Register now to get rid of these ads!

Whats better to build 351C or 351W?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by S1B, Aug 14, 2005.

  1. S1B
    Joined: Mar 18, 2004
    Posts: 678


    I'm going to put one in my 53 ford . Need to know wich one is better to build and for what reasons.I want it to be pretty quick and stout.
  2. I have a Cleveland in my '56 Customline. It is an awsome motor, but if I were to do one from scratch, I'd build a windsor. There is a bunch more parts available for them (intakes, headers, flywheels, other bolt on stuff). The cleveland is a good performer, it huge valves even in the two barrel version. But I think it makes a better race engine than street engine. Also, my clever gets around 9 mpg in town (if I stay outa the secondaries) and 11 anda half on the freeway.

    Both are good, my $.02
  3. AnimalAin
    Joined: Jul 20, 2002
    Posts: 3,417


    Windsor hands down. The Cleveland is a stout motor, but was built for only a few years, a long time ago. Aftermarket support for the Windsor is way better, and the advantages of the Cleveland head have been largely overcome by the plethora of aluminum Windsor heads available these days.
  4. Ford Freak
    Joined: Jan 5, 2005
    Posts: 827

    Ford Freak

    Edelbrock just released an aluminum Cleaveland head. Read all about it in the new Mustangs&Fords rag.

  5. jaybee
    Joined: Mar 3, 2001
    Posts: 268


    Second what the others said. Years ago a lot of people thought the Cleveland was the one to have. Mostly that was because there were a lot of fast, strong Clevelands on the race track. The Windsor was mostly limited by cylinder heads but was torquier than the Cleveland and has always been a great street engine. With the improved parts for Windsor engines, especially aftermarket heads, that's the way to go.
  6. Derek
    Joined: Dec 12, 2004
    Posts: 193


    They are both good stout motors, and people been buildin' hot rod Cleveland parts for years. If you do the Cleveland, stay with 2V heads unless you are building a high revving high horse engine for racing. Streetability, both can be really good motors. The Windsor will probably have a larger array of less expensive parts and if I'm not mistaken, is physically smaller than the Cleveland. As far as streetable power, same as before, both can be done and both have proven themselves as strong and durable motors to build. As far as better? All about the opinion, who likes what better, might as well ask if you should use a Chevy or a Ford, or what's better, Dodge or Ford, it's all about the opinions. The things I would ask you would be do you have one now? Do you have leads on one now? What kinda money do you want to spend? Like I said before, the Cleveland will probably cost you more money to build, but either way, it's gonna cost you money to build a motor. Regardless of what it is you will have to spend money for speed.
  7. TriFiveChevyJohn
    Joined: Apr 18, 2005
    Posts: 212

    from TEXAS!

    351 Modified is the best!;)
  8. Fender
    Joined: Dec 27, 2004
    Posts: 28

    from Detroit,MI

    The cleveland will make more power easier than a windsor, but the 351w is a better choice. Main reason is cost and availality, the 351w can be had cheap and lots of parts out there for them. With todays modern speed parts a 351w can run as strong as a cleveland so I advise using them. I got one to put in my t-bird, it's got 69 heads with a Performer intake and Comp Cams 280H cam. Good fun street motor!
  9. brianf31
    Joined: Aug 11, 2003
    Posts: 831


    Actually, there are plenty of speed parts for the Cleveland. The Aussies kept building C's way after we quit (in 302 and 351 versions). Many of their speed parts have made it over here. CHI and AFD (in Australia and/or NZ) make heads that, from most reports, shame Edelbrock's new heads. There's also the Parker Funnelweb intake from down under. Brodix makes a race version of the heads here, not to mention all of the Roush parts. Granted, you'll pay more to build the C.
    For street performance, it's hard to beat an 11:1 pump gas 351C with closed chamber 4V heads, port stuffers and a Weiand Xcelerator. The new Edelbrock RPM intake ought to help the low end. Cam selection is abundant, distributors and rockers from a 460 are interchangeable, and piston selection is good.
    The 351W is a good motor, too. In the end, you run a 351C to be different.
  10. Capt. Zorro
    Joined: Nov 30, 2004
    Posts: 557

    Capt. Zorro

    I'd have to vote for the Windsor, more parts available cheaper. Also my machinist said that about one out of three Clevelands won't take a .030 overbore due to core shift.
  11. krooser
    Joined: Jul 25, 2004
    Posts: 4,584


    8 pistons...8 rods....2 heads...16 valves...don't see much difference...Windsor's are like SBC's...everybody's got ' a good Cleveland or FE gets attention....And don't get excited about "cheaper to build"...if that was the only factor in somebody's buying decision, we'd all be driving Hyundai's and living in trailer parks...
  12. Ford Freak
    Joined: Jan 5, 2005
    Posts: 827

    Ford Freak

    Ihave the Aussie 2v closed chamber cast iron heads on my C. With a RPM intake and Comp roller,works great on the street. very strong low end & mid range power. The new Edelbrock heads are a bit of a dissapointment. Yes, I run a 351C to be different, and for sentimental reasons. It was my first "hot" motor 32 yrs. ago!!:cool:
  13. Henry Floored
    Joined: Sep 18, 2004
    Posts: 1,370

    Henry Floored

    Hey Ford Freak, do you remember a racer named Forrest Huff that ran a 351 Cleveland against the "rat" motored Chevrolets down at Spencer Speedway circa 1974? He did pretty well despite the significant displacement disadvantage.

    Anyway my thoughts on the Cleveland are these. The darn things just look so damn cool with those big old fat canted valve cylinder heads. Everybody has an sbc some have Windsors but a select few run the mighty Clevelands. Go for it and be different. BTW if you need a rear sump pan use one from a 351M- 400 4x4 application, that'll work just fine.
  14. psyched0ut
    Joined: Feb 16, 2005
    Posts: 34

    from Sweden

    I will have a rebuilt 351C 2V in my Tudor -31, I bought it for my Mach1 -70 but then sold the car away with the 460 that was in it. The one thing I would like to have on this engine is a 3x2 intake, but as I understand it doesnt exist, only one to the 4V and that was only produced in around 6 copies! Please correct me if I'm wrong! It will still look good with the new Edelbrock 750 carb and the cadillac air-cleaner though, cant wait to start it up...
  15. Ford Freak
    Joined: Jan 5, 2005
    Posts: 827

    Ford Freak

    Yeah, I remember Forest Huff! Gotta give him an "A" for effort. He tried, he really did. Didn't do too shabby, all things considered!! He built the car, motor, trailer, etc. himself too. Gawd, how things have changed.......:eek:
  16. Scotch
    Joined: May 4, 2001
    Posts: 1,489


    Why not a Cleveland-headed Windsor? Boss 302s were damn cool, and there are CHI Cleveland heads out now designed to bolt right up to a Windsor block.

    The Windsor shortblocks are easy to get, and easy to stroke out, too. I say go with a stroked 351W block to 410 or so, and top it with the CHI aftermarket heads. Kind of a Boss 410...should make great power...

  17. Flat Ernie
    Joined: Jun 5, 2002
    Posts: 8,406

    Flat Ernie
    Tech Editor

    It depends.

    What do you want to do?

    The 351C can probably be built to make more power. But it will all be at the expense of bottom end torque because of the size of the ports - even the 2V ports are cavernous!

    The "cheap" stroker for the 351C is offset ground crank, SBC 6" rods, & Boss 302 pistons.

    This used to be the same recipe for the 351W with the exception of using standard 302 pistons. But the 5.0 Mustang crowd has really pushed the parts availability for SBF in general. You can get huge stroker kits for the 351W for relatively cheap - I think 410" is the practical limit, but there's rarely an impractical limit not imposed by the wallet!:D :D

    If you want a true street/strip car, go with the 351C & some 2V Aussie heads. If you're really going to drive it on the street, but might go to the HAMB drags once a year, build the 351W for all the reasons everyone has told you (cheaper, parts availability, low-end power, etc.)

    If you want to be different, build the 351W & adapt some SBC valve covers to it! :p :D :rolleyes: Not many are running 351C though with only a 4.5 yr production run (in the states).
  18. RacerRick
    Joined: May 16, 2005
    Posts: 2,756


    Build a of both!

    They made the 351 and 400 Modified motors that used 2 brl cleveland heads until 1982 so there are literally tons of 2 brl heads out there. I have a 351M on the back on my truck right now that will be going for scrap. I am thinking of taking the head though.

    Take a 351 windsor block, drill a new water hole in the head, and stick a freeze plug in the old one, and the heads bolt right on. Depending on what chamber size you use, cheap flattop pistons can be used, but should be flycut for the cleveland valves. B&A Ford has intakes, and you are good to go.
  19. Jive-Bomber
    Joined: Aug 21, 2001
    Posts: 3,659


    I ran a 351 Cleveland in my 49 Lincoln for the last 4+ years. I didn't actually pick the 351C, it's just what the guy had, and would trade me for my dead Lincoln flattie.
    The motor is a 4V from a 70 Cougar XR7. I did absolutely no modifications, except Edelbrock intake and carb, and Pertronix in the distributor- I'm even running the stock exh. manifolds.
    You know what? It runs really strong, tons of torque, and pulls my 5500 pound car off the line with some authority. My mileage has been around 15 mpg on the highway because of rear end gearing.

    Run what you want, but it is a bit easier to get Windsor stuff these days...

    Attached Files:

  20. Dirk35
    Joined: Mar 8, 2001
    Posts: 2,064


    More availbility of parts = more speed for cheaper $$.

    You can put 289 Heads for higher compression and put the Chevy 350 valves in for more flow.

    No matter which you choose, be ready for a nightmare due to the number of variations of the Internal-vs-external balanced crank shafts. This also effects which harmonic balance weight and which flex plate weight to use. Then couple that with depth of balancer bolt face-vs- different timing covers available-vs- crazy amount of variations of pulleys.

    Other than that, my opnion, go with the Windsor.
  21. S1B
    Joined: Mar 18, 2004
    Posts: 678


    Thanks alot for all your input!! It will help alot.Thanks again ,Sean
  22. George
    Joined: Jan 1, 2005
    Posts: 7,613


    My 2 favorite engines are the C & the early hemi. I'd go for the C, 2V or 4V. There is an article on a 408C Stroker in newest Mustang Monthly. Valves are BIG on the 4V,:D same as chevy has in the 454
  23. PONY
    Joined: Nov 8, 2004
    Posts: 143


    What I haven't seen mentioned yet is the size and weight difference between the two. The cleveland is heavier and you'll have to address that but the biggest draw back is the width. I have a 351M in my 53 sedan and have No room for headers on the left side and had to run the stock cast iron manifolds. Even at that theirs only 1/2" between the steering box and manifold. The smaller width and much better selection of headers for the 351W would help make that end of the swap a lot easier.

    Attached Files:

  24. Flat Ernie
    Joined: Jun 5, 2002
    Posts: 8,406

    Flat Ernie
    Tech Editor

    351M is bigger than 351C - it's a destroked 400M which is an entirely different animal, really. But you do raise a good point.

    The 351C heads end up with plugs angled slightly downward - in tight applications, this makes changing plugs challenging. I preferred changin plugs in my 428SCJ Mach I over my buddy's 351C Mach I anyday!

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!


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.