• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

OT: 351w vs 351c

  • Thread starter Thread starter rudeone707
  • Start date Start date Mar 16, 2004
R

rudeone707

New Member
May 17, 2003
1,829
0
0
Fairfield, Ca
Mar 16, 2004
#1
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #1
I was at the gym last night and 2 people were arguing about which is better. So which is better and why?
 

StangerJon

New Member
Mar 20, 2003
141
0
0
Minnesota
Mar 16, 2004
#2
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #2
I thought that in stock form the 351c was better performing, but the 351W had a better aftermarket.
 

GTJake

Founding Member
Oct 28, 2002
3,049
0
56
Ann Arbor, MI
Mar 16, 2004
#3
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #3
Windsors have a better oiling system. The only sweet thing about Clevelands were their insane flowing heads from the factory. My friend has a 393 Cleveland in his fox and runs 11's N/A on Nittos with 130 mph traps.

Jake
 

89 blue lx

Founding Member
Nov 18, 2001
1,936
0
37
FSU in tallahassee GO SEMINOLES!
Mar 16, 2004
#4
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #4
StangerJon said:
I thought that in stock form the 351c was better performing, but the 351W had a better aftermarket.
Click to expand...
ditto
 

SorsCode

20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 10, 2003
1,022
432
113
St. Louis, MO
Mar 16, 2004
#5
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #5
351C would rev much higher... better block also...
 

Joes95GT

New Member
Jan 23, 2003
3,132
1
0
Delaware
Mar 16, 2004
#6
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #6
A Cleveland motor would run it's ass off, and thats all there is to it. There is nothing similar between the W and C motors. Blocks, heads, oiling systems, fuel systems, manifolds, they were all different. The only thing I'm unsure about is cams (which I think were different) and rotating assemblies.

The Cleveland aftermarket never made it like the Windsor market did because there was no real "better" design of any part, back in the day. What ever part was used on the Cleveland motor, was used for raw power. No one could make anything that out performed the factory Cleveland part.

Joe
 

cb18201

New Member
Oct 25, 2003
1,140
0
0
CT
Mar 16, 2004
#7
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #7
cleveland = 4 bolt main, windsor = 2 bolt main
 
O

otis

Founding Member
Oct 17, 2002
115
0
16
Alberta
Mar 16, 2004
#8
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #8
Actually not all 351C's are 4 bolt main, the majority of them are 2bolts just like the windsor, however all Boss 351C's and 1972 351HO's (a fairly rare mustang) are 4 bolts. All 1970 MAch1's that have a 351C in them are 2bolts. As for modifying them my dad has tons of old articles on buliding 351 C's for more power and specifically for drag applications. Its just hard to have a large aftermarket when the motor was only made from 1970-74 (maybe 75). The windsors were way more readily produced and our aftermarket technology has way surpassed the technology available in the 1970's. If your going to build a 351 now you might as well go with a windsor.
 

Car Nut

Founding Member
Jul 6, 2000
1,176
1
37
Snellville, Georgia (Atlanta area)
Mar 16, 2004
#9
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #9
What did Saleen use in there S-351 Mustangs? I believe it was a windsor. I've not heard a negative word about the Saleen 351, pretty much a very desired car. That's my motivation for considering a 351.

Aftermarket power never hurts much either, which sure has helped the 302.
 

408stroker5.0

The world would be a better place if all males jus
Mar 10, 2004
639
0
16
Bonnyville, Alberta, CANADA
Mar 16, 2004
#10
  • Mar 16, 2004
  • #10
SorsCode said:
351C would rev much higher... better block also...
Click to expand...

No offence man, but you are dead wrong and so is MOST of the other reply's.
A Windsor block is definetly tougher and can widstand higher RPM especially the Windsor 69' Blocks. The reason for this is the fact that the Cleavlend Bore's are not very thick and thus can not stand high amounts of power or RPM. Infact you are are asking for trouble when you start making over 500HP with these blocks or running Nitrous. Back in the day the Cleavlend would have been better because of there high flowing heads right out of the factory. Windor's never really came out with a great head out of the factory. Not only that but the 351C are heavier, wider and taller. The Windsor blocks may only be a 2 bolt main, but the main caps are quite thick (especially 69') and are very strong. The Block's also have a descent oiling system and are quite tough as well. When you use a girdle and ARP studs W Blocks are known to handle upwards of 700HP. There is no way a Cleav. could handle that for long. Overall a Windsor has a way better aftermarket availability, is lighter, stronger, and more compact. Cleavlends were definetly a good engine back in the day and are a part of the mustang heritage, but they are a thing of the past man. Stroked Windsor's are in, and with name's like AFR, Edelbrock, Scat, Trick Flow, etc. it's pretty darn hard to beat em.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
New here, just saying hi.
  • Tank Mechanic
  • Nov 1, 2025
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
2
Views
168
The Welcome Wagon Nov 2, 2025
nickyb
G
Help! Radio, door chime fuse keeps blowing.
  • goofyfoot53
  • Sep 9, 2025
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech
Replies
1
Views
299
2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech Sep 9, 2025
91AOD5.0LX
G
Fox Tire Size for 16" Pony Wheels on 1984 LX Convertible
  • gw7
  • Jun 24, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
119
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 25, 2026
Qtrhrse23
Q
Which SN95 axles for 93 LX, disc brakes, ABS rings?
  • dan50
  • Mar 22, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
463
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 3, 2026
7-UP BILL
Progress Thread The Mach Returns - Update/build thread
  • squeak93
  • Feb 20, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
384
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Monday at 2:45 PM
squeak93
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 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?