Brought to you in part by:

M&M Restoration & Tool Supply Store

Great deals on auto restoration supplies!

.


NOTICE! The old Mustangsandmore.com is a read-only archive.
Currently the Search function is inoperative, but we are working on the problem.

Please join us at our NEW Mustangsandmore.com forums located at this location.
Please notice this is a brand new message board, and you must re-register to gain access.

  Mustangsandmore Forum Archive
  '64 1/2 to '68 1/2 -- The Classic Mustang
  Just Out Of Curiosity On Engines

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Just Out Of Curiosity On Engines
christang
Gearhead

Posts: 262
From: Colliers, WV, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 06-23-2005 11:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for christang        Reply w/Quote
Saw these engines on a previous post...
www.mustangengines.com

Just out of curiosity...What if you put the 302 with 350hp or 373hp, and then the 351W with 365hp in our '65 Falcon, what would be the real difference in the performance between the 302's vs. the 351 in the quarter mile and overall performance, with everything else being equal? (gears, tranny, driver, etc.) ...Christine

[This message has been edited by christang (edited 06-23-2005).]

68mustang351w
Gearhead

Posts: 558
From: San Jose, Ca
Registered: Sep 2004

posted 06-24-2005 01:34 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68mustang351w        Reply w/Quote
Everything being equal (besides engine), i would imagine the 302 would rev faster than the 351. It would definitely weigh less than the 351 BUT since the torque ratings would be different (351windsors are usually very torquey) and torque is what actually gets you moving, everything else might not matter. (horse power is more for top speed, keeps you moving). Someone with a better grasp on these things might have a different opinion but i think a 351w would beat a 302 MOST of the time... David F.

Mike W
Gearhead

Posts: 135
From: CA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 06-24-2005 02:19 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mike W        Reply w/Quote
My 69 Mach has a 351W. It feels much stronger taking off from a stoplight than my 65 with a 302. The extra torque makes a difference that you can feel.

lalo302
Journeyman

Posts: 16
From: long beach, CA, usa
Registered: May 2005

posted 06-24-2005 11:16 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for lalo302        Reply w/Quote
If I was to goto the junkyard and look for a pair of heads for my 302 wut would be cheaper 351 4v heads or 1969 351w heads? Wuts the average price? Do any of these heads bolt right up or they need some mods?

warhorse1
Gearhead

Posts: 193
From: camino
Registered: Sep 2004

posted 06-24-2005 12:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for warhorse1        Reply w/Quote

have a 351 in a 65 ranchero...what a b!tch to stuff in without whompin on the shock towers or even better cuttin and plating them. mustang and early farcon ain't the same...shock towers are different and frame rails are 26" in the falcon and at the motor mounts its only 20" it'll fit (351W) but it's tight...as in headers only no way with cast iron or long tubes if i had it to do over again i'd usa a 302 and just stroke it out to 347

------------------
I know my limits....I just pass-out before I reach them
Run what ya brung and hope like hell ya brought enough.
Proudly annoying the neighbors for over 30 years

Fastymz
Moderator

Posts: 22791
From: Reno Nv M&M #1240
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 06-24-2005 04:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fastymz        Reply w/Quote
The 400hp 351w is only $55 more then the 373hp 302 I'd bet it makes plenty more torque too.
The 351w 365hp motor is sold complete from carb to pan. It's real close to build I did on my 351w. I was told it should make about 360-380hp and 420plus torque. I can tell you that my 360hp ? pulls real hard from 2000-6000rpm.
I think it should came down to what would fit the best.
I'd say if you want close to 400hp and mild running motor go with the 351w.

I've had about 10 people tell me. They were suprised how fast my car was,because the motor sounds almost stock.

------------------
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs

65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc.

My Pics

Fastymz
Moderator

Posts: 22791
From: Reno Nv M&M #1240
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 07-10-2005 01:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fastymz        Reply w/Quote
So which one are you going to get?

------------------
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs

65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc.

My Pics

christang
Gearhead

Posts: 262
From: Colliers, WV, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 07-12-2005 11:58 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for christang        Reply w/Quote
Scoop...Uhhh...I think we'll stick with the current 289 instead, add a pair of 165 AFR's, a set of Tri-Y's, and a cam change that comes on from around 1,500-6,000 rpm's! Might need to go to a Performer RPM manifold too.

What do you think?

[This message has been edited by christang (edited 07-12-2005).]

kcode
Gearhead

Posts: 3415
From: alvaton,ky,usa Suburb of Bowling Green, M&M #79, MCA #29208
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-12-2005 01:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for kcode        Reply w/Quote
Why not make the best of both worlds, stroke a 302 to 347, get the Hp and Tq of a 351 in a small 302 package.

------------------
Mike Golliver
MCA Gold Card Judge-Modifieds
65 Kcode coupe 347 stroker modified 5-speed MCA Retired
66 convertible-3 dueces and a 5-speed with a 289
01 Mustang GT Convt
05 F-150 4x4 CrewCab

christang
Gearhead

Posts: 262
From: Colliers, WV, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 07-12-2005 02:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for christang        Reply w/Quote
Mike...Now you're talking!

Fastymz
Moderator

Posts: 22791
From: Reno Nv M&M #1240
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 07-12-2005 08:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Fastymz        Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by christang:
Scoop...Uhhh...I think we'll stick with the current 289 instead, add a pair of 165 AFR's, a set of Tri-Y's, and a cam change that comes on from around 1,500-6,000 rpm's! Might need to go to a Performer RPM manifold too.

What do you think?

[This message has been edited by christang (edited 07-12-2005).]


I say go with a comp cam 270s or the girly man 'H' model like I did
Great cam from idle to 6000rpm so far.
RPM heads and intake 700dp and your off.

------------------
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs

65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc.

My Pics

68 S-code GT
Gearhead

Posts: 3835
From: Sayreville, NJ, US
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 07-13-2005 11:10 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for 68 S-code GT        Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by lalo302:
If I was to goto the junkyard and look for a pair of heads for my 302 wut would be cheaper 351 4v heads or 1969 351w heads? Wuts the average price? Do any of these heads bolt right up or they need some mods?

Kind of thought the heads were the same in the early years.

All times are ET (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Mustangsandmore Front Page

Copyright 2006, Steve LaRiviere. All Rights Reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47d

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

[Build a free Mustangsandmore.ws Home Page!]

[Posting Pictures]

[About M&M][Members' Pics]

[M&M Conventions] [M&M Mug Shots] [Tech Articles]

[M&M Bookstore] [M&M Restoration & Tool Supply Store]