CJ? Engine Well Clearance ?

65 Mustang Considering 351W. Restorer says he thinks the fit between exhaust manifolds at the shock towers and at steering box is extremely tight and will be a major headache for tune ups. Anyone know for sure? I didn't think there was that much difference between the 289 and the 351W. CJ? Hey! Spikey Likes IT! 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike
Loading thread data ...

This swap has been done many, many times. The 351 Windsor is just a raised deck version of the 260/289/302. Clearance around the steering box is identical to the smaller block. The taller deck height puts the spark plugs closer to the shock towers, true, but how often are you going to change the plugs anyway? I would worry about a restorer who is not aware of the ubiquity of Windsor-into-1st-gen swaps.

180 Out
Reply to
one80out

The fit if fine. Although the 351 is taller and wider it still fits between the shock towers and you can buy headers specifically made for this swap. Changing plugs is no problem. I've had 351Ws in 4 of my projects. I'm not sure where your getting the CJ reference, though. I never heard of that.

Reply to
Mark C.

You've never heard of me? Everyone in the uncivilized world knows what I am.

The stock W exhaust manifold *is* wider at the rear than a 289 part. I have no experience with the fit in an early car, though. An other alternative might be the HP 289 castings as they don't "flare out" like the W's.

Reply to
CobraJet

WOW! Somebody never heard of you? Seems to me it was in all the papers.... LOL

Hey thanks, CJ

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

Sorry for throwing you for a loop with the CJ reference.... but you'll see what that refers to in one of the responses.

Any of those projects a 65 or 66? Ford made the 67s a bit bigger.

I knew the engine would fit, but the installer had a 351W in a later year so he had more room, and wanted to make sure I knew it was going to be tight around the towers and steering box. So I figured I had better do some follow up before getting in to deep. After all, I sure would not want to have to jack up the engine every time I wanted to clean/change the plugs.

Thanks for the help.

By the way, happen to recall what kind of gas mileage you got with the

351W. W>The fit if fine. Although the 351 is taller and wider it still fits between

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

I knew the engine would fit, and was pretty sure about the differences between the 289 and the 351W, but had to make sure before making the decision.... I've run 289s for years, but this is the first experience with the 351W.

He had a 351W in a later model coupe which wasn't a problem, but wanted me to know that compared to the 289, it was going to be a bit tighter around the towers and steering box before I made the decision.

Thanks for the assist.

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

It was, but I got upstaged by that pesky tsunami.

Sure.

Reply to
CobraJet

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

The windsor will fit without a problem. If you really want a challenge cram a CobraJet in there! :) (I mean the engine not the person)

Reply to
Merc

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

So, anyone got an idea what I'm going to expect for gas mileage?

That has got to be the last part of the equation since I have grave doubts that gas will ever get back to 35 cents a gallon... and I never did finish getting my silverware and glassware sets... but I did finish the dinnerware set... and the first wife found a use for it but I kept ducking.... : ) LOL Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

That depends on what you do to the 351 and how you drive her. IIRC, there are stroker crank kits all the way up to 427 c.i. for this puppy. ;-) The thrill factor is inversely related to the gas mileage!

Reply to
John

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

Buddha Burgers? Crispy Commies? Dead Dudes? Water Buffalo Kabobs? Skyraider Surprise? Voodoo Violence? Cobra Chop-o-matic? In a Spooky Minute? Freedom Fighter Fries?

Oh, sorry... flashbacks..... : )

Somebody musta watched AMCs rerun of Apocalypse Now....: )

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

Someone has it on DVD. It lifts my spirits.

Reply to
CobraJet

I lift my own spirits... at least until the bottle is empty..... : )

And I got the extended version DVD : )

Sometimes I just want to buy a box of Ivory soap flakes and mix up a batch.... but my neighbors a nice pe>>

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!

1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Reply to
Spike

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.