I'm trying to find out if I'll run into any issues putting a 351M in a 64 F100. LMC truck sells mounts/conversions for Winsor Small blocks, and FE, 429/460 big blocks, but nothing for the 351M/400 does anybody have any insight? Engine is out of a late 70s F250 so the mounts that are on it are avaliable. Also can a C6 for a 4x4 be converted for 2wd? -I'd appreciate any wisdom that can be passed my way
I'm pretty sure that the 351 Clevland has the same mounts as the windsor but not positive about the 351M/400. I may have a block in my shop I will try to look in the next couple of days.
A 4x4 C6 can be converted to 2wd. You will need the 2wd output shaft and tailshaft housing. In the long run though it may be cheaper and easier to sell the 4x4 unit and find a 2wd unit. Good Luck
the 351m400 is a gas guzzling boat anchor unless you re cam it even then your still better off with a windsor engine or a F.E. motor
In 1979 I converted my 77 F250 4x4 351 into a .030 over 400 {406} along with an RV cam and an Edelbrock SP2P intake with a 600 Holley. {the only intake made at the time } I put dual exhausts, balanced the motor , milled the heads .050 etc. At the time there was very little aftermarket items made for the motor. It ran decent but not for the money I spent on it. It made good torque but once it got to 4500 it was like shutting the key off because of the intake. As an ex Ford mecnanic, Id say your money would be better spent on another engine. There is a good web site on building them if you do a search, in fact I built one recently for a buddy with higher compresion pistons, better cam & a dual plane Edelbrock intake. The results werent much different but he's happy with it towing. Im sure Theres others that think different but thats my 2 pennys worth. Plus they are gas hogs & ping on anything but premium fuel
The 351M/400 is actually a very good engine when you use the correct heads. Goobs of torque and can easily make 1hp/cube. They are based roughly on the cleveland not the windsor. Google Tim Meyer performance. Lots of aftermarket support. I've got a mildly built 351m in my tow rig and it does very well.
Bingo, Jon Kaase didn't win the Jeg's Engine Master Challenge 3 times with a 400 because they are bad motors. The right heads, cam, etc and these things can be made to run very strong and get decent mileage to boot. Don't get too caught up in the nay-sayers, build it and prove them wrong.
Some of the early M engine have the same mount as the Cleveland. The other have a 3 bolt mount. Look at the side of the block if there are two bosses sticking straight down you have the early engine. 302 w/35 cleveland style. If there is one bolt hole high on the block and two down near the pan then it is the later style block. On the later block pictures the #1 are the motor mount bolts If you have the early block the 351 C mounts will work
i alway liked the 351/400M motors,should able to find a 75-77 galaxy 500,75-78 T-bird W/a tranny,but watch the oil pans car & trucks are different.
Thanks everybody for all the advise, obviously not the most popular Ford block, but I'm going for more of a mild custom parts hauler as opposed to a speed demon, and I'm getting the running motor with a 9in from a jeeper who bought the entire donor truck just for the 4wd hubs.
it fits fine, have one in my 61. Id rather it be a 302, or even a modular, but it fits, it runs and it smokes the tires like theres no tomorrow
If it is the new style with 3 bolts for the mounts a 429/460 engine swap kit MIGHT work. As for any kind of performance on a budget, a non retarded timing set (since Ford retarded timing on these for smog), a cam, an intake and carb, headers and exhaust and you will have a fun cruiser but they sure do like the fuel.
It was always my understanding that the M motors were basically cleveland's that used 429-460 motor mounts and bellhousings... Sort of a stop gap measure by detroit to fit a smaller motor into existing chassis that were designed for big motors in an attempt to battle rising fuel prices and tightening emissions regs of the 70's
Having worked at a Ford dealership in the late 70s and early 80s, I have to say that the M engines were one of Fords biggest mistakes. They are big and heavy, had piston problems [usually number 7], a lousy valve train and sucked gas like crazy. Ford tried everything to get these engines to meet emission regulations but they just don't burn fuel efficiently.
Basicly a C with a raised deck. The usual comments is the more carb you give them the more gas gets used w/o much gain, so get the Edelbrock Performer intake & a Edelbrock 500 or Edel. or Holley 600.
The worst part of the 400 is the heads, real big combustion chambers that are prone to detonation (which is why they had piston problems). One of the best 400's I've seen was one that used the Aussie 2bbl heads that had closed chamber heads like the 351C 4bbl heads had.
If youre determined to do it, this is your best source of info and some really good tips on what to look for as far as cracks, which they are prone to do http://www.projectbronco.com/Technical_Articles/351m400_performance_build_up.htm
After doing a short check, Ive found that the higher compression pistons I used are no longer available. http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/hrdp_0702_ford_400m_engine_build/viewall.html this is a good albeit expensive solution to that problem. Way too much money for what youll get out of it. Buy a set of Edelbrock heads & intake and youll have the best running & most expensive 400 in town. These were never popular to start with so I doubt theres too much demand for performance parts for them now. Good luck at any rate
I put a 400 m in a 68 fairlane I used to have. rebuilt the heads added a weiand action series intake (copy of Edelbrock performer) 600 cfm AFB carb with a performer cam and dual exhaust off stock manifolds, chucked all the smog bogger crap in the trash. ran great for me. lots of torque, made a great highway cruiser motor and @ 17 mpg highway.
If you go to a 4 barrel Holley the trick to getting good mileage with it is to run a 2 stage power valve and uses the stiffest spring in the Vac. secondary spring kit. I got 18mpg with a 302w and C-4 trans in a 1969 Ford 1 ton van,towing a trailer.
The Jalopy Journal
