• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

351W in a 64.5-66?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mustangfreak_2001
  • Start date Start date Oct 9, 2004

mustangfreak_2001

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
266
0
16
St Petersburg FL
Oct 9, 2004
#1
  • Oct 9, 2004
  • #1
How easy will a 351w fit in a 64.5-66. I know people have done it, but I did a search and nothing came up.

Do you have to lift the motor out to change the plugs? Or anything like that?


Please post pics if you have them, Im trying to decide what I want as a next pony.
 

ratio411

Founding Member
Apr 21, 2002
3,870
73
109
Pensacola FL
Oct 9, 2004
#2
  • Oct 9, 2004
  • #2
You need special headers.
Plug changes are tight, but I don't see lifting the engine.
Headers are available from a few sources in 1.5" primarys for a street cruiser, or from Hooker in 1.75" for street/strip.
It is a bolt in swap.
The stock oil filter location will work, but some headers, especially the Hookers, get very close. A 90* adapter or remote filter is best.
Tall intakes, like Victor or Air Gap have hood clearance problems.
RPM and Stealth are tight, but not as bad.
Torker 2 is stock intake height for a sleeper look.
Dave
 

mustangfreak_2001

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
266
0
16
St Petersburg FL
Oct 9, 2004
#3
  • Oct 9, 2004
  • #3
but the 351 will fit ina 67-70 with no prob correct?
 

rbohm

Founding Member
Apr 12, 2002
6,698
550
204
tucson,az
Oct 10, 2004
#4
  • Oct 10, 2004
  • #4
the 351w fits fine in both cars, the 67-70 has few issues, jus the need for swap headers is all. in the 65-66 cars, swap headers again are all that is really needed and hedman and hooker both have them. plugs changes are a bit harder, but not so as you would notice. for the 65-66 cars i recomend the shorty swap headers as you have better clearance under the car. in either case the 351w bolt right inplace of where the factory 289/302 went. one other item with the 65-66 cars, the shock tower have a tendency to sag over the years, so after you have the old engine out, and before youinstall the new engine, install an export brace. that will get the shock towers back where they need to be, then install the new engine, and a monte carlo bar as well. they make a BIG difference in the front end rigidity.
 

1995cobraR

Member
Jan 15, 2004
161
10
19
Sandy Springs, GA
Apr 6, 2005
#5
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #5
rbohm said:
the 351w fits fine in both cars, the 67-70 has few issues, jus the need for swap headers is all. in the 65-66 cars, swap headers again are all that is really needed and hedman and hooker both have them. plugs changes are a bit harder, but not so as you would notice. for the 65-66 cars i recomend the shorty swap headers as you have better clearance under the car. in either case the 351w bolt right inplace of where the factory 289/302 went.
Click to expand...

Did you use the Z-bar clutch or a hydraulic clutch? Toploader or T-5?
 
O

Opentracker

20+ Year Stangneter
Feb 4, 2004
516
0
16
Apr 6, 2005
#6
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #6


This is what a Cleveland looks like in a 65-66 car. Both C and W motors bolt in, with the right headers. It's about the same amount of swap work with either motor. I like the Cleveland much better. The Wow! when I open the hood is great. I had this motor in a '64 Ranchero at one point.

John
 
R

roler

New Member
Nov 21, 2001
10
0
0
Apr 6, 2005
#7
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #7
I agree to the above statements. However, the hedman headers don't even come close to my oil filter. Spark plug changing for me is a bit hard on the rear two driver side plugs as thats where my brake booster is. I run a serp belt setup I snagged from the junk yard towncar 5.0 motor. This is a bit older pic. Since then I have put in a monte carlo bar. I have no hood clearance problems with the RPM Air Gap because I have a drop base air filter. It is about 1/4 of an inch from hitting my hood though Please excuse my dirty engine bay. Here is a pic of my 66 stang:

 

xj220

Founding Member
Sep 15, 2000
696
0
17
Apr 6, 2005
#8
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #8
How much does the weight balance change with the swap though?
 
R

roler

New Member
Nov 21, 2001
10
0
0
Apr 6, 2005
#9
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #9
xj220 said:
How much does the weight balance change with the swap though?
Click to expand...

Well, I believe the 351w weighs 65lbs more than the 302 of comparable years. I do have aluminum heads on my engine, so the weight difference should be next to nothing. My old 302 even had an air conditioning compressor which my new 351w does not, so I bet my 351 is even lighter.
 

Edbert

Founding Member
Jul 13, 2002
3,548
32
109
Austin TX
Apr 6, 2005
#10
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #10
roler said:
Well, I believe the 351w weighs 65lbs more than the 302 of comparable years. I do have aluminum heads on my engine, so the weight difference should be next to nothing. My old 302 even had an air conditioning compressor which my new 351w does not, so I bet my 351 is even lighter.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The other thing is that with an aluminum manifold a 351W with aluminum heads weighs LESS than the little 289, but the swap also lowers the cg and the roll-center of the entire vehicle as well. The 351W in mine with a holley, K&N air filter, RPM manifold and a 1-inch phenoloc spacer leaves less than a quarter inch with the Shelby scoop. It definitely would not fit with the stock hood on my 67, I dont see how it would fit in the 65/66 cars at all.

What I (we) need are the lowering type of engine mounts but I cannot find them.
 

xj220

Founding Member
Sep 15, 2000
696
0
17
Apr 6, 2005
#11
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #11
Yet if you put all the aluminum goodies on a 289 or 302, they'd still be lighter. My goal is to even out the weight front to rear as much as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
66 Coupe Progress Thread
  • DTCRAWLEY
  • Apr 19, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
43
Views
958
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 17, 2026
DTCRAWLEY
D
D
After Market fuel rails with Stock fuel lines
  • dropteeth
  • May 1, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
178
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 2, 2026
2000xp8
D
97 V6 suspension upgrades
  • Dale1bre
  • Jan 18, 2026
  • SN95 V6 Mustang Tech
Replies
5
Views
326
SN95 V6 Mustang Tech Jan 19, 2026
Noobz347
J
1996 v6-v8 swap
  • jujuonurmom
  • Oct 28, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
191
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Oct 28, 2025
jujuonurmom
J
S
ECU/PCM ISSUE
  • Santi1015
  • Jun 29, 2026
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
2
Views
100
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jun 29, 2026
Santi1015
S
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific 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?