Close



Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 55 of 55
  1. #51
    FEP Power Member Broncojunkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Barboursville, WV
    Posts
    1,773

    Default

    You can occasionally find gt40 heads that have been worked for fairly cheap. Usually someone who built a motor and then wanted more power and eventually went to aftermarket aluminum heads. I know my machinist was recently sitting on a fresh pair of gt40's that he did for a customer and he didn't take them for some reason. He was wanting $500 or so. I've been meaning to see if he ever decided to come down on them. I'd like to have them for my 82gt, if I ever get around to starting that project.

  2. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haystack View Post
    Or, after spending $400 on a set of heads, $200 yet to get them machined, then $200 on springs, you could get some aluminum heads.

    Really, swap in the gt40's. If the head needs machined, go back to a u pull it yard and find some that don't.
    "Some"... which? Fallacy. With so many of the opinion now that early castings are basically nothing but doorstops, on the shelf, discarded in general, sometimes they can be had for nothing, as is fully assembled, and including all attending hardware and parts and such and stud rockers to boot instead of the newer aluminum pedestal/trunnion and spindly rocker hold down bolts. The odds are REAL good that all 16 seats or valves will not be burnt, all 8 exhaust valves/seats won't be "sunk" from unleaded use needing repair/replacement, etc, requiring minimal machining. A quick trip to Summit racing will show even USA-ers cannot get ONE assembled aftermarket aluminum cylinder head for 800 bucks. I can assemble a few PAIRS of great working early iron castings, with larger valves, hardened exhaust valve seats, porting, planing, and appropriate valve springs instead of spending 1200 Canadian dollars for ONE "assembled" aftermarket aluminum head.

    Who is determining the necessity for machining, how, and how much is that cost? Bringing cleaning supplies, a machinist's straight-edge, feeler and depth gauges and calipers and micrometer, or x-ray glasses with incremental precision measuring ability to the yard? lol
    Mike
    1986 Mustang convertible ---> BUILD THREAD
    Past Fox-chassis "four eyes":
    1983 Mercury Cougar LS
    1986 Ford Thunderbird ELAN
    1980 Capri RS Turbo

    Work in progress website ---> http://carb-rebuilds-plus.boards.net/

  3. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ourobos View Post
    351w has hardened seats since unleaded gasoline was introduced... an early 70s set will not, correct
    Only the early 351w heads have a performance advantage, Not worth swapping later 351w heads with hardened seats because they are basically the same as 5.0 heads. I have run a set of worked over '69 351w heads, ported bigger valves, and so on. I wouldn't bother with it now.

    Jess
    Previously owned;
    1979 Mustang, v6 swapped to EFI 393, custom installed m122 blower, 4r70w trans, Megasquirt II, T-top swaped in.
    1990 Mustang, 545 BBF, C-4 with brake, ladder bars.
    1983 Mustang, 1984 SVO Mustang
    1984 Mustang convertible, v6 swapped to 351
    1986 Mustang GT, 1989 Mustang GT convertible
    1992 Mustang coupe, 4 swapped to 302

  4. #54
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Only the early 351w heads have a performance advantage, Not worth swapping later 351w heads with hardened seats because they are basically the same as 5.0 heads. I have run a set of worked over '69 351w heads, ported bigger valves, and so on. I wouldn't bother with it now.

    Jess
    Amen. Despite the 1968 and 1969 USA market non Boss Windsor engines having no camshaft duration to speak of, the first year Windsor 302 and 351 4V's were exceptionally good head castings, but try and find a 1968 230 hp "J " or 1969 290 hp "M" code. These engines were a consession to the emissions, and the dislike for the 271 hp K code 289's noisy mechanical lifters. The total production of 302 1968 and 1969 4-bbl Windors must have been much higher than the old K codes numbers. The J's and M's had the most conservative valve timing, so an intake and cam swap with some better valve spings made a worked on 68 to 69er a firebrand with some Total Performance parts.

    My countrymen are buyin up whole 68 and 69 cars because any old 4bbl Windsor heads are almost as good as a closed chamber 57 cc 302 Cleveland 2v head. About 189 cfm verses 205 cfm at 500 thou before any port work at 28"H20. That's great for a stock head.

    I cannot believe how many 1968-1969 Mercury Montego MX's and XR7's that I have detailed as imports have gotten the 4V engine codes.



    They were such a power full engine for something with less than 270 degrees duration and under 450 thou valve lift, but they had 10 to 10.7:1 compression, and although they'd run on standard gas, they still love a splash of 98 Octane, 105 Avgas or 104+.

    The whole issues for modern heads is how they cope with lower octane gas, and the GT40 and P's are much better on 93 octane than a set of 4V C8's or C9's.




    As the old saying goes, "with Windsors, it's all in the heads!"


    The J code C8 302W 4V and M code 351w 4V C9's are excellent, but are rare, and high compression.

    Many 4v 302's came out in the 68 Fairlanes too, and they had the same kind of 1969 351 W 4V head, just missed out on the bigger Boss 302 head bolt sizes, 62.5 thou bigger diameter.



    Compared between each, the early head modified has a lot more potential. All production Windsor OHV heads suffer a lack of room to put in good valve sizes.

    3 and 4 eyebrows are so common, and people wanna offload to go to alloy heads.

    This is a nice situation to be in, becasue the compression ratio issues with short duration cams are what demollishes 351 engines.

    From late 1969 to about 1983, the Cleveland got all the money pumped into it for competition, so Windsor iron head modification fast became a lost art.

    Australian Mick Webb did the engine rebuilds on Windsors as well as Australian licenced owner of SVO Motorsport,



    He and classically stated in 1988 "Hot 302's and 351's" that the Windsor 351 4 barrels were all boat anchors with a tendancy to crack pistons and head castings. "thankfully, there aren't too many left. A Cleveland [4 barrel (either 2v, or 4V)] is always 50 horses up on any 302 or 351 Windsor 4 barrel."


    The USA situaton was different, for its first year, a 69 351 2v or 4V Windsor was basically a standout 250 or 290 hp engine. After 1969, the premium small block was the 2V or 4V Cleveland, 250 or 285/300/330.

    The emissions regulations and the decision not to offer the US designed 302 Cleveland 2V, which with 57 cc heads and 9.4:1 compression was rated 240 hp gross with a 245 cfm 2-bbl Bendix Stromberg carb, 250hp gross as a 351 2V with 75 cc heads and 8.9:1 compression.

    Factory Windsor 302 4bbls were about 200 hp but we never got a 2V 351 Windsor. Our 4-bbls were 290 or 300 hp for 1969, 10 more than the US M-code.



    Our Cleveland 351 GT's were all about 330 to 350 hp net according to Mick Webb, so that 50 hp up on stock shows the 1969 351 Windsor 4v to have been a very strong engine combination, even despite the derogatory "boat anchor" statement.

    Sucessfull car and open wheel F5000 and 500 mile enduro racer Kevin Bartlett still rates the first year 1969 351 as the nicest 351 engine.

    https://www.tradeuniquecars.com.au/f...sie-connection




    then suddenly pegged back the Cleveland verses Windsor power differences to a very small amount, something like less than 20 hp net.

  5. #55

    Default

    Hey Trey
    I know you answered a post about swapping a sn95 rear end into a fox body. Cant seem to locate that info. Can you lead me to it.
    Thanks

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •