Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W

Page 1 of 2  
Hi,
I am working on a new website www.Ford351.com and need pictures of Ford 351 engines. I had a '72 Ford Torino with a 351C engine but no good engine pictures before restoration.
Specifically, I am looking for 351 C or 351 W engines. Pictures of a "Boss 351" or 351 engines factory installed in non-Ford cars (Pantera, Ski Nautique, Jeep) will be interesting.
Please do not mail me pictures of your cars. I am looking for Ford 351 engine pictures.
Images to snipped-for-privacy@Ford351.com .
Thanks,
snipped-for-privacy@Ford351.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The internet has many pictures of all sorts of engines. Use Google "images" as a search tool, and just Google "web" to research the engines.
Jason
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I wonder if you know the Cleveland and the Windsor are not related. Except that they were both in Ford cars and they sound alike because of the 351. Some parts can be made to swap with a lot of machine work. The Cleveland had a much shorter run and is more interesting in other ways. Try to hang onto it.
If you wanted to do something really interesting get into the FE big blocks.
disston
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
disston wrote:

They had the same block and crank, didn't they? (As if that makes a difference.)

And then there was the 351M (modified), which was closer to the C than to the W IIRC.
--
Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast.
That's why stereo has two channels.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clifto wrote:

The W and C blocks weren't even close, although IIRC, Cleveland heads could be made to fit on a Windsor with some modifications and a special intake manifold. I don't remember the particulars though, that was a looong time ago. The 351C and 351M are 'similar' but there is very little interchange between the two. For all intents and purposes, they are all three distinctly different engines.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clifto wrote:

Oh heaven's no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_335_engine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Windsor_engine#351W
are correct on some days. Read up.
Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
the only thing the Cleveland and Windsor share in common is the bell housing bolt pattern. other than that, they are 2 completely different engines.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom wrote:

And iron blocks / iron heads. And bore spacing. And bore size(4.00" - also shared with the 352 FE engine). And stroke(3.5" - also shared with the 352 FE engine). And displacement(352 cid - also shared with the 352 FE engine). And head bolt pattern. And 3.00" main bearings(on some).
Rob
other than that, they are 2 completely different engines.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
blah blah blah. go ahead and get technical on me. ;-)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom wrote:

Yeah, sorry about that. Most folks interested in Fords & Mustangs know all that stuff already, & that the Cleveland engine was developed to use a set of heads that were originally designed for & bolted to a Windsor engine.
Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's a new one.
As far as I'm aware, the Cleveland was designed completely independently of the Windsor to eventually be used as a Windsor replacement, and the 4V heads only ever saw use on the Windsor based Boss 302 (which required an inlet manifold unique to that particular engine). The problem with the Cleveland was that it was a horrible engine as far as emissions go, and had a very short run in the US because it couldn't meet the emissions requirements without being strangled to death.
It ran for quite some time here in Australia, but our emissions laws weren't so stringent.
-- Regards, Noddy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noddy wrote:

Technical question: Same bore, same stroke, semi-interchangeable heads... why is one more polluting than the other?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The Cleveland heads.
While they'll bolt onto a Windsor block with little trouble, they're completely different to a Windsor in that the Cleveland's flow characteristics promotes poor atomization at low to mid rpm, and plenty of incomplete combustion.
-- Regards, Noddy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noddy wrote:

So would running them on LPG solve that problem? I mean atomization isn't going to be an issue with gas is it?
And I assume the poor atomization at low rpm is associated with better flow at high rpm?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They work well on lpg, provided you run a good valve seat insert, as Cleveland heads are made from a very soft grade of cast iron, and will suffer from massive valve seat recession in a big huury.

It is.
Anyone who owned a 4V Cleveland will tell you that the things do next to nothing under 4000rpm other than suck massive amounts of fuel. Once they hit that rpm band, they really take off and become a bit of a fire breather. It used to be quite a task to get any performance from the things back in the GTHO Falcon days if you ran the standard 6150rpm rev limiter, as you'd only have a couple of seconds of "play time" in the lower gears between getting on the cam and needing to change gear before the rev limiter would try to blow the mufflers off the car :)
The 2V's weren't anywhere near as bad, but still suffered from a horrible exhaust port.
-- Regards, Noddy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Patrick wrote:

The canted valves & semi-hemi chambers, while great for moving a lot of air & making high rpm power, were especially bad at passing unburned hydrocarbons & high oxides of nitrogen.
Rob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noddy wrote:

The heads were designed for the Boss 302, production of which pre-dates any Cleveland/335 engine. The cooling arrangement was slightly modified for the 335 family block.
Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Any production Cleveland engine anyway.
The Cleveland is known to have existed in pre production form before the Boss 302 ever went into production, and the popular theory is that Ford made the two engines share a lot of physical dimensions, like cylinder head bolt spacings for example, to reduce machine tool production costs. The failure of the Tunnel Port Windsor head lead a couple of engineers to experiement with the new Cleveland head on the Windsor short motor, and the outcome of that experiment was the Boss 302 we know today.

As far as I can tell, the only difference between Boss 302 cylinder heads and early production 4v cylinder heads is the screw in studs, and slightly bigger valves of the Boss head. Laid side by side on a bench, the gasket faces look identical.
-- Regards, Noddy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noddy wrote:

I'll buy that.

There is a minor difference in the water jacket openings not reflected in the gaskets.
Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://www.projectbronco.com/History/history_of_the_ford_351m.htm 'The "M", by the way, does not stand for anything. Ford only used the "M" designation to distinguish it from the 351 W (Windsor) and the now discontinued 351C (Cleveland). The "M" designation has now become know to mean "modified" or "Michigan", even though the 351M was produced at both the Cleveland foundry and Michigan casting center.'
I had one once. I did everything to that truck. It sure hurt when I sent it to the crusher. -- (||) Nehmo (||)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.