• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

351M, 351W, 351C, what's the difference?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Killer50stang
  • Start date Start date Sep 6, 2006
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

Killer50stang

New Member
May 11, 2004
632
0
0
Sep 6, 2006
#1
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #1
I know the C=Cleveland and the W=Windsor and the M=Modified, but where is the difference between them all. I have a 351M motor I plan on rebuilding and am curious on the differences.

Here's what I came up with:

Now a 351 Windsor is really a slightly enlarged 289/302, as it's name implies it comes from Fords "Windsor" engine family (a.k.a. the 90-degree V engine family). The thin-wall cast SMALL BLOCK accepts regular sized spark plugs, uses a timing chain in the block, routes water through the intake manifold, features thin main-bearing caps, a very good oiling system, and uses the same heads for 2V & 4V versions. The heads are are small, utilizing in-line valves with relatively small ports. The valves are 1.78" intake and 1.54" exhaust, i.e. the same size as a 289/302. The valve covers are straight (front to rear), attached by 5 bolts, and when removed you can see 351 cast in the lifter valley. The small side-by side (in-line) valves are the dead give-away.
The 351 Cleveland, on the other hand, belongs to Ford's 335 engine family. This thin-wall cast BIG SMALL BLOCK uses the smaller 14mm spark plugs, has a separate front cover (bolted to the block) housing the timing chain and routing water - so that water does not go through the intake manifold, features beefy main caps (wide enough to drill for 4-bolt mains), a poor oiling system, and uses different heads for 2V & 4V versions. The heads make all the difference and these fire breathing babies make this motor the legend it is. On the 4V, the valves are HUGE, measuring 2.19" intake and 1.7n" exhaust (don't remember exactly). Valves this large are only possible via a canted valve arrangement, forming what Ford refers to as a "poly-angle" combustion chamber. The valve covers are not straight - the front is flat and parallel to the ground, but a curve twists the rear parallel to the head. They are attached by 8-bolts and when removed, there is a 4 cast into the corner of the 4V and a 2 cast into the corner of the 2V (at least in 1970). The canted valves are the dead giveaway.

But what about the modified?



Jason
 

85ragtop

BTW, I like dudes.
10 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
823
475
123
NC
Sep 6, 2006
#2
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #2
The modified was a truck engine, I think. I have one (400m) my self in an F-100. I don’t know a lot about them. The truck is slow as dirt, but it can really tow. It was in the truck when I bought it, so I have never really messed with it.
 
R

R2D2

Sep 6, 2006
#3
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #3
if you plan on building an M for performance you should stop now.
 

85ragtop

BTW, I like dudes.
10 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
823
475
123
NC
Sep 6, 2006
#4
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #4
sbftech said:
if you plan on building an M for performance you should stop now.
Click to expand...
I agree, I don’t think there is a lot you do with it. I cant hardly find parts for my truck.
 

feifong

New Member
Apr 4, 2005
319
0
0
mesa
Sep 6, 2006
#5
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #5
wich should u build for perfomance 351w or 351c? do they still make 351c?
 

85ragtop

BTW, I like dudes.
10 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
823
475
123
NC
Sep 6, 2006
#6
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #6
My 351w is working nice. I dont think they make a 351c any more, but I could be wrong.
 
R

R2D2

Sep 6, 2006
#7
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #7
the cleveland was built from 1970-1974 and when done right will walk away from a windsor. If you have never built a cleveland, I wouldnt tackle it for your first build. The windsor is much easier to build.
 

dastang2

Active Member
Dec 11, 2003
2,020
0
46
tx
Sep 6, 2006
#8
  • Sep 6, 2006
  • #8
the M is a boat anchor.
 

muh'stang

If I were rich, I'd make sure all the scoops on my
Sep 26, 2003
277
0
0
Quesnel, B.C., Canada
Sep 7, 2006
#9
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #9
dastang2 said:
the M is a boat anchor.
Click to expand...
the M is a C with better geometry. The C had 5.778" rods, the M had 6.581" rods...the 351m even had 1.98" compression height on the pistons, you could get some 7" rods in one and still have about a 1.48" piston pin height. People rant about how stout a stock 351c can be, and then turn around and call the M a boat anchor.
The M was a truck motor like stated, and grossly detuned at that. The pistons were way down in the hole, the compression was low, the cam was retarded 4 degrees and both the 351m/400 were majorly starved of a/f. Also, as a truck engine parts were built beefy to ensure a long service life.
Not to burst your bubble since you seem to be the know all of the M series Ford engines, I wonder if you think a cleveland is a boat anchor
anything you can do to a 335 cleveland series engine you can do to the M block 335 series engine, except have more room to expand. That said, I'll say it agian, truck engine.
 

Foxfan88

My Grandpa has great wood.
Sep 13, 2004
2,487
4
0
Miami, Ok
Sep 7, 2006
#10
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #10
351M is a destroked 400
 

dastang2

Active Member
Dec 11, 2003
2,020
0
46
tx
Sep 7, 2006
#11
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #11
you said it was built stock like that with all those bad qualities which makes it a boat anchor. nobody is talking about nothing other than stock. also i didn't say anything else other than what i typed, who are you refering to when you say i boasted about a C or calling a C an anchor. my opinion still stand as BOAT ANCHOR
 

QUIKSVT

New Member
May 19, 2006
93
0
0
Sep 7, 2006
#12
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #12
wow. I never knew how amazing M motors were. I wonder why I never see race cars or fast street cars with an M motor?

BOAT ANCHOR <--- the troof
 
R

R2D2

Sep 7, 2006
#13
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #13
Just as long as noone insults the mighty cleveland, cause then its gloves off.
 

795.0pacecar

lover of pudgy polygamists
Jul 11, 2003
480
0
17
Senoia, GA
Sep 7, 2006
#14
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #14
sbftech said:
Just as long as noone insults the mighty cleveland, cause then its gloves off.
Click to expand...

I hear that lol.
 
R

red95gtconvert

New Member
May 29, 2006
382
0
0
Ponca city, OK
Sep 7, 2006
#15
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #15
We used to have an 82 F250 with a 351M in it, that engine was junk and the truck couldn't get out of its own way. My parents were always saying " I wish we would have got the 460 ".
 

muh'stang

If I were rich, I'd make sure all the scoops on my
Sep 26, 2003
277
0
0
Quesnel, B.C., Canada
Sep 7, 2006
#16
  • Sep 7, 2006
  • #16
http://www.tmeyerinc.com/400stroker.html click the "See and Hear it on the dyno" link
400cid based stroker engine, Peak HP 488/Avg. 392, Peak Torque 534/Avg. 503

Im not a big M block fan...but like any engine they can be built to run hard. Watch and listen to the vid.
edit: Check this out also, http://www.tmeyerinc.com/400Fordpg4.htm
 

dastang2

Active Member
Dec 11, 2003
2,020
0
46
tx
Sep 8, 2006
#17
  • Sep 8, 2006
  • #17
muh'stang said:
Im not a big M block fan...but like any engine they can be built to run hard.
Click to expand...

yes they can be built but it's expensive and stock they suck. the winsdor family are alright performers stock
 

muh'stang

If I were rich, I'd make sure all the scoops on my
Sep 26, 2003
277
0
0
Quesnel, B.C., Canada
Sep 9, 2006
#18
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #18
its not that expensive. You get a serious cost break on initial purchase, most people give them away. A timing chain, new pistons, ported heads, cam and intake will get you burnin rubber easily....I wasnt flamin you for calling it a boat anchor, just rather correcting your statement to read "theyre a boat anchor in stock form" next time you pass on that bit of info.
The 2 major problems of the M block engines are the pistons are down almost 0.10" below deck, and the cam was retarded 4 degrees.
Did you listen to the vid? that engine sounds pretty badass
 
7

71swing

Member
Aug 18, 2006
199
0
17
Omaha,NE
Sep 9, 2006
#19
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #19
351 clev. IS bullet proof.

My 73 mach 1 with 351 will run high 11's allday, I really beat the crap out of the car at the track and still running strong.

It is the original block but had been completely rebuilt about 10years ago. Iv'e put about 100passes on it blowing my toploader, drive shafts, and twisting my axles. never had a problem with the motor.

clevland is basiclly a windsor block with some of the water ports filled in so they could put a modified version of the Boss heads on it.
 
R

R2D2

Sep 9, 2006
#20
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #20
71swing said:
clevland is basiclly a windsor block with some of the water ports filled in so they could put a modified version of the Boss heads on it.
Click to expand...
The cleveland is far from a windsor block. What do they share? Bore spacing! Clevelands are far from bulletproof. And Im a cleveland junky. Why do you think we all took windsor blocks in the 80's and used cleveland heads on them?
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
791
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
  • Locked
Engine Might have to get a Dart block but don't want to and if I do, then 363 instead of 331. Thoughts on what I've already bought so far.......
  • from6to8
  • Jul 8, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
2
Views
486
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 8, 2025
Noobz347
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
Might have to get a Dart block but don't want to and if I do, then 363 instead of 331. Thoughts on what I've already bought so far.......
  • from6to8
  • Jul 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
52
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 9, 2025
from6to8
0
V6 to V8 Swap info
  • 02_2v_Curtis
  • Jan 11, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
666
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jan 11, 2026
02_2v_Curtis
0
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?