351W 408 Stroker Kit

69Tool · Jun 18, 2007

bnickel said:
you might seriously consider using some iron Windsor Sr. heads and the 392 stroker, you'll still save money over the 408 stroker kit even with the heads and they will out flow stock or mildly ported 69 351w castings.

What is the difference between a 393 and a 392 stroker crank, I confused myself here. I looked at this crank, http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/351w...016QQitemZ260129339504QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW in the 393 and I read it would work well with the existing rods and the 302 pistons, is this a good deal for the crank? Thanks again and I apologize for my lack of knowledge in this area.

brianj5600 · Jun 18, 2007

I think even a first time porter can work wonders on a stock Ford head. The casting in the ports of the ones I had were terrible. If you stick to just cleaning up the ridges were the molds met in the casting process, it will help a lot. If you turn the thermactor bump into an aerodynamic vane, you will be even more ahead. The key as stated before is to be careful, you can spend more on machine work and parts than a pair of aftermarket heads cost. If all you are doing is a valve job, I say buy a die grinder and get cutting. I went high 11's with early first timer home ported w heads on a 306, stock valves and all. This may be news to some of you, but there were fast Fords before aftermarket heads were available. Again just don't sink a lot of money into stock castings.

bnickel · Jun 18, 2007

69Tool said:
What is the difference between a 393 and a 392 stroker crank, I confused myself here. I looked at this crank, http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/351w...016QQitemZ260129339504QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW in the 393 and I read it would work well with the existing rods and the 302 pistons, is this a good deal for the crank? Thanks again and I apologize for my lack of knowledge in this area.

hmmm, i don't think i'd use that crank. i'd use a scat crank that allows you to use the stock 351w connecting rods and 302 pistons, that way you'll only be replacing the crank and pistons, everything else in the engine stays the same. the scat crank is about the same price or not much more, IIRC

rbohm · Jun 18, 2007

69Tool said:
What is the difference between a 393 and a 392 stroker crank

no difference except how they round off the number behind the decimal point.

knifefighter · Jun 20, 2007

Callin' ya on that one LoL

bnickel said:
i've seen flow charts that show the ported stock 69/70 351w castings outflowing box stock E'brock heads so don't say they won't flow enough air, .

I call bull*****!

Yer gonna need to back that one up with some facts you can verify while sober.

The rest of your post was quite accurate and infomative.

Did he ever verify he had a real C9 casting? I would like to think not everyone gets screwed as badly as I did on my hot '69' engine. (Ya, hot with no oil pressure)

The reason I mention it again, is if you have a different year you might really want to go a different path. . . I know I did!

Danno

knifefighter · Jun 20, 2007

Check this link

Check this link on porting. They kinda like bigger valves before they start porting.

I liked the idea posted earlier about removing casting imperfections and stuff.

http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2000/07/homeporting/

Spot the Green fluid that does not belong on this stock 351W head

http://www.flickr.com/photos/spotzilla/535338901/in/set-72157600325607836/

Danno

bnickel · Jun 20, 2007

i got my info here

http://www.jason.fletcher.net/tech/flowdata/castiron.htm

and here

http://www.jason.fletcher.net/tech/flowdata/aluminum.htm

check out the stage 3 and cnc ported DO casting 351w heads and the stock e'brock performer heads.

i was not exactly correct in that the windsor castsings flowed better than the E'brock heads but nearly indentical and in some case slightly more or slightly less

bnickel · Jun 20, 2007

knifefighter said:
I call bull*****!

Yer gonna need to back that one up with some facts you can verify while sober.

Danno

BTW, not a drinker or druggie either, i'm always sober.

Max Power · Jun 20, 2007

Performers are their worst flowing and only emissions legal heads, if I am not mistaken. There are a number of Edelbrock castings that far outflow them for about the same price. Plus, they have resale value if you change your mind, and they are at the front end of their flow potential rather than the ragged edge. You can't get two cents for ported stock heads.

knifefighter · Jun 20, 2007

My Bad

Whoops!

I missed that you were comparing stage 3 ported stock heads to out of the box Edelbrocks. I wonder what the cost comparison is. I get it now. We both have the same point they need work done.

I was reading some interesting stuff on quench and the area under the valves as being real important in all this, but that went way past my level of understanding.

I took my 82 351W apart and I pretty much think it is toast. bearings are showing copper, the crank and cam are worn and striated, and you could see a big gap between the .040 over pistons and the cylinder wall.

So it looks like my stock 96 351W will have to serve for a while while I find a suitable victim engine for a build up.

Stock 96 351W with Dual Dipsticks
Edelbrock 650 and performer intake
Hedman retrofit headers
Dual Flowmaster 40s
all in a happy lil 66
Traveling to Florida this weekend to get a nice used C4

At least the pony will roll around if I did not mess all that up.

Danno (The things I do for my wife)

bnickel · Jun 20, 2007

Max Power said:
Performers are their worst flowing and only emissions legal heads, if I am not mistaken. There are a number of Edelbrock castings that far outflow them for about the same price. Plus, they have resale value if you change your mind, and they are at the front end of their flow potential rather than the ragged edge. You can't get two cents for ported stock heads.

no that would be the performer 5.0, and i agree that is a crappy head, the performer is actually a fairly decent head.

69Tool · Jun 20, 2007

I was searching through my old Mustang Monthly articles and found a good article on head porting, I have two sets, so I am going to give it a try on the non-numbers matching heads. It is the October 2001 issue, starting on page 43. I will let you know how my first porting job goes...

bnickel · Jun 20, 2007

69Tool said:
I was searching through my old Mustang Monthly articles and found a good article on head porting, I have two sets, so I am going to give it a try on the non-numbers matching heads. It is the October 2001 issue, starting on page 43. I will let you know how my first porting job goes...

what are the casting numbers on these heads? really onlt the C9 and D0 castings are worth porting or putting any money into at all for that matter.

69Tool · Jun 20, 2007

bnickel said:
what are the casting numbers on these heads? really onlt the C9 and D0 castings are worth porting or putting any money into at all for that matter.

Both sets are C90E-G. Thanks again.

351W 408 Stroker Kit

69Tool

Member

brianj5600

Active Member

bnickel

rbohm

knifefighter

New Member

knifefighter

New Member

bnickel

bnickel

Max Power

Active Member

knifefighter

New Member

bnickel

69Tool

Member

bnickel

69Tool

Member

Similar threads

351W 408 Stroker Kit

Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency