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

Not sure which set of these I should use.

  • Thread starter Thread starter 68stang351
  • Start date Start date Jun 1, 2011

68stang351

Founding Member
May 16, 2002
850
9
39
Savoy TX
Jun 1, 2011
#1
  • Jun 1, 2011
  • #1
After I put TW heads on my 351w in my 68, I had planned on putting the 69 351w heads on my 90. But I just recently bought a set of GT40P's for like 60$ and a trade of a nitrous plate.

I'm not really sure which heads I want to go on the 90. If I use the GT40P heads, I believe I can re-use my beehive springs and roller rockers from my E7's. Is this correct? But then I have to find a set of headers too.

If I use the 69 351w heads, I'll either have to use the stock stamped rockers or buy new ones.


They both have the a 1.84 intake valve (vs E7's 1.78), but the the P heads have the same size exhaust valve as the E7 (1.46) while the 351w head has a 1.54 exhaust. It looks like I would gain compression with the 351w head also.

I wonder which one has the better chamber design?
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,260
17,945
224
Massachusetts
Jun 1, 2011
#2
  • Jun 1, 2011
  • #2
The p heads angled spark plug puts the electrode tip in a better location. Those are the heads I would prefer to use.

You can reuse your e7 springs if using the stock cam...anything more aggressive and you'll want performance springs. Keep in mind, e7 springs aren't great either...but better than the explorer stuff.

You can use regular headers with some 90* boots and plug boot protectors
 

1bad67sbf

Active Member
Nov 24, 2010
674
1
29
N. VA
Jun 1, 2011
#3
  • Jun 1, 2011
  • #3
i would say go with the 351 heads, they will flow better and are a good set of heads. sell the 40's and use that money toward getting new roller rockers and springs. im sure you know but in the classic car world 351W heads are highly recommended for good performance from cast heads.
 

1bad67sbf

Active Member
Nov 24, 2010
674
1
29
N. VA
Jun 1, 2011
#4
  • Jun 1, 2011
  • #4
did you unass your smog stuff? if not the 351's most likley wont work due to no air ports in the rear of the heads.
 

68stang351

Founding Member
May 16, 2002
850
9
39
Savoy TX
Jun 1, 2011
#5
  • Jun 1, 2011
  • #5
Mustang5L5 said:
The p heads angled spark plug puts the electrode tip in a better location. Those are the heads I would prefer to use.

You can reuse your e7 springs if using the stock cam...anything more aggressive and you'll want performance springs. Keep in mind, e7 springs aren't great either...but better than the explorer stuff.

You can use regular headers with some 90* boots and plug boot protectors
Click to expand...

As stated, my E7's already have aftermarket beehive springs, it has an E cam. Didn't know I could use regular headers!

1bad67sbf said:
i would say go with the 351 heads, they will flow better and are a good set of heads. sell the 40's and use that money toward getting new roller rockers and springs. im sure you know but in the classic car world 351W heads are highly recommended for good performance from cast heads.
Click to expand...

1bad67sbf said:
did you unass your smog stuff? if not the 351's most likley wont work due to no air ports in the rear of the heads.
Click to expand...

Smog stuff is long gone.
That was my original plan, to use the 351w heads, until this deal came along.
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Jun 1, 2011
#6
  • Jun 1, 2011
  • #6
I'd be tempted to use the GT40Ps. Unless the Windsor heads flow a bunch more wind than the 40Ps, the 40Ps are going to have a more updated combustion chamber and more modern ports, thus would likely be the better head. But I have no idea what the flow numbers look like between the two heads, so I can't say for sure.
 

Mr. Rustypwnz

Advanced Member
Jun 1, 2005
1,761
63
69
indianapolis/ valdosta ga
Jun 2, 2011
#7
  • Jun 2, 2011
  • #7
1bad67sbf said:
i would say go with the 351 heads, they will flow better and are a good set of heads. sell the 40's and use that money toward getting new roller rockers and springs. im sure you know but in the classic car world 351W heads are highly recommended for good performance from cast heads.
Click to expand...

p heads blow the 351 heads away stock for stock!
 

1bad67sbf

Active Member
Nov 24, 2010
674
1
29
N. VA
Jun 2, 2011
#8
  • Jun 2, 2011
  • #8
whats the date code on the 351's?
 

85_SS_302_Coupe

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end
15 Year Member
Nov 11, 2003
6,945
1,598
223
Northern KY
Jun 2, 2011
#9
  • Jun 2, 2011
  • #9
The Ps may have smaller exhaust valves but they actually flowed more on the exhaust side than the non P version did, even with the smaller valves. It has to do with port shape and port velocity.

That said, if i had to choose one or the other i would probably just use the Ps because you won't have to deal with changing them over to screw in studs and then deal with guide plates and buy different rockers. The Ps are a straight bolt on except for crappy valve springs and the header issue.

I have C90E's on my 347, but they've been ported so much they're not really a good comparison.
 

68stang351

Founding Member
May 16, 2002
850
9
39
Savoy TX
Jun 2, 2011
#10
  • Jun 2, 2011
  • #10
I'll probably just use the P's then, and swap over my aftermarket springs and roller rockers from my E7's.

Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

9
Engine Donor '00 Mountaineer meet '91 Fox
  • 91firecracker
  • May 11, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
41
Views
919
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 28, 2026
91firecracker
9
J
MEED HELP!! 86 mustang
  • Jacob0121
  • Jan 23, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
348
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 25, 2026
CAMTWO1070
S
5.0 Rebuild
  • smittys7up
  • Nov 29, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
579
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Dec 20, 2025
Noobz347
Any 1 find any decent blackfriday sales for Foxbody or car stuff?
  • rednotch
  • Nov 29, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
18
Views
773
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Dec 19, 2025
rednotch
Considering widening my rear wheels, would like to verify my thoughts on fitment
  • 2000xp8
  • Jul 9, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
421
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 15, 2026
FastDriver
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
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?