Hey now, I just got my hands on a 351w that is comin from a 88 mustang and being as this engine is new to me I was wondering any tips that some might have. I had a 300 straight 6 in The Mistress when she was bought and was just lookin for some more power and figured she deserved an 8. Once I get at it I will start posting some pictures as I'm just undressin the lady now for the chop and other labors of love. As for body work and the straight 6 I know a good deal but am always open for other views on the matter. "SQUARED n LEVELED"
I own both engines, and they both do their jobs well. However, Don't look past the 300. A 4 barrel or multi-carb intake, good cam, and headers really make them come alive. That might be easier then swapping motors, however the 351W will bolt to the same trans that is behind the 300. You will just have to fabricate new motor mounts, exhaust, linkages, and possibly fan shroud. If you want to go further with building a hot 300 there is a ton of info both on the HAMB and the web. Good Luck.
You can also use a 289 / 302 motor swap kit.... That 351 W is a bolt in replacement for the 289 / 302 engines, so one of those engine swap mount kits will work. 4TTRUK
Jamco sells a bracket kit to put a SBF in a shoebox... http://jamcosuspension.com/products/sfID1/3/sfID2/39/productID/159
We put a 351W into my friend's '50 Shoebox using Opie's mounts (bought from Butch's cool stuff) - nice kit . We did , however , have to notch the front crossmember a bit for extra clearance , as the 351 oil pan is a couple inches deeper than a 302 . No biggie , but figured I'd tell ya . We also had a small valve cover clearance issue with the heater blower , but that may have been due to a replacement (12v) motor we installed (351W is wider than a 302) . We relieved the valve cover a bit & it's fine . The 351 sure fills the engine bay ... looks great in there plenty of pep ! On the other hand , we installed a 302 into my '49 Shoe using a Jamco mount kit . Using a rear sump pan , it fit with no issues ... but that's a 302 . I really like the Jamco setup . Here's a pic of how we notched the crossmember for the 351W - and you can see lower part of the Opie's engine mounts : and the oil pan clearance it has now :
my dads 50 convertible has a 302 in it. the 351 is 1.5" wider and about the same taller. we used ford truck motor mounts and a oil filter relocater. his has the original drive train with except the motor. clutch was out of like a 75 ford p/u. mounts are common 302 truck mounts.motor sits good and level and leaves plenty of clearance for the hood. i dont have a pic the engine sitting in the car but here is one of his for the fun of it.
I'm doing the 351W in a '51 Ford and it's a pain in the ***. Yes, you will have to cut the front crossmember then fill it in later. If I had it to do all over, I would go for the 302.
Why? I've done it w/o cutting the crossmember...you did use a van/truck/bronco/fox oil pan, didn't you?
Did you make your own mounts ?? With the deeper oil pump on the 351 , a van/truck/Bronco/fox body rear sump oil pan won't fit the engine - ask me how we know ! OK , I'll tell ya ... we tried . Then we notched the crossmember . Like I said , this was with Opie's mounts .
The oil pumps are the same size - you can swap a 351 pump for a 302 pump if you also swap the drive and distributor...because the hex drive is larger in a 351. The oil pans are dimensionally the same. The rear portion of the pan at the rear main bearing/seal area is larger on the 351W. Otherwise, a Bronco 351W pan is identical to a Bronco 302 pan...and any other pan. A 351W Fox conversion pan is all that is required. No cutting of crossmember using commercial SBF mounts. Not sure what you ended up doing... Never heard of "opie's" mounts. I tried the Speedway mounts - sent them back - worthless. I think we ended up with Butch's Rod Shop (now closed) mounts, but could've just as easily fabricated some.
Butchs Rod Shop is now Butch's cool stuff and still in buisness. Sells a kit to install 302,351 in early Fords. Used one of his kits to put 351 in my 57 Ranchero. Works really good.
The oil pump on Craig's car was definately taller (or should I say lower ?) , and the 302 double/rear sump pan surely wouldn't fit . No way in hell . It wasn't that hard of a job to notch & box the crossmember , so we re-installed the 351 pan & away we went . I should be glad , because that pan is now on my 302 & in my car ! Saved me some time & wampum . Opie's mounts are the ones Butch's sells . Butch's is still around , BTW - Butch's Cool Stuff .
Then you may have had a hi-vol pump, but they'll still fit in a rear sump pan as long as they use flathead screws in the pump instead of bolts. If you re-read my post, I wasn't suggesting you use a 302 pan - it won't fit a 351 - I was just saying the same application pan for a 351 is the same physical external size. There are van, bronco, 4x4, and fox pans for 351W...just like 302.
I know the "footprint" of both pans are the same , but the 351 pan is definately deeper by more than an inch . I don't think ANY 351 pan was gonna fit his car without notching the crossmember , and that 302 pan surely was gonna fit his engine without adding some depth . Changing out the screws wasn't going to make this one fit , lol ! I don't think there's any special oil pump or whatnot in his engine - maybe the H.O. truck engines are different ? It doesn't really matter to us , as we're both cool with the outcome - but for the sake of some knowledge , I guess ...
love 351w's put one in a 1946 Chevrolet Styleline convertable with a c6 behind it and a ford 9 , had tons of pickup.
What oil pan did you use? It is obviously one that needs to be identified as requiring modification when stuffed into a shoebox. However, I'm not aware of ANY 351W rear sump pan that, when compared to its 302 application, is physically different other than where it bolts to the rear main. But that doesn't mean they don't exist...Ford did a lot of odd things at times. Way back before 351W into Fox bodies was common and there were kits, I "made" a Fox 351W oil pan by grafting a 351W rear main seal area into a 302 pan. I used a hi-vol pump and had to change the pump bolts out for flat head screws to get clearance on the pump. Otherwise, it fit just fine. Years later I was able to compare my hybrid pan to an actual 351W fox pan and discovered no difference at all. I'd really like to know what pan you used as it seems you've found one that's different. Of course, if the engine mounts you used were shorter than the ones I used, well, there's the likely problem. I'd be willing to put dollars to donuts that's the real issue here.
In the end , we ended up using the stock pan that was on the motor when removed from the truck . When we tried to install the rear-sump fox pan (that's now on my 302) , it just plain wouldn't fit - the pump was hitting on the bottom of the pan . IIRC we measured the 2 pans & the 351 pan was definately deeper , by a good bit . If I remember , the next time I'm over at Craig's , I'll measure the 2 & report back . Believe me , if it would've fit , we'd have used it - and I would've had to find a pan for mine . If you used Opie's / Butch's mounts also , then there should be no difference there I guess . I believe his engine is out of a mid/late-80's F-150 - a HO engine . I believe he said it was the last year with a carb , if that helps to nail it down (I'm not familiar with trucks) .
You tried to put a 302 pan on a 351W - it won't work. It won't fit. Not because there's any dimensional difference, but because the rear main seal area is different - otherwise, the pans are identical. That pan won't even sit down right, but the problem is at the back, not the front where the oil pump is. If you try to set it on, the angle may make it hit the pump, but the problem is actually in the back at the seal. You ended up using the stock pan from the 351W and it was front sump (or you wouldn't have tried the 302 fox pan). The front sump pans are deeper than the rear sump pans overall due to the design. The rear sump pans still hold 5 quarts, but are shallower overall due to the small 'mini' sump up front. Well, it was long enough ago that it was Butch's Rod Shop - probably 1999 or 2000 - so they may not be the same anymore. A front sump pan will not fit at all. So, if you used a stock front sump pan, you would have definitely had to notch the crossmember. I think this is the issue, not the mounts. Mystery solved. You could have used a 351W Fox pan, Bronco pan, or Van pan and not had to notch the crossmember.
The Jalopy Journal
