Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

351W vs 302 vs 289

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-13-2006, 10:43 AM
  #11  
want_66fastback
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
want_66fastback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location:
Posts: 153
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

Well I am SORT of syartin lean towards a 351W...instead of the original HiPo 289....I know that is sort of changing it from being vintage and all. But it seems sort of messed up any way bening that Ford stamped the wrong Engine code on the fender Aprin...They stamped a "T" instead of a "K". The door and the Title have a "K" on them...I don't know...I am leaning towards a 351W..I think.
want_66fastback is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 12:43 PM
  #12  
myshifter
I ♥ Acer
 
myshifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,364
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

ORIGINAL: Baker

No mention of a 351C makes me sad, it is the best engine Ford ever produced.
Ya I wouldnt go that far, thats for sure. The 4V needs massive amounts of head work, they make no low end torque, you gotta spin them to 9k to make serious power, the blocks were casted horribly and core shift was a major factor and let's not touch on the oiling system. Other than that I loved spinning them up to 8500-9000.
myshifter is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 03:02 PM
  #13  
67Rally
2nd Gear Member
 
67Rally's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 237
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

I don't have timeslips since I wasn't talking about my own. When my stang was on the street, high 12's was attainable with a full interior.

I am only illustrating that a 289 is plenty capable on the street. To discount it so easily is a mistake.
67Rally is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 03:08 PM
  #14  
6mustang6
5th Gear Member
 
6mustang6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,645
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

uh yeah..... a 10 sec car....... probably bored over, stroker, and every thing else. Im talking about a 289 that doesn't have any of those thousands of dollars mods done to it. im talking, a new intake, cam, and maybe heads. If i do that to my 289, there is no way to even dream of hitting 10 seconds in it..... im not near enough rich.
6mustang6 is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 03:11 PM
  #15  
Decurion
2nd Gear Member
 
Decurion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The unemployment epicenter, Detroit, MI
Posts: 432
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

351C the best engine ford ever made? PLEASE! Edelbrock makes aluminum heads for AMC engines and Oldsmobile, but not for the Cleveland, that should say something about it. Remind me again how much heavier is it than a windsor? Its a dinosoar, let it die. I would say the best engine for your appication would be a 302 roller with gt40 heads or something similar. Also since you say its your daily driver, and you didnt mention if you have power steering or not, but remember that the 351w is about 125 lbs heavier than a similar 302 which you may notice with manual steering. Also dont forget the clearance for the shock towers. Either 351 (particularly C, but W too) is going to be wider and make it a bitch to change things like spark plugs and installing headers.
Decurion is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 03:16 PM
  #16  
valley firearms
5th Gear Member
 
valley firearms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
Posts: 2,505
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

I was running 12's in my 289 65 fastback in the 80's. Stock bottom end, stock heads, nice cam, holley, performer, and oh yeah, did I forget to mention NOS? I probably could have had lower times if I were able to squeeze in first. Tire fitment sucks on 65 and 66 unless you narrow and tub. NOS is like adding a second engine.
valley firearms is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 03:45 PM
  #17  
rmodel65
Yukon Cornelius
 
rmodel65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: deep in the heart of dixie GEORGIA
Posts: 11,808
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

actually edelbrock makes cleveland heads! it is a great engine it was dropped from ford line up because of emission concerns it revs quicker than a 351w! actually changing sparkplugs is supposed to eaiser than on the "w" in early cars because of the angle of the heads and the heads flow like mad stock! can u add a cam and 4bbl carb/intake headers to get 400hp in a 351w on a stock 2bbl engine? ummmmmmmm no but on a clev its that easy!!! www.351cleveland.net there is a huge aftermarket for cleve parts since the engine was used past the 4 years it was used in the us 1970-1974! in austrialia go to this link and at the top of the page is a company called aus parts? they sell aussie 2vheads for a great deal!
rmodel65 is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 04:06 PM
  #18  
myshifter
I ♥ Acer
 
myshifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,364
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

ORIGINAL: rmodel65

actually edelbrock makes cleveland heads! it is a great engine it was dropped from ford line up because of emission concerns it revs quicker than a 351w! actually changing sparkplugs is supposed to eaiser than on the "w" in early cars because of the angle of the heads and the heads flow like mad stock! can u add a cam and 4bbl carb/intake headers to get 400hp in a 351w on a stock 2bbl engine? ummmmmmmm no but on a clev its that easy!!! www.351cleveland.net there is a huge aftermarket for cleve parts since the engine was used past the 4 years it was used in the us 1970-1974! in austrialia go to this link and at the top of the page is a company called aus parts? they sell aussie 2vheads for a great deal!
The cleveland is a dinosaur like mentioned and is a dead issue, only diehards like them for restos. Good luck finding a block that is any good, clevelands are so thin and core shift is the major issue. You gotta go through a dozen blocks before you find one good enough to machine. I started with clevelands and they take a ton of work to make serious horsepower. The winsor is a far better engine
myshifter is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 04:09 PM
  #19  
rmodel65
Yukon Cornelius
 
rmodel65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: deep in the heart of dixie GEORGIA
Posts: 11,808
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

the site i listed has aussie cleveland blocks for cheap did u check out the site?
rmodel65 is offline  
Old 05-13-2006, 04:14 PM
  #20  
rmodel65
Yukon Cornelius
 
rmodel65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: deep in the heart of dixie GEORGIA
Posts: 11,808
Default RE: 351W vs 302 vs 289

www.ausfordparts.com


http://www.ausfordparts.com/block.html here the link to engine cores!

apparently u didnt put ur engine together right i was pulling my left front tire with my 351c 2v in my 72 fastabck with an open rear and 3:1 gears!! clevelands make power effortlessly try making 400hp powerfor about 500$ in mods to a windsor! do u really think u can? the problem with 4vs are the ports are to large and the aussie heads is the perfect street head closed chambers and 2v ports!
rmodel65 is offline  


Quick Reply: 351W vs 302 vs 289



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:39 AM.