351C 2v

Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with a
351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner. Why
do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 01:26:51 -0500, James Friedel rearranged some
electrons to form:

> Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with a
> 351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner. Why
> do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
> with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz

Can't speak for Mustang hood clearance, but the Edelbrock Performer 351C2V
works for me along with a Holley 4160 600 CFM.
YMMV


--
David M (dmacchiarolo)
http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled
T/S 53
sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 8 days 19:10

James Friedel wrote:
> Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with
a
> 351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner.
Why
> do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
> with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz

Depending on what you are doing to the car, consider a set of 351
Australian heads. Breathing will improve and compression will be raised
slightly.

I'm restoring a '72 mach1 with a 351C. I purchaced a set of aussie heads off
of ebay and I'm getting the Edlebrock "Performer 351C 2V" I'm using an
Edlebrock 650 cfm carb, it's very similar to a Carter 625 cfm that was on
the 351C on my '73 Ranchero. That car would definitely MOVE, considering
it's weight and size.

Can't wait to get the new Cleveland back from the machine shop and get it in
the mach!!!

Good luck!

-Dave

"James Friedel" > wrote in message
...
> Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with a
> 351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner. Why
> do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
> with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz
>

James Friedel wrote:
> Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with a
> 351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner. Why
> do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
> with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz

I would definitely recommend a dual plane intake manifold - much more
street friendly than a single plane. You should *at least* be using a
600 CFM rated carburetor - preferably a 650 CFM rated carburetor.

I have a Holley 750 CFM double pumper and a Edelbrock Performer 351 on
my 377 CID stroked 351C. I get 340 RWHP @ 5,000 RPM and 400 lb-ft
torque @ 3,300 RPM.

Yet another $.02 worth from a proud owner of a 1970 Mach 1 351C @
http://community.webshots.com/album/18644819fHAehGJAjt

How does that double pumper do on the street? Bet it sucks gas.

--
Mark C.
--
I don't CLAIM to know everything. I just do.




"Grover C. McCoury III" > wrote in message
...
> James Friedel wrote:
>> Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with a
>> 351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner. Why
>> do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
>> with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz
>
> I would definitely recommend a dual plane intake manifold - much more
> street friendly than a single plane. You should *at least* be using a 600
> CFM rated carburetor - preferably a 650 CFM rated carburetor.
>
> I have a Holley 750 CFM double pumper and a Edelbrock Performer 351 on my
> 377 CID stroked 351C. I get 340 RWHP @ 5,000 RPM and 400 lb-ft torque @
> 3,300 RPM.
>
> Yet another $.02 worth from a proud owner of a 1970 Mach 1 351C @
> http://community.webshots.com/album/18644819fHAehGJAjt

James Friedel wrote:
> Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with
a
> 351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner.
Why
> do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
> with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz

Get an Edlebrock 625 cfm w/electric choke. I have been running this on
my '70 Cougar for 5 years without a hitch. The intake I have is an
Edelbrock F351, probably from the 70's. But Edelbrock intakes are
still the class of the field. If they make a Performer RPM, get that
one. Or a Weiand Stealth if they make one for a Cleveland.

BTW, why would you want to hide your new stuff under the OE air
cleaner?

Also, anyone who disses the Clevo is an idiot. Just tell them the 1st
and 2nd place engines in the Popular Hot Rodding '05 Engine Masters
were Cleveland headed 410 ci Windsors. The winner made nearly 700 hp
naturally aspirated on 92 octane.

180 Out
TS 28

Going into the wayback machine, Professor Peabody and I re-affirmed that I
had seen many Cleveland blocks with cracked main bearing webs and less than
ideal coolant flow through the block casting. It is relatively easy to
install Cleveland heads on the windsor block and come away with a better
package in terms of reliability and durability. Moving up into modern times,
curent cylinder head technology surpasses what we had back before most of
you were born. There are some skookum heads out there for reasonable without
having to re-invent the wheel...


"James Friedel" > wrote in message
...
> Any recommended d carb, intake 4bbl. set up for a 72 Mustang with a
> 351C 2v. Totally stock ,needs to fit under stock hood air cleaner. Why
> do lots of Mustang guys bad talk the 351C? This car a strong runner
> with ASSUME midrange! Thanks Fritz
>

wrote:

> Also, anyone who disses the Clevo is an idiot. Just tell them the
1st
> and 2nd place engines in the Popular Hot Rodding '05 Engine Masters
> were Cleveland headed 410 ci Windsors. The winner made nearly 700 hp
> naturally aspirated on 92 octane.

Follow up: while the 3rd place engine was a Clevor, the first place
used Cleveland heads AND block. Here's an excerpt from the PHR web
site:

"Jon Kaase is no stranger to the world of ultra high performance engine
building and the incredibly slick Ford 408 Cleveland he brought this
year was by far the most exotic mill in attendance. With its Australian
CH1 Cleveland heads, AMC six-cylinder main bearings and .5-inch thick
copper head spacers, it was number one qualifier with peak readings of
698.2 hp, 619.6 lb.-ft, average power readings of 485.9 hp and 557.3
lb.-ft. and a staggering 1,043.2 points.

"We asked Jon if there was anything left in the 12.4:1 compression Ford
Cleveland to be unleashed for the final rounds and he said, 'I've got
the timing back as far as it will go (24 BTDC) and still make power so
jetting is all that's left.'

"The motor was started and the competition pulls commenced. The amazing
result was peak output of 691.2 hp and 616.2 lb.-ft., average output of
485.9 hp and 557.3 lb.-ft. for a total score of 1,043.2 to win the
Engine Masters Challenge."

So there you go, a Cleveland block with aftermarket Clevo heads beat
several dozen 410 ci Chevy small blocks, Windsors, etc., at a
competition geared to reward all-rpm torque and horsepower, not just
peak.

Regarding Jim Warman's comments about the superiority of Clevors, I
don't dispute his recollection regarding cooling problems, but it seems
like if water were circulating through the block at all you'd be OK,
that the main function of the cooling system is to cool the heads.

OTOH, it is common knowledge that the Clevo needs help with the oiling
system for extended high rpm use. The fix as I recall is to tap into
the block near the fuel pump and run an oil line to the oil pressure
sending unit's port at the back of the block. Only worth doing if
you're going to be running 6000+ regularly.

180 Out
TS 28

wrote:
> Regarding Jim Warman's comments about the superiority of Clevors, I
> don't dispute his recollection regarding cooling problems, but it seems
> like if water were circulating through the block at all you'd be OK,
> that the main function of the cooling system is to cool the heads.
>
> OTOH, it is common knowledge that the Clevo needs help with the oiling
> system for extended high rpm use. The fix as I recall is to tap into
> the block near the fuel pump and run an oil line to the oil pressure
> sending unit's port at the back of the block. Only worth doing if
> you're going to be running 6000+ regularly.

The following info is from http://stangstable.com/engine_specific.htm

"The 351C or 429-460 are capable of tremendous horsepower and high revs.
As power and RPM levels increase so does the strain on the stock oiling
system. Many engine failures occur because the stock system tends to
direct more oil to the rocker arms, than to the rod and main bearings.
Good news! There are performance kits available to solve this problem by
taking oil from the front oil galley directly above the oil filter, and
plumbing it into the rear main oil galley right behind the intake
manifold. Complete kits include high volume oil pump, cam bearing and
rocker arm restrictors, and external oil line. However, if you are a
do-it-yourselfer and just want to redirect oil, build a 3/8 inch oil
line and plumb it in."

Oiling kit for 351C/429-460 are available @ http://www.mpgheads.com

I think the oiling problem is somewhat overrated - take a look @
http://xpfalcon.kicks-ass.net/Engines/Cleveland.htm for more information
on this issue.

Yet another $.02 worth from a proud owner of a 1970 Mach 1 351C @
http://community.webshots.com/album/18644819fHAehGJAjt