351 power!

#21
If you are degenerate enough to put an intake that is way passed maxed out on 302 onto a 351, then there is a possibility you will spend $2900 on it.

Kurt
 
#23
So let me ask you guys who know more about these engines. On the 351 which one is the best year wise. I have heard some ppl go for certain years etc. bc of deck height and what not. Idk what I want actually bc I was looking at Ford strokers and a 347 or 363 sounds great with a blower. I have a buddy who is all about NA big cube, and is always in my ear to get a 351 and stroke it. So I have another home town buddy I grew up with that messaged me and told me he has a fresh machined 351 that’s bored 0.40 out of a 1993 f-250. Is that a good one to build off of? I’ve gone through the in and outs and the reason I’d rather stay 302 based is bc I could use everything I have heads, exhaust etc. From what i take I could still use my current exhaust just need 351 swap headers as well as a new intake which I’d probably use the trick flow 351 intake vs trying to find a 351 gt40 lower. I have TFS 190s and I’m guessing those might be a little small on a stroked 351, but I could technically use those heads couldn’t I? Maybe even have those worked so they flow even better, or could always upgrade to 205s. Anyways besides knowing if that’s a good block to build on, what would be a good offer on something like this? I’m not sure what the machine shop charged him, but basically it’s just a 351 cleaned up 0.40 over. No internals etc.
 
#25
a91what said:
190's on a stroker will run out of steam above 5500 or so but the port velocity will be very good through the midrange. It will make a ton of torque, FWIW I have 190's on my 393.
Click to expand...
How much do you think one could port the 190s for max flow? Idk if 351 is what I want to do but a 408 beast would be pretty sweet.
 
#26
I always find the whole 351w vs stock 5.0 conversation to be similar to a dog chasing his tail. Why anybody sits on the fence when considering the two makes you just want to grab them by the shoulders and shake them violently.

1. Simply placing the 351 in place of the stock 302 is an upgrade.
You actually have to spend significant money to stroke a 302 to make it the same size as the 351 is stock. When you do that, a 347 piston has a pin that has to be placed so high up it actually gets into the ring lands and the longer rod now has less than optimal angle issues. Obviously, it works, people do it all the time, but if you’re really comparing apples,..one of the two engines is being forced out of its optimal design parameters.

For whatever reason, the conversation when considering a 351 swap automatically goes straight to “which 351 stroker combo is best“...when in reality,.* see point 1.

A 351 is already 50 freakin cubic inches bigger to begin with..

2. The upgrade justifies itself for the future.

A 351 has proven itself to withstand well in excess of 700whp. A 5.0 would’ve been two chunks of cast iron embedded in the highway at that power level. The “ all I want is 400 hp“ build plan quickly erodes as the speed-power ronavirus 19.1 takes over the body. Before long...there’s a whole bunch of broke sht on the horizon

Everybody nowadays automatically considers a power adder beyond that...The power adder being a SC or turbo. If that’s the case, and rational thought being allowed to steer the decision, Why would anybody need to go further than the 10 psi it’ll take to make that kinda power in a stock block .030 over 351w combo that don’t care how many times you beat on it? And why on earth would you need 393/408/414/427/433/454 cubic inches to do that with?
 
#27
CarMichael Angelo said:
I always find the whole 351w vs stock 5.0 conversation to be similar to a dog chasing his tail. Why anybody sits on the fence when considering the two makes you just want to grab them by the shoulders and shake them violently.

1. Simply placing the 351 in place of the stock 302 is an upgrade.
You actually have to spend significant money to stroke a 302 to make it the same size as the 351 is stock. When you do that, a 347 piston has a pin that has to be placed so high up it actually gets into the ring lands and the longer rod now has less than optimal angle issues. Obviously, it works, people do it all the time, but if you’re really comparing apples,..one of the two engines is being forced out of its optimal design parameters.

For whatever reason, the conversation when considering a 351 swap automatically goes straight to “which 351 stroker combo is best“...when in reality,.* see point 1.

A 351 is already 50 freakin cubic inches bigger to begin with..

2. The upgrade justifies itself for the future.

A 351 has proven itself to withstand well in excess of 700whp. A 5.0 would’ve been two chunks of cast iron embedded in the highway at that power level. The “ all I want is 400 hp“ build plan quickly erodes as the speed-power ronavirus 19.1 takes over the body. Before long...there’s a whole bunch of broke sht on the horizon

Everybody nowadays automatically considers a power adder beyond that...The power adder being a SC or turbo. If that’s the case, and rational thought being allowed to steer the decision, Why would anybody need to go further than the 10 psi it’ll take to make that kinda power in a stock block .030 over 351w combo that don’t care how many times you beat on it? And why on earth would you need 393/408/414/427/433/454 cubic inches to do that with?
Click to expand...
There’s that ray of sunshine!! This makes complete sense. This is were the guidance of someone who knows way more about motors and on top of that building them themselves helps out. So what I don’t get why certain ppl like certain years of this engine to build on. I’m guessing the deck height? Main question really would be, is this 1993 351w out of a f-250 the right or better one to build on? Also what is a decent price to quote on this? I asked what the machine shop charged him but he said it was done 7yrs ago and has just been wrapped in plastic sitting in his storage.
02295BE1-43C6-4F40-812D-5312E67C9EE9.webp
A8CEF55F-39E6-4650-8B26-8BD67524C5BB.webp
52AC2856-6C73-4AA3-AF37-2DAF0B306DA3.webp
72C1F9DE-B2DA-405A-8DFB-826BDA61FEF2.webp
A4C62FB4-156E-42EE-9728-0DC2BAF39200.webp
 
#30
a91what said:
Are you planning on a stock stroke?
Click to expand...
So it’s bored 0.40 currently and he said it was a roller block. I thought it was just a bare block and I would need to buy internals so doing 408 stroke kit from CHP or somewhere was what I was thinking. He just told me he actually has all the original stuff crank, pistons and rods etc that he would toss in with it. So I guess that’s a plus.
 
#31
Yes that's a roller block so you wouldn't need link bar lifters which are pricey.
My 393w is built with a 1969 block, deck height of this block is slightly shorter than more recent 351 blocks (9.48" vs 9.50")
Also the older blocks, like mine, use a 2 piece rear main seal as apposed to 1 piece on the newer blocks.
I originally had a 1974 block but it had some issues my machinist didn't like , he had a prepped 1969 block for sale so that's
how I ended up with it.
I've been told the older blocks are stronger but not sure how true that is, I do know there have been some cracking issues on
some of the roller blocks, just a fyi.
www.corral.net

Must Read....PSA for Windsor Roller block guys

There is a cracking problem that is becoming an epidemic, and its only among the 351 roller blocks, the F4TE. We are averaging 2-3 cracked blocks for every 10 we get in. The crack is in the same spot every single time. The cracks are noticed easily by eye when you remove the number 2 and...
www.corral.net www.corral.net
 
Last edited:
#32
Steel1 said:
Yes that's a roller block so you wouldn't need link bar lifters which are pricey.
My 393w is built with a 1969 block, deck height of this block is slightly shorter than more recent 351 blocks (9.48" vs 9.50")
Also the older blocks, like mine, use a 2 piece rear main seal as apposed to 1 piece on the newer blocks.
I originally had a 1974 block but it had some issues my machinist didn't like , he had a prepped 1969 block for sale so that's
how I ended up with it.
I've been told the older blocks are stronger but not sure how true that is, I do know there have been some cracking issues on
some of the roller blocks, just a fyi.
www.corral.net

Must Read....PSA for Windsor Roller block guys

There is a cracking problem that is becoming an epidemic, and its only among the 351 roller blocks, the F4TE. We are averaging 2-3 cracked blocks for every 10 we get in. The crack is in the same spot every single time. The cracks are noticed easily by eye when you remove the number 2 and...
www.corral.net www.corral.net
Click to expand...
That’s interesting, I got him to snap a pic of the stamp, weird thing is there is no T, is this a stamping issue? I did a quick google and have saw a few topics on this.
373FD43A-AA8A-4796-9044-E0CE551C1DF3.webp
 
#33
The special years you hear people reference is for the roller blocks. I think they were 93-95 with the F4 casting (I know someone will correct me if I am mistaken - and better to have correct information than not).
 
#34
So he said give him $300 for all of it!!! 150 for the block and 150 for machine shop. Plus I get a new engine stand with it and what not, gaskets etc.obky down side is it’s back in my home town and that’s a good 5-6 hour drive south. Guess it’s a good reason to go home visit the parents, hit the beach and grab a motor!
 
  • Hell Yeah!
  • Like
Reactions: Essn95 and General karthief
#37
That's a decent deal! I have a fresh 1984 block that's +.030" that I got with a stand for $150, but the guy was in a bind. People argue that the roller blocks are better, but they're also prone to cracking around the cam bearing journals. not all, but some. I think you got a good deal. Put some good heads on it and go to work!
 
  • Like
Reactions: General karthief
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Forums
Menu