Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
Geoff2
Expert
Expert
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 4:36 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Geoff2 » Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:12 am

Steve,
You seem to miss the point that the 351C was neither a winner as a street engine or a race engine. And I don't care what valve locks Ford used, I saw plenty of 351Cs leaving the drag strip on flatbeds. For circle track racing, they reqd serious oiling modifications. For street use, they were sluggish at low rpms because of the huge intake ports & needed high rpms to perform, not what you want in a street engine. So what were they good for in standard form?

Sure, you can modify/make new parts that fixes the problems, but that says little for the original design??

A 1971 GT HO Phase 3 Falcon was tested here over the 1/4 mile; HP was quoted at 300 hp, came with a 780 Holley, but knowledgeable sources claimed it was nearer 380 HP. It ran 14.8. It got beaten by a 265 cu in Chrysler 6 cyl In line hemi head engine [ actually the chambers were a pent roof design ] that had 3 Weber side draft carbs & produced 303 hp; it ran 14.7. The road testers added the 265 could pull down to 20 mph in high gear without snatching, while the Ford was baulky to drive at lower speeds [ the big port problem ].
And I don't know where you get the idea that the Boss 351 was faster than the 428 Ford. PHR test Jan 69, Mach 1 Mustang, auto, ran 13.69 @ 103 with a 3.50 axle. A PHR test Mar 71, Boss 351 Mustang with 3.90 axle & 4 speed ran 13.76 @ 103. It had 11:1 CR, hardly a street friendly CR!!

From Roger Huntington's Car Life files: showroom condition, no special tuning. Four cars tested 69 Camaro Z/28 302, 70 Camaro Z/28 350, 69 Boss 302 Mustang, 70 AAR Cuda 240 -6v. Slowest was the Mustang at 14.8/96 mph; it had 3.91 gears. Equal fastest was the 70 Z28 & Cuda, 14.5 @ 99 mpg. Cuda had 3.55 gears, Z28 4.10.

he goes on: The only thing that saved the street performance of the Boss 302 was the low final drive ratio & wide ratio 4 speed. But those big port 351C heads were never right for the 302 block. Even professional TA racers who routinely revved the engine to 8000 rpm, would often line the intake ports with epoxy to make them smaller! It gave them better midrange torque off the turns, with practically no sacrifice at the top end, When you can do that to an engine & make it perform better, something is radically wrong.
Perhaps the Dodge & Plymouth TA cars with the 340 6 pack had the best street combination of all. Yes.

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Steve.k » Sun Feb 11, 2018 9:58 am

Geoff the boss351 ran a 13.7 right from ford most were quicker than that. My own 73 cougar with 351 4v ran 12.70@ 107 after cam intake and headers in 3700 pound car. Not sure what happened in Australia but the Clevelands here on the street would kill anything short of a 427 camaro. Thats how i became interested in them,if these motors over there were spitting valves the were not setup right same with oiling. As for port filling it does not work, the prostock guys did it to turn the flow to center of cylinder!I have a ur19 tunnel ram and heads modified this way from pro stock racer Paul JENKINS of florida. We spent hrs talking about his race days. The only serious problem he said he had was valves which they would drop as they were spinning 9800-10,000. When trw introduced ti valves problem solved.Its a well known fact in show room trim boss was faster than 428. The 428 would melt the factory tires which didn't help it. But hey we can argue all week.

Bos's5.0
Pro
Pro
Posts: 283
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Bos's5.0 » Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:23 am

Geoff2 wrote:
Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:12 am
Steve,
You seem to miss the point that the 351C was neither a winner as a street engine or a race engine.
#-o :shock: :^o Did a 351C touch you in the wrong way?

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Steve.k » Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:51 am

Heres a list of the top 50 fastest production muscle cars of all time. Note the boss 351 made list. Have a look at the cubic inches around it. Id say its in good company!!http://www.streetmusclemag.com/news/mus ... scle-cars/. While these lists are the culmination of who ever writes them it is interesting that the only other small block is the chevy 327 in a lightweight vette :shock:What is equally impressive is its faster than the 3 428 fords listed below it. Who would've thunk!http://www.chevyhardcore.com/news/the-t ... -all-time/ Heres another list from chevy camp. Boss made it again.

Truckedup
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1573
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Truckedup » Sun Feb 11, 2018 11:29 am

All the tests done in books back in the Muscle Car period can be taken as gossip...Many of the vehicles were prepped by dealers or manufacturers before being released to journalists....
I spent many days at Englishtown NJ with a friend running a amateur built 4 speed Hemi in stock class...It was very unusual to see any "pure stock" street tire entry level muscle car run faster than 14.5...The higher performance stuff, 440 6 pack, Hemis, 396-375, 427 Vettes and full size Chevys or 428 Cobra jets could get near 13.5 if well driven.Obviously there was always a few faster than normal cars, probably had unseen modifications..Fastest "pure stock" car at that track at that time was a 70 454 Chevelle running lower 13's..
I dated a girl in the 70's with a 70 Cougar, two barrel Cleveland automatic...It ran well and I believe it was faster than any 2 barrel Chevy or Mopar..
World's fastest stock frame 650 cc push rod gas land speed racing bike...

Casper393W
Pro
Pro
Posts: 372
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:18 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Casper393W » Sun Feb 11, 2018 12:33 pm

Well all of this debate tells me that the Chevy vs Ford vs Mopar rivalry is as strong as ever... The crazy part is now you can have a standard SUV running just as fast as those musclecars of yesteryear....

I have respect for all of the musclecars and their engines... To me one of the most underrated engines of the day was the Mopar 340! It truly could hang with the best of them.... After all it had a 9.60 deck height, 2.5/2.125 journals, 6.123 rods, and 18 deg heads.. decent flowing heads for the day...

My first car was a 340 Duster.... Back in the mid 90's I killed Many 5.0 mustangs and 350 Iroc z... While they were running mid 9's in the 1/8th.... I was running 7.60's
It was a very simple build.... Ported J heads, first set I had ever flowed...they flowed 255cfm a OLD SCHOOL Racer Brown SSH-25 cam and I ran two manifolds first being a Highly worked over Holley Street Dominator opened up to the 340 port size... And a Edelbrock LD340... both with a Holley 4779 750 DP. Running 10.75 to 1 compression, I did something a little different back the as I went with a Cast crank because it weighed less compared to the forged unit I had... Boy was it fun to balance! I had a 340-6 block out of a AAR cuda

I started out with a 727 TorqueFlight with a B&M 3500 stall and a 8.75 rear with 3.91 gears... I later swapped in a Hemi A833 and put 4.57 gears in it!

I miss that car dearly...I sold it when I got laid off from my job back in 2000 it was a bad ride.... A buddy of mine in school had a 68 C10 short bed with a built 454!! I mean it was right....we had the two fastest rides at school and I beat him for $200 I ran a 7.71 to his spinning 7.95 we both had about the same MPH if I remember right it was like 90mph

I built mine with my own money I earned cutting grass and doing odd jobs for people in the neighborhood...while his dad funded every bit of his "wants". It pissed them off when I beat them almost the whole school came to the track to watch!


I am now a Ford man with my F100 that I'm turning into a F100XL clone type.

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Steve.k » Sun Feb 11, 2018 1:19 pm

Yes casper im with you there. A lot of my buddies ran 340 dusters. When updated to w2 heads very serious. Ive owned chevy Novas and z28 camaros but it wasn't till i rode in my buddy's 428 cj cougar I started to hunt for fords. With my money constraints back then bought my cousins 73 cougar xr7 in 81. Which i still own and race.

Truckedup
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1573
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Truckedup » Sun Feb 11, 2018 3:04 pm

What is interesting is the speed of modern vehicles...A full size Chevy 4x4 PU weighing about 6200 pound empty with a 420 HP 6.2 can run the 1/4 in about 14 flat at 95 MPH...Of course today's 420 HP was 500 in 1970 when they used gross numbers....The average 330 advertised HP muscle car would get whipped by a typical new family sedan with a V6...
World's fastest stock frame 650 cc push rod gas land speed racing bike...

Casper393W
Pro
Pro
Posts: 372
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:18 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Casper393W » Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Truckedup wrote:
Sun Feb 11, 2018 3:04 pm
What is interesting is the speed of modern vehicles...A full size Chevy 4x4 PU weighing about 6200 pound empty with a 420 HP 6.2 can run the 1/4 in about 14 flat at 95 MPH...Of course today's 420 HP was 500 in 1970 when they used gross numbers....The average 330 advertised HP muscle car would get whipped by a typical new family sedan with a V6...

That is exactly what I am talking about! Plus get killer mileage to boot

Casper393W
Pro
Pro
Posts: 372
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:18 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Casper393W » Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:30 pm

Shoot.... Today's 425hp would've probably been closer to 600-625 then... Just look at the HP ratings from 70 to 72

I have seen a blueprinted LS6 454 Chevelle rated at 450 gross get his feelings hurt on a local Dyno day here near Charlotte..... Made 295 rwhp oh yeah this was a 4 speed car

He was sick because he was talking major smack about "all those mustangs are only making 300hp with their little 4.6 engine. Watch this I will show you what a real car can put down"

tchapps88
New Member
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:43 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by tchapps88 » Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:36 pm

big blocks dont like exhaust manifolds

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Steve.k » Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:44 pm

While the new engines boast good hp theg still have trouble with old cars high tq numbers. Even my sons mild hyd cammed 302 mustang 2 puts pretty good lickin on new gt mustang. However he gets zero milage compared to them.

superpursuit
Member
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:07 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by superpursuit » Sun Feb 11, 2018 9:18 pm

Geoff2 wrote:
Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:12 am
Steve,

And I don't know where you get the idea that the Boss 351 was faster than the 428 Ford. PHR test Jan 69, Mach 1 Mustang, auto, ran 13.69 @ 103 with a 3.50 axle. A PHR test Mar 71, Boss 351 Mustang with 3.90 axle & 4 speed ran 13.76 @ 103. It had 11:1 CR, hardly a street friendly CR!!

So a big block auto mustang is one tenth quicker than a manual 4 speed boss 351 mustang.

Seems to me that if they were both auto's then the boss 351 could easily be one second faster than the big block. :D

turdwilly
Pro
Pro
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 10:09 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by turdwilly » Sun Feb 11, 2018 9:55 pm

superpursuit wrote:
Sun Feb 11, 2018 9:18 pm
Geoff2 wrote:
Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:12 am
Steve,

And I don't know where you get the idea that the Boss 351 was faster than the 428 Ford. PHR test Jan 69, Mach 1 Mustang, auto, ran 13.69 @ 103 with a 3.50 axle. A PHR test Mar 71, Boss 351 Mustang with 3.90 axle & 4 speed ran 13.76 @ 103. It had 11:1 CR, hardly a street friendly CR!!

So a big block auto mustang is one tenth quicker than a manual 4 speed boss 351 mustang.

Seems to me that if they were both auto's then the boss 351 could easily be one second faster than the big block. :D
Yes im sure those 3 manual shifts took quite a bit longer than the 0.07 seconds E.T. difference between those 2 cars. And to boot I also bet that 1971 tank was heavier than the 1969 even with the smaller engine.

Geoff2
Expert
Expert
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 4:36 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Geoff2 » Mon Feb 12, 2018 4:32 am

Superpursuit,
You should read more carefully before you post. My comparison of 1/4 times between a 428 & 351 C was in reply to Steve.k's claim that the 351 was quicker than the 428.... And in case you missed it, the 428 was running a 3.50 axle, the 351 had a 3.90 axle, which even things up somewhat...

Turdwilly,

The curb weights were listed:
428 car 3600 lb
351 car 3452 lb.
Hmm....

Steve.k.

Sorry, I don't see the relevance of your modified 351C running 12s. It wouldn't be the lone ranger...The above cars were stock. I also made a mistake in my last post where I quoted 1/4 times of 14.8 & 14.7 for the 351C GT -HO Phase 3 Falcon & the Valiant Charger with 265 ci 6 cyl engine. I got the book out today & checked. Aussie readers would probably be familiar with this book, Top Aussie Supercars, which tested all the cars of the Big Three of the muscle car era.
The Falcon ran a 14.7 quarter & 0-100 mph of 15.2. For the 265, the times were 14.4 & 14.1 sec. Said the road testers of the 265: "..it's pretty hard to believe. A 0 to 100 mph in 14.1 seconds! That's really flying - the engine's no thumping V8 or four cam V12. It's Chrysler Australia's 4.3 L in-line six, a stormer called the Charger RT E49."


And it gets worse... A 351C GT Falcon Hardtop coupe was tested against a 340 Charger with an AVS 4 bbl carb [ not the 6 pack ] : "We managed 15.5s in the Charger, while the Falcon was battling to break 16 seconds...". The 351 was rated at 300 hp/ 380 ft/lbs; the 340 275/340. Hmm....

I like the FE Ford engines, I think they were good, solid, reliable engines. Same for the 289-302-351W engines. The 427 SOHC were great & I admire Ford's determination to win leMans in the 60s & their Indy engines. But the 302-351C engines...failures as street engines & race engines in stock form.

Post Reply