351M... worth a crap - Page 2 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Talk > Ford Tech
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier All Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 29th, 2009, 06:23 PM   #21
Westside Willy
Senior Member
 
Westside Willy's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-23-07
Location: Sparta/Cedar Springs
Posts: 180
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by junk90xj View Post
your a fuckin idiot

windsor and modified motors are not interchangeable.
Have you read this ?

http://www.mustangandfords.com/techa...ine/index.html



I have always wanted to build a 400 with the Cleveland 4V CLOSED CHAMBER heads, remember these ? the ports are almost twice the size of 351C/351M/400 2V heads [ almost larger than 429/460 ], and have the much better quench. The main drawback of the M/400 are the open chamber heads and previously mentioned retarded timing. More elusive are the Australian heads, 2v ports with closed combustion chamber - once in a while you'll find these on ebay.

WW
Westside Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old October 29th, 2009, 07:08 PM   #22
kkodet
Formerly Route55
 
kkodet's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-21-07
Location: Marine City, Michigan
Posts: 4,157
iTrader: (47)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

I like the 351M

In stock form they came with 130hp but alot of torque (I believe almost 500 ft lb)

They get great mileage: My 1978 F-150 extended cab longbed 4x4 with 35's and 3.55 gears got 20mpg consistently.

My most reliable work truck at my work is a 1978 F-350 Flatbed dually with a four speed and 3.73 gears. Fully loaded this truck gets 15 mpg, and it now has over 400,000 miles on the stock original motor.

The only downside to these motors besides the items already mentioned that I see is the motorcraft 2bbl carb. Although it performs nicely and acts like a 4bbl, it has a tendency to stick open the float, allowing fuel to run raw right down the intake. I've had this happen twice on my work truck, and it also did this on my F-150 at 65 mph, sending so much gas into the motor that it wiped everything out.

As for the bigger 400, it was rated at 160hp. I've had those too, but have never been able to get more than 13mpg out of one.
kkodet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2009, 07:25 PM   #23
deathbypsi
Brian R.
 
deathbypsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-08-07
Location: Temperance Mi
Posts: 2,026
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to deathbypsi
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keithshotrodshop View Post
I like the 351M

In stock form they came with 130hp but alot of torque (I believe almost 500 ft lb)

They get great mileage: My 1978 F-150 extended cab longbed 4x4 with 35's and 3.55 gears got 20mpg consistently.

My most reliable work truck at my work is a 1978 F-350 Flatbed dually with a four speed and 3.73 gears. Fully loaded this truck gets 15 mpg, and it now has over 400,000 miles on the stock original motor.

The only downside to these motors besides the items already mentioned that I see is the motorcraft 2bbl carb. Although it performs nicely and acts like a 4bbl, it has a tendency to stick open the float, allowing fuel to run raw right down the intake. I've had this happen twice on my work truck, and it also did this on my F-150 at 65 mph, sending so much gas into the motor that it wiped everything out.

As for the bigger 400, it was rated at 160hp. I've had those too, but have never been able to get more than 13mpg out of one.
No offence but there is no way a stock 351m made anything near the 500ftlbs you were thinking!Maybe...just maybe they made 300ftlbs stock. And as far as 20mpg.......come on now My fuel injected 4.0 ranger 4x4 doesnt even get that.

*edit* a quick search netted this info.
A stock 79 351m made 156hp @ 4000rpm and 262 ftlbs @ 2000rpm.

Last edited by deathbypsi; October 29th, 2009 at 07:33 PM.
deathbypsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2009, 07:35 PM   #24
kkodet
Formerly Route55
 
kkodet's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-21-07
Location: Marine City, Michigan
Posts: 4,157
iTrader: (47)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deathbypsi View Post
No offence but there is no way a stock 351m made anything near the 500ftlbs you were thinking!Maybe...just maybe they made 300ftlbs stock. And as far as 20mpg.......come on now My fuel injected 4.0 ranger 4x4 doesnt even get that.

*edit* a quick search netted this info.
A stock 79 351m made 156hp @ 4000rpm and 262 ftlbs @ 2000rpm.
I might be wrong on the torque, however the mileage I know I am dead on with. I drove the truck for about 4 years for work and had to keep very accurate mileage records. It used to completely astound my friends that it got that kind of mileage. With those tires and gears though I never tried to tow anything, and I bet it would have sucked. It had a zero to 60 time of about five years.
kkodet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2009, 11:00 AM   #25
bowser
CAD monkey
 
Join Date: 05-18-08
Location: Ypsi, MI
Posts: 11
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

go ahead and get it. if you want anything to go from mild to wild, just get ahold of Tim Meyer. www.tmeyerinc.com he's got everything for the 351M/400, including complete 434 stroker kits.
bowser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2009, 03:50 PM   #26
Superlifted06FX4
MFC
 
Superlifted06FX4's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-22-09
Location: Lowell, IN
Posts: 501
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Superlifted06FX4 Send a message via MSN to Superlifted06FX4 Send a message via Yahoo to Superlifted06FX4
Default

I'm currently building up a 351M into a 400. They seem decent. All of what has been posted is the truth, low hp, high tq.
Superlifted06FX4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 21st, 2009, 09:55 PM   #27
masterbeatty
Senior Member
 
masterbeatty's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-04-08
Location: my house
Posts: 4,156
iTrader: (17)
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Default

i had one in my 77 f150. had an intake, headers, and a 4 barrel, mds. i think that was all but even with 3.55s and 38s thew truck would smoke em easy. wasnt fast but it was pretty quick 0-60 wise. loved wheelin it because it had the power to do anything i asked.
masterbeatty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2010, 02:47 PM   #28
blade262us
Senior Member
 
blade262us's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-04-10
Location: Grant/MI
Posts: 262
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default 351c

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offroadexpy View Post
289 heads will wake a 351 WINDSOR up.

However, 351 Cleveland heads should work on a Modified.

You could remachine M heads till theres nothign left and they wouldnt fit a windsor.
Would like to know where you found that info ? The 351C / M and 400 heads are all the same dimesions as far as the 2 barrel versions . I have bolted M heads on a C to save the cost of having hardened seats installed on a pre 74 C motor . My first car had a 1970 C thing would go like hell . The clevor a couple people made mention of is a 351W block with 351C heads and a special intake . The 302 BOSS is a 302 with 351C 4V heads on it the bolt pattern for the heads is the same as with the location of the dowels so why wouldnt they fit ? I have a 1972 351C that I built a couple yrs ago with the aussie heads I was going to put it in a 1999 Ranger I have but ran into some clearance issues havent decided what I want to do yet . So many misconceptions about the C motor did you know it will bolt right in where any 289/302/351W was sitting ? The motor mount bosses are in the same location as any of these motors and the small block bell housing pattern means you dont even have to change the tranny .
Click image for larger version

Name:	351C.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	44.1 KB
ID:	57509
blade262us is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Talk > Ford Tech

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.16651 seconds with 46 queries