Long rod 351?

[erratic50]

be sure to spend the time needed to port that tubular GT40 351W lower. They barely flow past 160 CFM on front and rear cyl before they are ported. A high RPM 302 or a stroker or a 351 or a 351 based stroker needs more air than that if its going to make power.

Tom Moss published a detailed how-to on GT40 intake porting and last I knew was still willing to clean them up and do the port work for a fee.


I nearly went GT40/Explorer/Cobra/Lighting style intake on my car, but then I realized there are several aftermarket intakes that will out-do that setup that costs less. I'm running a Typhoon EFI on my 302 instead because of that.

$250 shipped -- you just can't go wrong with that. I paid $100 for my Explorer intake then $50 to tank it then decided to just clear coat it and sell it instead of porting. I got $300 for that setup when I sold it because it looked very nice. I kept the 65MM throttle body so I guess I made a little money on the deal. I also got access to power from 5800 - 6250 - a range where the Explorer would never go due to its runner length vs plenum setup.

Seat of the pants it was so worth it even though I personally think the Typhoons and ProComps and Edelbrocks and Trick Flow intakes are ugly compared to the tubular GT40 and Explorer and Cobra setups.

[nelzfoxes]

be sure to spend the time needed to port that tubular GT40 351W lower. They barely flow past 160 CFM on front and rear cyl before they are ported. A high RPM 302 or a stroker or a 351 or a 351 based stroker needs more air than that if its going to make power.

Tom Moss published a detailed how-to on GT40 intake porting and last I knew was still willing to clean them up and do the port work for a fee.


I nearly went GT40/Explorer/Cobra/Lighting style intake on my car, but then I realized there are several aftermarket intakes that will out-do that setup that costs less. I'm running a Typhoon EFI on my 302 instead because of that.

$250 shipped -- you just can't go wrong with that. I paid $100 for my Explorer intake then $50 to tank it then decided to just clear coat it and sell it instead of porting. I got $300 for that setup when I sold it because it looked very nice. I kept the 65MM throttle body so I guess I made a little money on the deal. I also got access to power from 5800 - 6250 - a range where the Explorer would never go due to its runner length vs plenum setup.

Seat of the pants it was so worth it even though I personally think the Typhoons and ProComps and Edelbrocks and Trick Flow intakes are ugly compared to the tubular GT40 and Explorer and Cobra setups.

Gotcha! Thanks! I guess when I get to the point that I am looking for those top end numbers I’ll go after it. To be honest right now I would settle for 1995 cobra r type numbers. That is pretty much what I have put together so far, with the exception of the camshaft. I’m not sure if a 1995 cobra r even had a roller cam. I know the lightning trucks did not. This first build is a street car. Something to play with day in and day out during the cruising/show months. Air conditioning is on the list of musts. I just hope it runs good and stays together.

[xctasy]

First thing is to get it done, then you can debate if the engine is Air Flow Restricted against a reputable Electronic Dyno program.

If it is restricted, the long rods will make a difference. If its not air flow restricted, the long rods won't help much.

Dollar for dollar, other low hanging fruit exists.


I for one love the 49 year old special US aftermarket Ford Total Performance C9-OZ-6250-C cam, and think that Ford really knew that a moderaltly well flowing 351W 4V head with compression and a great intake could be the King Maker in future 351 Fords. The 290 degree, 464 thou lift cam worked so good with the tall, long rod 1969 351W.

Going back to the rod thingy again. The manner in which the Air flow restriction occurs defines the gains from long conrods. Substantial gains equal to what I've quoted in the past exist only on Air flow Restricted engines, and most of the later port EFI engines aren't air flow restricted the way a carb engine can be, although Port EFi engines do suffer from very poor peak intake maniofld air flow, so do all EFi port V8's before the advent of dual intake runners or proper internal velocity tubes.

The Windsor 351's are cam and regular compression ratio restricted. Air flow restriction is based on about five conditions occuring, and as Ethyl Cat says, he doesn't see any Ford Small Block in any shape of form exhibiting the same characteristics that a

Formula Atlantic TRD 1600 or
BMC Mini or Bug Eye 1275, 1435 or 1560 cc A series , or
a 200/250 in line Ford six or
240/300 in line Ford six or
Winston Cup Carb NASCAR 355 or 357 does when the rods are lengthened.

Yes, for every 4 to 15% gain in rod length, you can gain 2 to 7.5% in peak power with stock or peformance cams, proven on those five classes of engine, but adding 11% to the rod length might not give 5.5% extra power on a 351W. Torque wise, the power gains chart as lb-ft losses in the lower ranges.

The examples I used were valid to them, but to say "a long rod 351W will add similar percentages" is pushing it because its not pushing air restriction as much as the five examples I quoted.

Gotcha! Thanks! I guess when I get to the point that I am looking for those top end numbers I’ll go after it. To be honest right now I would settle for 1995 cobra r type numbers. That is pretty much what I have put together so far, with the exception of the camshaft. I’m not sure if a 1995 cobra r even had a roller cam. I know the lightning trucks did not. This first build is a street car. Something to play with day in and day out during the cruising/show months. Air conditioning is on the list of musts. I just hope it runs good and stays together.

1. No roller cam for either. The hydraulic lifter cam was developed in 1973 before port EFi even existed. That proves that Ford designed the Performance Revival of the 5.8 liter Lightenings, 1995 351 R SVT's, 1994 351 Saleens, 1994-1999 Saleens from ancient 1973 design stock probably tested in the late 60's

2. Ford spent more time in 1968 to 1971 finding good profiles, and then emissionising them to suit Clevelands, Modifieds and the 1996-2001 Explorer roller cam is actually just a certain kind of late emissions 2V 351C and common 351M/400 hyraulic flat tappet cam profile remastered in roller form.

3.

Confirming that the 1995 Ford Mustang SVT 351 R cam is basically the 1972 Cleveland Cobra Jet cam profile remastered. The intake lobe lift is probably the same as the Cobra Jet, the net lift is with 1.7:1 rockers, not 1.73. Note that the actual net lift is 478 thou on the 351C 4V CJ, and 490 thou on the exhaust. So some of the quotes for the 1995 cam might be different.

4.

1995 Mustang Cobra "R"
351W 300 HP GT-40 heads, hypereutectic pistons, 9.0:1 compression
hyd roller camshaft
Duration 208 int./224 exh. @050
Valve Lift 0.453 int./0.453 exh but used 1.7 ratio rockers that basically made the cam a 0.481 lift

In a similar way, the G VIN code HO 351 cam, E0OZ 6250-A, for 1980-1981 HO cam for the 351 Windsor in Panther platform cars actually had 10 thou less intake lift with 1.6:1 rockers, 0.443 vs 0.453" and 2 degrees less 50 thou lift than the Marine 351w and 1995 cam. It was a reprofile to suit the emissions and CAFE requirements.

5. The Marine cam is the very aggressive 351 W 2 barrel cam profile designed for boats,

6. while the 1982 2V HO 5.0 GT, 1983 and before 1984-1/2 4V HO GT engine and Lightening just used the 1973 351 2v Torino grind.

Ford knew exactly what made any kind of 351's pass emissions, (Windsor 2V, Windsor 4V, Cleveland 2V, Cleveland 4V, 2V Modifieds and 2v 400's) and what made performance at expense of emissions. The most radical 351 Windsor cams were the Shelby derived 1969 351 Windsor cams which weren't legal on USA 1969 Shelby's, but you could buy them over the counter from your Total Performance dealer, along with the Buddy Bar 4-bbl high rise intake, and even with iron headers.......your Shelby 351W 4V with the factory 10.7:1 compression, would drop flat 14.8's and do 135 mph in a heavy 69 Shelby Mustang.

7.

With Holley 600 4-bbl, (ex FE 390 C6OF-9510-N List 3557), a 10.7:1 compression ratio, (up from the 10:1 in the US 230 hp gross J code 302HP 4V) stock cast headers, the car was rated at 290 Gross at 4800 rpm and 385 lb-ft at 3800 rpm.

Cam in 1969 Shelby 351, or XW Falcon GTHO 351 was uprated from this the US C90Z-6250-A cam, with
256 I/270 E split lobe cam,
Intake: opens 11* BTDC, closes 65* ABDC
Exhaust: opens 68* BBDC, closes 22* ATDC
33* overlap
Int Dur@.050- 206
Exh Dur@.050- 221
Intake Lobe lift .2775
Exhaust Lobe lift .2825
Lobe Sep 115

To this, the special US aftermarket Ford Total Performance C9-OZ-6250-C cam, with
Unsplit 290 I/290 E lobe cam,
Intake: opens 36* BTDC, closes 74* ABDC
Exhaust: opens 84* BBDC, closes 26* ATDC
62* overlap
Int Dur@.050- 218°
Exh Dur@.050- 218°
Intake Lobe lift .290
Exhaust Lobe lift .290


The common D30E-6250-AA 351W camshaft became the 1982 HO 13726548 firing order cam
(App- 84-85 5.0L CFI ; 82-84 5.0 HO manual trans; 351W Lightning, '73 351 2v Torino, incorrectly called the 351W 'marine').

260 I/274 E split lobe cam,
Intake:.416" lift, opens 15* BTDC, closes 65* ABDC
Exhaust: .444" lift, opens 68* BBDC, closes 26* ATDC
41* overlap
Int Dur@.050- 198
Exh Dur@.050- 208
Lobe Centerline- 114.5 (115* lobe center on intake, 114* lobe center on exh).

Another exceptional cam is the ancient 310 degree K code cam, the 271 and 306 hp 289 cam, which was remeastered for the 351 Firing order, and used in the very high output Aussie 351 Cleveland 4V's, the Phase II engine. Big 351's don't have as much chop as the 289 HP 271/306 HP versions

About then, Ford found a little more power with less cam duration, and although always quoted 300 HP, the 1971 and 1972 Phase III and Phase IV Falcon GTHO's according to Mike Webb made 350 and 380 hp net respectively with 10 degrees less lift at lash, a 300 degree cam.

The Windsor 5.8 is just the same, it needs 1.7:1 style rocker lift, good 50 thou duration figures, and if you come down on peak duration with a more aggressive solid roller cam, you'll get great results. The key is the ages old Aussie GT spec Phase I Hydraulic cam, best old non roller hydaulic cam for a hot EFI 5.8

the more radical custom 310 degree K code in 351W timing,

or what the De Tomaso guys called the Mechanical 505 Phase III and Phase IV cam.


The trick with the Windsor has always been what happens with the first five inches to the intake valve, and the modern EFI uppers and lowers don't suffer the way the 1993-1997 Showa made GT40 intake does, its a great intake below 295 hp net at 4800 rpm, but it just dies past that. All of Roushes 295 to 305 hp engines were pushing the GT40 intake upper and lower very hard, and there was a reason he didn't use the 1969 cam.

erratic50 is bang on, stock, the GT40 intake in the 5 inches from the intake back to the injector, its all very restricted. When the 342 factorry 5.6 liter Stroker hit town in 2002, it needed a lot of very expensive intake modifications, the upper an lower were re-jigged, and the Cobra 1993 Roller cam spec was used with good roller rockers. 335 hp at 5250 rpm and 369 lb-ft at 4250rpm verses 300 hp @ 4800 rpm and 365 lbs.-ft. @ 3750 rpm seams to favor the 351R, but the R is unable to give the goods past 4800, or the flat torque curve from off idle to the toque and horspower are equal point of 5252 rpm.

Due to the lower and upper intake improvements, the 2002 roller cammed short rod 5.35", 3.4 stroke 342 is streets ahead of the 1995-1999 long 5.956" rod, 3.5" stroke 351 R engine used in the SVT's and Saleens. Somewhere, the 351's long rods might do something special verses the 302 W "stroker" but I have no idea.

The R Marine cam and G VIN 1980 351 ho 2V Windsor cam are very underrated and under appreciated. The best is, in my opnion, the 290 degree 464 thou cam with 1.6 lifters....a perfect non roller cam with all the goods for a fun safe modern 351w.

Any well devised aftermarket cam designed around a modern properly designed non OEM Ford EFI will just make the 5.8 erupt like a System of a Down track form Steal This Album.

When the good factory heads are useds (289 HP GT350 R heads from the GT40 program and the Shelby 289, the 4v 1968 J code 302W, 1969 4V 351 W H code, 1993-1996 GT40, 1997-2001 GT40P), the problems with the Windsor are migrated fast to more compression, and more cam to intake manifold "smarts". The truck 351W knock sensor and the copies of the Jack Roush divided single plane with EFI injection manifold have been a standard 450 to 520 hp at 6500 rpm go getter on many Aussie 342/347 Windsor strokers and the very similar VN-VS 355 Holden Commodore combinations...that old GMH was just a Windsor engine in drag.

If it were me?


Solid Phase I/Shelby aftermarket 351 "69" cam,
find Tom Moss to do the lower intake port work,
re-massage the fuel tables of the ECM.

GT40P heads were the 335 hp 2002 heads of choice.....Ford even listed the alloy heads as fctory, but none were ever made, and the engines were just a lot of fun. 351R, or 342 Ticford T3.

Forget the headers, the 1969 race Falcon GTHO's and Shelby GT350's with the 351W just used iron hedaers, the cam was designed around the engine with just a little restriction, but the 69 dual exhaust pipes on GT350's and GTHO Falcon Phase I's were the sweetests things around.


and have a little fun.

The mild end of the 351 specturm is a lot of long life fun.


The rods and pistons, they are going to make an already wonderfull engine very smooth, and it won't spoil what you've done.

Dollar for dollar, Ford didn't really change that much from the 1969 351 to the last 1999 Saleen 351 blocks, they knew what they were doing.

[Walking-Tall]

See note 14...



1993-1995 "Cobra R" roller cam. Interesting, maybe little known fact, that the F3ZE-CA camshaft was snuck into some '93 Thunderbirds and Cougars...

[nelzfoxes]

I’ve been driving The Daddywagon for several months now with a 351w in it. The torque I think is key to a nice street car... that and a smooth idle. To that end I put a stock mustang camshaft into a Ford Lightning 351w engine upgraded with cobra roller rockers. Great first step. I fill up with 87 octane and drive it around all day long. I just need a little more from the engine. It pulls nicely but my brother’s 2015 pulls harder. I have all of the major components for this long rod engine. Perhaps it’s time.

[xctasy]

http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=70822



The exact references were on two engines, Stans TRD 4AGE item, and David Vizards A series engines. They are conclusive enough, though more data would be nice...

I've gotten some more data from Kelford on a 1.58 to 1.78 (12.6%) rod increase. The 1588 cc engine was not air restricted as much as the 9000 rpm TRD Atlantic 4AGE comparison from Stan, but it yielded a 3.1% power increase on a chassis dyno. 177.6hp on the rollers is about 222 hp. This is less than the " half the rod ratio increase is the power increase".


See
https://youtu.be/uQLiWQAS35E

On the modified stock 1275 Mini Cooper S engine with a 100 hp engine, David Vizard found a 2 hp increasee from a 4.5% improvement in rod ratio from 1.79 to 1.87. 5.75 rod with 3.206 stroke, verses a 6.00 inch 970S rod.

2% power increase from a 4.5% rod ratio improvement.

I've posted his Melbourne 2 hour video that cites the power increase at the 1:49 mark.

Other data on 6 inch rod changes to the 302/327/350 and 400 cube Chevrolet Small Blocks by Richard Holdener yielded no improvement on a Super Flow 902 dyno.

On the Chrysler LA 318/340/ 360, the idealised lobe center ratio was charted by Marlon at Hot Rod in 1986, but the rod ratio data wasn't included. Ford in 1962 did an FE rod ratio experiment on a single cylinder Morse Test, the paper confirmed that 1.8 was a good target, just as the Chrysler Hemi development engineers found.

More info is being unearthed.

Good fortune with your long rods. Engine Masters is a restricted Area Under Curve dyno test. It's not based on peak power or reducing cylinder side loads or finding smoother engines. It's disappointing that people don't cite the evidence like I have done constantly for the last 20 years. The long rod advantages exist, in some cases, quite a lot of power is given with a moderate improve mentioned in rod length with air restricted engines. This isn't a self delusional decision to let a crackpot theory emerge from no data at all.

[ZephyrEFI]

You and your long rod...

[xctasy]

Lol. Boastang.