiling issues.

I don't know about the other kits like summits, or other companies.

But I personally am going with a 347 over a 331....but it is your choice.

If you want high hp in the end...go with a 331
If you wan high tq in the end....go with a 347.

I like low end power...that is why I chose a 347
Old Aug 17, 2005 | 02:41 AM
  #4  
primetime5.0's Avatar
primetime5.0
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 9,587
From: United States
Default RE: 331 vs. 347

i had a buddy that ran an eagle 347 never had one problem
Old Aug 17, 2005 | 02:14 PM
  #5  
boxer347's Avatar
boxer347
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 11
Default RE: 331 vs. 347

I've been running a 347 for four years now with no problems at all.
Old Aug 17, 2005 | 02:15 PM
  #6  
boxer347's Avatar
boxer347
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 11
Default RE: 331 vs. 347

It's an Eagle kit BTW.
Old Aug 17, 2005 | 02:37 PM
  #7  
86HOGT's Avatar
86HOGT
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,105
From: Phoenix, AZ
Default RE: 331 vs. 347

I plan on getting a 331, but that really doesn't help you I think. I want to get a low comression 331 and put some FI on it. Either turbo or KB.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
uedlose
The Racers Bench
4
Oct 1, 2015 08:31 PM
Brett Ludlow
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
7
Sep 23, 2015 06:59 AM
JT76
Street/Strip
6
Sep 20, 2015 11:32 AM
EASTIDEE123
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
5
Sep 15, 2015 11:08 AM
EASTIDEE123
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
14
Sep 14, 2015 03:52 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:58 PM.