351w

i want to put a 351w out of a 88 e350 in my 89 5.0 i want to no if my
computer will work with it and if so should i use my stock injecters or
the ones in the 351 and any other ideas would help thank you


--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/....ford.mustang/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html

It should work but you will need a custom programmed add-on chip to make
it compatible with the larger displacement of the 351W. I am assuming
the firing order of the 351W is the same as the 302. You should size
the injectors according to the hp the engine will produce.

chevyman84 wrote:
> i want to put a 351w out of a 88 e350 in my 89 5.0 i want to no if my
> computer will work with it and if so should i use my stock injecters or
> the ones in the 351 and any other ideas would help thank you
>
>
> --
> Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/....ford.mustang/
> More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html
>

"chevyman84" > wrote in message
lkaboutautos.com...
>i want to put a 351w out of a 88 e350 in my 89 5.0 i want to no if my
> computer will work with it and if so should i use my stock injecters or
> the ones in the 351 and any other ideas would help thank you
>
>
> --
> Message posted using
> http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/....ford.mustang/
> More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html

Just some food for thought on this. First, the 351w truck motor may have a
little more torque but allot less horsepower. Is the 88 E350 speed density
or MAF? Leave the stock injectors on the 351, they are rated fot the engines
hp. I wouldnt be surprised if they were 19lb injectors just like the 302's
h.o. motor. I would swap the 351's computer with the engine otherwise you
would have to get another computer set up.

ND wrote:
> "chevyman84" > wrote in message
> lkaboutautos.com...
>> i want to put a 351w out of a 88 e350 in my 89 5.0 i want to no if my
>> computer will work with it and if so should i use my stock injecters or
>> the ones in the 351 and any other ideas would help thank you
>>
>>
>> --
>> Message posted using
>> http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/....ford.mustang/
>> More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html
>
> Just some food for thought on this. First, the 351w truck motor may have a
> little more torque but allot less horsepower. Is the 88 E350 speed density
> or MAF? Leave the stock injectors on the 351, they are rated fot the engines
> hp. I wouldnt be surprised if they were 19lb injectors just like the 302's
> h.o. motor. I would swap the 351's computer with the engine otherwise you
> would have to get another computer set up.

Swapping the computers may require swapping the wiring harness for it to
be compatible. I would rather get the chip (and a better tune by
default) than go through that hassle.

"Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
...
> It should work but you will need a custom programmed add-on chip to make
> it compatible with the larger displacement of the 351W. I am assuming the
> firing order of the 351W is the same as the 302. You should size the
> injectors according to the hp the engine will produce.

MAF needs to match injectors and computer
I think 87 was the last of the speed density.
Not sure about the air temp sensor location and its calibration in computer


>
> chevyman84 wrote:
>> i want to put a 351w out of a 88 e350 in my 89 5.0 i want to no if my
>> computer will work with it and if so should i use my stock injecters or
>> the ones in the 351 and any other ideas would help thank you
>>
>>
>> --
>> Message posted using
>> http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/....ford.mustang/
>> More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html
>>

Al Lergy wrote:
> "Michael Johnson" > wrote in message
> ...
>> It should work but you will need a custom programmed add-on chip to make
>> it compatible with the larger displacement of the 351W. I am assuming the
>> firing order of the 351W is the same as the 302. You should size the
>> injectors according to the hp the engine will produce.
>
> MAF needs to match injectors and computer
> I think 87 was the last of the speed density.
> Not sure about the air temp sensor location and its calibration in computer

With a chip the MAF and injectors don't have to match. It can be
programmed to compensate for the discrepancy. Also, 1988 (except for
California cars) was the last of the speed density systems.

>> chevyman84 wrote:
>>> i want to put a 351w out of a 88 e350 in my 89 5.0 i want to no if my
>>> computer will work with it and if so should i use my stock injecters or
>>> the ones in the 351 and any other ideas would help thank you
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Message posted using
>>> http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/....ford.mustang/
>>> More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html
>>>
>
>

The groundpounder(302) and the winsor(351) engine are the
same except for displacement... probably a longer stroke.
Same block, heads and rollers.

I defer to you on the block but the heads and rollers were
same. I stand corrected. I knew it had a longer stroke, as
you say. Hope he measures that sucker first, then.

Then the taller 351 will need a shoehorn for the hood. All
else should be constant though. Keep slammin till it
latches....lol

I have had owed ford V8's including 4.6 litre, 302, 351W,
351 Cobra Jet, 429 Cobra Jet and my fav was always the 302.
Indestructible and reasonable on fuel. Had two of them...

Cheers,

"Scott W." <69ta_mustangatcomcastdotcom> wrote in message
. ..
|
| "Lazimodo" > wrote in message
| ...
| > The groundpounder(302) and the winsor(351) engine are
the
| > same except for displacement... probably a longer
stroke.
| > Same block, heads and rollers.
| >
|
| No, The 302 and the 351W are NOT the same. The 302 is
shorter on stroke by
| half an inch. 3" vs 3.5", the block was taller and wider
by almost an inch
| both ways. You can use the same heads, but you cannot use
the same intakes.
|
| If it were the same block then you should be able to make
a 427 stroker out
| of that little 302. For that matter, you should be able to
make a 427
| stroker out of that tiny lil 289. the 289 and the 302 WERE
the same block.
|
| You could ALMOST include the 260 in the same category as
the 289 and 302 but
| there are enough internal deifferences to leave it out
AFAIK. But externally
| the 260 was the same block up to the 302.
|
| Scott W.
| '68 Ranchero 500, 302
| '69 Mustang Sportsroof, stroker 400W
|
|

"Lazimodo" > wrote in message
...
> The groundpounder(302) and the winsor(351) engine are the
> same except for displacement... probably a longer stroke.
> Same block, heads and rollers.
>

No, The 302 and the 351W are NOT the same. The 302 is shorter on stroke by
half an inch. 3" vs 3.5", the block was taller and wider by almost an inch
both ways. You can use the same heads, but you cannot use the same intakes.

If it were the same block then you should be able to make a 427 stroker out
of that little 302. For that matter, you should be able to make a 427
stroker out of that tiny lil 289. the 289 and the 302 WERE the same block.

You could ALMOST include the 260 in the same category as the 289 and 302 but
there are enough internal deifferences to leave it out AFAIK. But externally
the 260 was the same block up to the 302.

Scott W.
'68 Ranchero 500, 302
'69 Mustang Sportsroof, stroker 400W

"Lazimodo" > wrote
>I defer to you on the block but the heads and rollers were
> same. I stand corrected. I knew it had a longer stroke, as
> you say. Hope he measures that sucker first, then.

The only head differences that I know of were on the first 2 years they
built the 351W back in 69 and 70. Starting in '71 they both used the same
head which came off the 302. The earlier C9 and D0 351W heads were better
than the 302 heads and flowed more. It was just more cost effective for Ford
to use the same head instead of using 2 different ones when the penny
pinchers started getting involved and just as the EPA started getting
"uppity" about the environment. The smaller heads choked the 351W.

>
> Then the taller 351 will need a shoehorn for the hood. All
> else should be constant though. Keep slammin till it
> latches....lol

I found out the hard way that the height was a pain in the ass when I
slammed my BRAND new paint job hood onto my JUST installed 351W and put a
giant dent right smack in the center where the air cleaner center post
sticks up. Wouldn't have happened on a 302.

Went straight to Checker and got a drop base for the air cleaner.

Scott W.
'68 Ranchero 500, 302
'69 Mustang Sportsroof, Stroker 400W
http://home.comcast.net/~vanguard92/