351 crate motor?

Anyone had any experience with Ford Racings 351 crate motor, the one they
say is HD. 250 hp,4bbl intake, and cost $2,800? Thinking of putting one in
my 71 coupe, the Ford parts website says it makes 350 ft lbs of tq. I would
like alittle more hp than 250 say around 300, but this price is in my
budget.

Thanks Dean.

Nothing says you can't take the crate motor and build it up from there....
OTOH, there is no replacement for displacement and it wouldn't be hard to
take a seasoned block and stroke it out to 400 inches... add some decent
heads and you are well on your way to 300+ HP


"Dean" > wrote in message
...
> Anyone had any experience with Ford Racings 351 crate motor, the one they
> say is HD. 250 hp,4bbl intake, and cost $2,800? Thinking of putting one in
> my 71 coupe, the Ford parts website says it makes 350 ft lbs of tq. I
would
> like alittle more hp than 250 say around 300, but this price is in my
> budget.
>
> Thanks Dean.
>
>

Dean wrote:
> Anyone had any experience with Ford Racings 351 crate motor, the one they
> say is HD. 250 hp,4bbl intake, and cost $2,800? Thinking of putting one in
> my 71 coupe, the Ford parts website says it makes 350 ft lbs of tq. I would
> like alittle more hp than 250 say around 300, but this price is in my
> budget.

That's not the one you want. You really want the marine version of the
351W. I don't recall how much it costs these days, but it's good for
almost 350hp normally aspirated. They also more or less drop in to a
Fox Mustang with some minor alterations.

Cheers,

"Dean" > wrote in message
...
> Anyone had any experience with Ford Racings 351 crate motor, the one they
> say is HD. 250 hp,4bbl intake, and cost $2,800? Thinking of putting one in
> my 71 coupe, the Ford parts website says it makes 350 ft lbs of tq. I
> would like alittle more hp than 250 say around 300, but this price is in
> my budget.
>

I spent that much rebuilding my 302 that's in the 'Chero. It's a .060" ob C8
block with gasket matched C8 iron heads, RPM air gap intake and a little
more cam than stock. It puts out ~270hp at the flywheel, and that's with 40
cid less than that brand new 351W. Installed.

The other end is the 351W that's in my '69. It's a .060" ob D9 block. GT40-X
heads. Comp Cams XE262H cam. Performer intake. CHP 393 stroker crank. full
balance. How 'bout 420hp and 480lb/ft tq? This cost in the neighborhood of
$4k installed.

I suggest you do a bit more research. I know getting a crate engine is a lot
easier, but there are advantages to having a motor built for you. My builder
asked a lot of questions before he started building. First obviously is what
my budget is. Next is what am I going to use it for. Am I planning on having
some fun with it later on? Any trips to the circle, roadcourse or straight
line track (regularly, rarely, or never)? These are things a builder you
actually talk to can discuss which way to go with the build. With a crate,
you get what you get.
--
Scott W.
'66 HCS Mustang 289
'68 Ranchero 500 302
'69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W
ThunderSnake #57
http://home.comcast.net/~vanguard92/

Ritz wrote:
> Dean wrote:
>
>> Anyone had any experience with Ford Racings 351 crate motor, the one
>> they say is HD. 250 hp,4bbl intake, and cost $2,800? Thinking of
>> putting one in my 71 coupe, the Ford parts website says it makes 350
>> ft lbs of tq. I would like alittle more hp than 250 say around 300,
>> but this price is in my budget.
>
>
> That's not the one you want. You really want the marine version of the
> 351W. I don't recall how much it costs these days, but it's good for
> almost 350hp normally aspirated. They also more or less drop in to a
> Fox Mustang with some minor alterations.


There's also the 385hp 351-HO SVO (PN M-6007-A351) crate engine. List
is a little over $4k. That's a bit more than the $2,800 quoted above,
but it's also over 50% more horsepower in a normally aspirated Ford
crate engine. And then there's the 351 GT-40 SVO assembly (PN
M-6007-B351), which comes with cast-iron heads and an auto-trans
flexplate. Using SVO’s dual-plane intake (PN M-9424-Z351), a 750-cfm
Holley, and headers, it’s still rated at 346 hp and 364 lb-ft.

Don't forget that there are also lots of places doing the old
standard...347 stroker which can produce a lot of normally aspirated
power on a budget as well.

Good luck!

Cheers,

Dean, Earlier this year my daughter's b/f started a complete
drivetrain replacement project for his '65 coupe. We decided early on
to replace the non-original 302 w/a 351 and looked at that crate engine
also. He eventually bought a remanufactured 351 with the same heads
and cam (reputable machinist shop) for $1000 less. If other items
weren't needed for the project he'd have bought the crate engine.

Headers, 4BBL and a set of used 1.7 roller rockers later he has a car
that outruns my 14.2 sec. '00 GT from a roll ('65 needs limited slip
and ratio change).

bradtx

What is "4bbl intake", please?

--
Scotter


"Jim Warman" > wrote in message
news:aLLdf.106073$S4.36724@edtnps84...
> Nothing says you can't take the crate motor and build it up from there....
> OTOH, there is no replacement for displacement and it wouldn't be hard to
> take a seasoned block and stroke it out to 400 inches... add some decent
> heads and you are well on your way to 300+ HP
>
>
> "Dean" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Anyone had any experience with Ford Racings 351 crate motor, the one they
>> say is HD. 250 hp,4bbl intake, and cost $2,800? Thinking of putting one
>> in
>> my 71 coupe, the Ford parts website says it makes 350 ft lbs of tq. I
> would
>> like alittle more hp than 250 say around 300, but this price is in my
>> budget.
>>
>> Thanks Dean.
>>
>>
>
>

Scotter wrote:
> What is "4bbl intake", please?
>


An intake manifold that will accep a 4-barrel carburetor.

Cheers,

Scotter wrote:
> What is "4bbl intake", please?
>

OMG it's finally happened. The old fashioned carburetor and its
associated hardware is not recognized by the masses anymore...

Rob

trainfan1 wrote:
> Scotter wrote:
>
>> What is "4bbl intake", please?
>>
>
> OMG it's finally happened. The old fashioned carburetor and its
> associated hardware is not recognized by the masses anymore...
>
> Rob


Anyone younger than about 30 or 35 that isn't a hotrodder probably has
never even seen one on a production car. Personally, I prefer fuel
injection. It's a little more complex, but you can more finely tune the
engine and you don't have to worry about a cranky choke when the weather
gets cold. 8-)

I have an old mid-60's Jeep Commando that I use occasionally to plow my
driveway. I was rebuilding the carb a few months ago and must have had
a dozen people ask me what that funny looking thing on my workbench was.
The rebuild kit I got from my usual parts supplier looked like it
had about 30 years worth of dust on the box. 8-)

Cheers,