Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
Truckedup
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1864
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Truckedup » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:57 am

Steve.k wrote:
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.
So your son's mild 302, I assume like a 80S-90S Mustang nearly stock 302 ? run high 12's with street tires ?
Motorcycle land speed racing... wearing animal hides and clinging to vibrating oily machines propelled by fire

Truckedup
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1864
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Truckedup » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:58 am

Truckedup wrote:
Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:57 am
Steve.k wrote:
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.
So your son's mild 302, I assume like a 80'S-90'S Mustang nearly stock 302 ? runs high 12's with street tires ?
Motorcycle land speed racing... wearing animal hides and clinging to vibrating oily machines propelled by fire

Casper393W
Pro
Pro
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:18 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Casper393W » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:15 am

I have seen the new '18 GT Mustangs run in the 11's with just drag radials... That new 10 speed auto is bad!

Truckedup
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1864
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Truckedup » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:40 am

Casper393W wrote:
Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:15 am
I have seen the new '18 GT Mustangs run in the 11's with just drag radials... That new 10 speed auto is bad!
Yes,most anyone can do it ,just press the pedal letting traction control do the work and no messing with clutching or shifting...Just like most bracket racing..
Motorcycle land speed racing... wearing animal hides and clinging to vibrating oily machines propelled by fire

turdwilly
Pro
Pro
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 10:09 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by turdwilly » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:19 am

Geoff2 wrote:
Mon Feb 12, 2018 4:32 am


Turdwilly,

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

Steve.k.
[/b]
[/quote


Wow - I would never have guessed a tank 1971 would actually weigh less than a 1969, even with a lighter engine & transmission. I stand corrected. And I completely missed that the curb weights were listed - my bad. I'm going to have to research this myself though, I'm having a very hard time believing that massive car could weigh less than 3500 lbs.

turdwilly
Pro
Pro
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 10:09 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by turdwilly » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:34 am

Geoff2 wrote:
Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:12 am
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!!
The closed chamber 351C heads apparently have a chamber design that is very compression-friendly on the street. I've seen numerous examples of 11.0:1+ closed chamber iron headed engines in various vehicles that run fine on pump gas, even a heavy truck. My friend had a '70 Mach 1 with a SFT 13.5:1 351C with closed chamber heads & a Doug Nash 5 speed in the late 70s-early 80s that ran fine on Amoco Gold 93 leaded fuel. I don't know how it would fare on today's fuels. It had some slight pinging on other premium pump fuels. That thing was pretty damn stout too. I've been told it's something about how the chamber affects the flame front. I have no clue if that's true or not, I can only tell you it ran fine on the Amoco fuel & was extremely crisp & responsive - it wasn't running low ignition timing.

turdwilly
Pro
Pro
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 10:09 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by turdwilly » Mon Feb 12, 2018 12:04 pm

2 reviews from the same source

Car & Driver Review 1969 Mach 1 428 CJ with 3.91 axle Automatic January 1970

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/19 ... h-i-review

DISPLACEMENT: 428 cu in, 7002 cc
POWER: 335 hp @ 5200 rpm
TORQUE: 440 lb-ft @ 3400 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 3-speed automatic

DIMENSIONS:
WHEELBASE: 108.0 in
LENGTH: 187.4 in
WIDTH: 71.3 in HEIGHT: 51.2 in
CURB WEIGHT: 3607 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.3 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.3 sec @ 100 mph
Top speed (est): 115 mph
Braking, 80-0 mph: 256 ft


Car & Driver Review 1971 Mustang Boss 351 (4-spd 3.91 axle)

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/19 ... 351-review
DISPLACEMENT: 351 cu in, 5750 cc
POWER: 330 hp @ 5400 rpm
TORQUE: 370 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 4-speed manual

DIMENSIONS:
WHEELBASE: 109.0 in
LENGTH: 189.5 in
WIDTH: 74.1 in HEIGHT: 50.1 in
CURB WEIGHT: 3560 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 100.6 mph
Top speed (redline limited): 117 mph
Braking, 80-0 mph: 250 ft

For some reason I couldn't find a curb weight for a '70 Mach 1 with a 351C or a '69 Mach 1 with a 351W, but I found the quote below by a poster on a forum in my google search for curb weight. The '69-'70 is definitely a much lighter car (given the same drive train) than the tank 1971 Mustang.

"A 1970 Mach 1 with 351C-4V, Shaker hood, factory air, and have added a T-5 five-speed and rack and pinion steering. With a full tank of gas (22 gallons), I have weighed it at 3480 pounds using digital scales."

Barry_R
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1225
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Detroit area
Contact:

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Barry_R » Mon Feb 12, 2018 12:07 pm

Geoff
It will be easier if we all just admit that you are correct and we can go on to other things.

Feel better now?
Survival Motorsports
www.survivalmotorsports.com

WD for Comp, Manley, Blue Thunder, Diamond
Probe, Holley, Clevite, Federal-Mogul, Scat....

elwood
New Member
New Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 5:37 pm

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by elwood » Mon Feb 12, 2018 4:51 pm

Boss 351 never had 11:1 CR that was pre-production propaganda, it was 11.3:1 IIRC

actual CR was almost exactly a full number lower at 10.3:1 or close to it

i'll also suggest that published curb weights are suspect too. scale or it didn't happen

i like the part Geoff2 where you beating the GT-HO until ... what did happen at 80 mph ?

to the original Topic, they dressed fraternal twins in the same gear and they look alike ?

Ford vs Chevy < .02" stroke and the winner by a hair is .... Pfft

is that close, difference between the Ford & Chevy .02" stroke ?

plovett
Expert
Expert
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:49 pm
Location: Kansas City

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by plovett » Mon Feb 12, 2018 5:25 pm

Here's the unbiased truth when it comes to musclecar era American pushrod V8's. When it comes to big blocks we could argue all day long which is the best with no resolution. BBC's are great, Chrysler Hemis are great, BBF's are great. Heck even big Buicks are great. And on and on and on.......

BUT when it comes to small blocks of the same era, it is much clearer. The 351C 4bbl is in a completely different league from all other small blocks. That is in terms of power potential. There's first place and then the rest of the pack is waaaaay behind. It's just those crazy big heads. No doubt there are plenty of imperfections in the Cleveland design. For power potential there is no close second.

And no I don't have a Cleveland.

JMO,

paulie

Casper393W
Pro
Pro
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:18 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Casper393W » Mon Feb 12, 2018 5:35 pm

I will agree with the statement made above! Look at ProStock.....first they put penalties on the Hemis because the first two years of the class Sox and Martin Dominated! Even though Grumpy Jenkins won the first race and was first in the 9's.... Then when the Clevelands started cleaning house " with Gapp & Roush , Bob Glidden, and Dyno Don....they added weight!

Can't argue with history! But as long as Grumpy was winning The Masterminds were happy! Go figure

turdwilly
Pro
Pro
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 10:09 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by turdwilly » Mon Feb 12, 2018 5:56 pm

elwood wrote:
Mon Feb 12, 2018 4:51 pm
Boss 351 never had 11:1 CR that was pre-production propaganda, it was 11.3:1 IIRC

actual CR was almost exactly a full number lower at 10.3:1 or close to it

i'll also suggest that published curb weights are suspect too. scale or it didn't happen

i like the part Geoff2 where you beating the GT-HO until ... what did happen at 80 mph ?

to the original Topic, they dressed fraternal twins in the same gear and they look alike ?

Ford vs Chevy < .02" stroke and the winner by a hair is .... Pfft

is that close, difference between the Ford & Chevy .02" stroke ?

In the interest of full disclosure - I should have stated that my friends '70 had Speed Pro 13.5:1 dome pistons - I have no clue what the actual true compression ratio was, as I never measured it & I can assure you he didn't either. It could have been as low as 12.5:1 as far as I know. But the point I was trying to make was whoever that was that stated "11:1 is hardly a street-friendly compression ratio!" most likely never had a closed chamber 351C, because a closed chamber 11:1 (um, err, I mean, a closed chamber zero deck flat top single intake valve relief piston 351C :wink: ) in actuality was very street friendly back in the leaded fuel days.

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Steve.k » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:18 pm

Truckedup wrote:
Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:57 am
Steve.k wrote:
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.
So your son's mild 302, I assume like a 80S-90S Mustang nearly stock 302 ? run high 12's with street tires ?
His car is a 77 mustang 2. We run a local track here 1/8 mile. The car is around 2900 with him in seat. The newer mustang of my nephew is a 2015 gt 5 litre. Its about 2/10 slower. My sons street car runs low 8 in 1/8. Not super fast by any stretch. All im saying is neither is newer gt in stock trim. I own a 07 shelby 500 with a tune it typically runs 12.7 @ 114 in quarter. On nitto street tires. No sticky tires.

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Steve.k » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:27 pm

It goes on and on!! My 73 cougar weighed in at 3530 without me. They were typically a little heavier than mustang. The 71-73 mustangs& cougars were the heaviest of all. Thats why they were less popular. The small block cars were typically 100-200 heavier than pre 70's big blocks. I have nearly every ford book ever printed so if you need pictures let me know I'll dig them out. Geoff i really find it hard to believe all this you tell as you from Australia the country that carried the torch for cleveland motors for many years. The Aussies i talk to have a whole different philosophy than yours and not one has every said you have to be wary of dodges in line hemi 6. I never said the cleveland(boss351 in particular) was one of the fastest production cars from ford to piss you off its a well known fact here. And finally if you research any prostock facts or NASCAR the Cleveland has been the most penalized motor in racing history! Why is that? Prostock Cleveland had to take a 350 lb handicap over all the rest. Hmm seems fair. The stock cleveland cars that were dogs from factory did not exist here, even the puny 2v head would lay a whipping on most unsuspecting cars of era.In the area where i live you could buy bbf cars cheap, no one wanted them as a Cleveland would do the job just as good or better. It wasnt till mid eighties the bbf started to really catch on here. Ive tuned a few 428's clevelands 302s and bbf i know exactly how they all work.

Steve.k
Expert
Expert
Posts: 829
Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 10:41 am

Re: Engine Masters 350 vs 351w shootout

Post by Steve.k » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:47 pm

IMG_2244.JPG
Heres some listings for cobra jets out of one of my mustang books. The book is called Boss&Cobra jet mustangs. Note the 68 1/2 428. I believe those cars tipped scales at 2900lbs. So yes i guess i was wrong. Cleveland not the fastest!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Post Reply