Register now to get rid of these ads!

51 Ford 302 or 351?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by 51fordor, Nov 3, 2010.

  1. 51fordor
    Joined: Sep 16, 2010
    Posts: 215

    51fordor
    Member

    I have the option to get a 302 or a 351 both with the same trannys for the same price. I read some people have issues with clearance on the 351.. Is this a real issue? Also what headers are most guys using?
    Thanks in advance guys!
     
  2. krackerjack88
    Joined: Apr 6, 2008
    Posts: 1,247

    krackerjack88
    Member
    from Fresno,Ca

  3. 51fordor
    Joined: Sep 16, 2010
    Posts: 215

    51fordor
    Member

    Windsor sorry...
     
  4. krackerjack88
    Joined: Apr 6, 2008
    Posts: 1,247

    krackerjack88
    Member
    from Fresno,Ca

    Ah man... either will do.
     
  5. Mudslinger
    Joined: Aug 3, 2005
    Posts: 1,965

    Mudslinger
    Member

    Im getting ready to drop a windsor in my 49 using opies engine mounts. IM wanting to keep a 3 speed manual on the tree but I think I will run into problems.
     
  6. ganga
    Joined: Dec 27, 2008
    Posts: 152

    ganga
    Member

    If it fits go with the 351.
     
  7. RAY With
    Joined: Mar 15, 2009
    Posts: 3,132

    RAY With
    Member

    The 351W is a real good motor with lot of horsepower options if wanted.They make considerable more HP that the 302 and the blocks hold more HP. You wont be sorry to go the 351w selection.
     
  8. JDW
    Joined: Jan 25, 2007
    Posts: 29

    JDW
    Member
    from Upstate NY

    Either will fit nicely in a '51 Ford tho the 351 is a couple inches higher and wider then the 302

    Nothing beat cubic inches. I like them both - my last car had a nicely warmed .030 351W, the current one has a warmer 302 that would never outperform that 351.

    A 302 will be done at 347+/- cu in, a 351 - I've seen 427's and have heard of 430++.

    Whatever camshaft you want will work in either engine with the right valve train and the correct firing order.

    Heads are interchangeable with very minor work. Headers are the same.

    Timing covers and water pumps can be used interchaneably.

    You are somewhat limited in RPM with a 351 due to bearing speeds and the stock type cast crank. There are nice aftermarket steel units that would have the same rpm potential as the 302

    You will spend about 10 - 25% more to build a 351 vs a 302.

    Did I mention the 351's cubic inch potential:D
     
  9. AnimalAin
    Joined: Jul 20, 2002
    Posts: 3,416

    AnimalAin
    Member

    351W has more cubes, more output stock, more upside potential. Fit will be a little more snug but certainly not impossible. Either will work well enough, but the bigger motor is a better choice for a shoebox.
     
  10. Francisco Plumbero
    Joined: May 6, 2010
    Posts: 2,533

    Francisco Plumbero
    Member
    from il.

    Doug's Block huggers. me likey. Get the coated ones, no rusty. Powermaster starter. Wrap the exhaust at the starter. no cooking the starter
     
  11. 51fordor
    Joined: Sep 16, 2010
    Posts: 215

    51fordor
    Member

    I prefer the 351 also, but was worried that it was wider and might be a fit issue. Is there any particular headers that fit the shoebox with no mods?
     
  12. chopnweld
    Joined: Apr 16, 2009
    Posts: 428

    chopnweld
    Member
    from Nor Cal

    I have had both, but I would go with the 351w. A little more hp and a lot more torque! 302 is better if you are trying to jam it between the shock towers of a 65 66 mustang, but you are not. If your other one falls through, I am selling a freshly rebuilt one; see the classifieds
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Beebeebobby
    Joined: Sep 5, 2010
    Posts: 224

    Beebeebobby
    Member
    from Webb City

    I know ppl like the bigger HP...but the 302 has a great powerband...RPM's really well...
     
  14. Mnhotrodbuilder
    Joined: Jul 12, 2010
    Posts: 1,140

    Mnhotrodbuilder
    Member
    from Afton, MN

    I agree ^
     
  15. Retro Jim
    Joined: May 27, 2007
    Posts: 3,854

    Retro Jim
    Member

    Take that 351w ! More cubes mean more power plus you can build a really nice 408 stroker from the 351w too . A 302 can't be stroked that much . I think the pistons is the difference . Anyway the 351w is only a few inches wider than a 302 .
    Is the 351w a flat tap or roller engine ? If an early flat tap from like 75 or so , check to see what heads are on it . In the early 1970's Ford used 302 small valve heads for the newer laws to lower the compression . If that is what you have then I would go with the 302 . I like roller blocks better because you can do so much more with them cam wise . But it really depends on what you want to build the engine for . If stock I would keep the 302 due to weight difference . If you want to do a little more and change the cam and do some other performance up grades , I would go with the 351w . Just remember 302 used parts are a lot easier to find than 351w used parts . I am talking about intakes and a couple either parts . The cams are the same except for the wiring order . You can use a 302 cam in a 351w but must use a 302 firing order . If you use a 351w cam in a 302 the use the 351w firing order .
    I love both Ford engines and use the both myself so it's up to you on what you want from your engine performance wise .

    Retro Jim
     
  16. BadassBadger
    Joined: Oct 24, 2010
    Posts: 460

    BadassBadger
    Member
    from wisconsin

  17. fbama73
    Joined: Jul 12, 2008
    Posts: 989

    fbama73
    Member

    Go with the 351. With a stroker kit, they can get in the 450 cubic inch range, and you can tell a Chevy guy it's a 289, and he'll never know. Hell, a lot of Ford guys have trouble externally IDing a 351W
     
  18. JDW
    Joined: Jan 25, 2007
    Posts: 29

    JDW
    Member
    from Upstate NY

    Sanderson FF1 headers and a Ford SVT mini starter in my '31. These were Jet Hot coated. It took me a few hours to clean up the inside - tag end MIG wires, poorly cut tubes, otherwise nice headers. There is about .25 clearance to the steering on the LHS and plenty to the starter on the RHS

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  19. 51fordor
    Joined: Sep 16, 2010
    Posts: 215

    51fordor
    Member

    The 351 I am looking at is out of a 1989 Crown Vic Police car that was actually a Fire Cheif's car. The 302 is out of a 86 Crown Vic. Both motors are running and both are the exact same price. I wanted the 351W but was worried most about finding a aftermarket header that clears my steering.
     
  20. big bad john
    Joined: Aug 11, 2010
    Posts: 4,726

    big bad john
    Member

    .............Both are nice motors......I think the 302 could be easier to get parts..........I have 302"s in my 39 and 40 Fords....plenty of horsepower...even when AC on
     
  21. MERC 55
    Joined: Mar 26, 2007
    Posts: 277

    MERC 55
    Member

    Depends on intake. If you want 3 x 2's you have to go with the 302
     
  22. Francisco Plumbero
    Joined: May 6, 2010
    Posts: 2,533

    Francisco Plumbero
    Member
    from il.

    You want the 351 police interceptor, trans and all, run it just like it is, it has a few special parts that make it haul ass, I switched from 302's to 351's. It may be a tough gig to fit headers on it, you may end up making a set.
     
  23. 51fordor
    Joined: Sep 16, 2010
    Posts: 215

    51fordor
    Member

    Well I am picking up the donor car sunday.. Going with the 351W. Anyone have any pics of header clearance on the shoebox driver side? Just wanted to see some to see if I can make my own or find some that will fit prefab. Thanks again guys for all the info!
     
  24. Grommet
    Joined: Oct 24, 2008
    Posts: 532

    Grommet
    Member
    from South GA

    I put a 351 with an automatic in my 50 ford. I used the headers and H pipe of of a 1993 mustang.....worked GREAT
    have fun
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.