Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

Repost:

Hi,

I am working on a new website www .Ford351,com and need pictures of
Ford 351 engines. I had a '72 Ford Torino with a 351C engine but no
good engine pictures before restoration.

Specifically, I am looking for 351 C or 351 W engines. Pictures of a
"Boss 351" or 351 engines factory installed in non-Ford cars (Pantera,
Ski Nautique, Jeep) will be interesting.

Please help me find Ford 351 engine pictures. They must be your
pictures; please do not mail me links or search suggestions. No
pictures of your cars, boats or trucks.

Images to pics@Ford351,com .

Thanks

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

try typing into Google 351 windsor and I get 7600 pics.


"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote in message
news:yN01i.372$b67.338@trnddc06...
> <flrealbot@yahoo,com > wrote in message
> news:1178890301.824594.68080@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups,com ...
>> Repost:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am working on a new website www .Ford351,com and need pictures of
>> Ford 351 engines. I had a '72 Ford Torino with a 351C engine but no
>> good engine pictures before restoration.
>>
>> Specifically, I am looking for 351 C or 351 W engines. Pictures of a
>> "Boss 351" or 351 engines factory installed in non-Ford cars (Pantera,
>> Ski Nautique, Jeep) will be interesting.
>>
>> Please help me find Ford 351 engine pictures. They must be your
>> pictures; please do not mail me links or search suggestions. No
>> pictures of your cars, boats or trucks.
>>
>
>
>
> Most of us will have the engine bolted up to a car, truck, or boat.
> Getting a shot of the engine standing alone is going to be very difficult.
>
> I could lift the hood and send a shot of the air cleaner, but somehow I
> think you've already got that shot.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

Why should I do that? Maybe the OP ought to give it a whirl ...




"TF" <flannery16@insightbb,com > wrote in message
news:vs-dnY5K9MwMKdnbnZ2dnUVZ qSrnZ2d@insightbb,com ...
> try typing into Google 351 windsor and I get 7600 pics.
>
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote in message
> news:yN01i.372$b67.338@trnddc06...
>> <flrealbot@yahoo,com > wrote in message
>> news:1178890301.824594.68080@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups,com ...
>>> Repost:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am working on a new website www .Ford351,com and need pictures of
>>> Ford 351 engines. I had a '72 Ford Torino with a 351C engine but no
>>> good engine pictures before restoration.
>>>
>>> Specifically, I am looking for 351 C or 351 W engines. Pictures of a
>>> "Boss 351" or 351 engines factory installed in non-Ford cars (Pantera,
>>> Ski Nautique, Jeep) will be interesting.
>>>
>>> Please help me find Ford 351 engine pictures. They must be your
>>> pictures; please do not mail me links or search suggestions. No
>>> pictures of your cars, boats or trucks.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Most of us will have the engine bolted up to a car, truck, or boat.
>> Getting a shot of the engine standing alone is going to be very
>> difficult.
>>
>> I could lift the hood and send a shot of the air cleaner, but somehow I
>> think you've already got that shot.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost


"TF" <flannery16@insightbb,com > wrote in message
news:vs-dnY5K9MwMKdnbnZ2dnUVZ_qSrnZ2d@insightbb,com ...
> try typing into Google 351 windsor and I get 7600 pics.

Just because you can view that many doesnt mean you can copy and use them as
you see fit. Copyright comes into play here. Sounds like the OP is asking
for donations of images he can use on his web royalty free ie for free,
rather than stealing someone elses images.

Whitelightning

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

this guy is an idiot, and the web site sucks



<flrealbot@yahoo,com > wrote in message
news:1178890301.824594.68080@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups,com ...
> Repost:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am working on a new website www .Ford351,com and need pictures of
> Ford 351 engines. I had a '72 Ford Torino with a 351C engine but no
> good engine pictures before restoration.
>
> Specifically, I am looking for 351 C or 351 W engines. Pictures of a
> "Boss 351" or 351 engines factory installed in non-Ford cars (Pantera,
> Ski Nautique, Jeep) will be interesting.
>
> Please help me find Ford 351 engine pictures. They must be your
> pictures; please do not mail me links or search suggestions. No
> pictures of your cars, boats or trucks.
>
> Images to pics@Ford351,com .
>
> Thanks
>

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

On Fri, 11 May 2007 06:31:41 -0700, flrealbot rearranged some electrons to
form:

> lame website stuff snipped

Your web site is not only lame, but has incorrect information on it.

351C and 351W are completely different engines.


--
David M (dmacchiarolo)
http :// home.triad.rr,com /redsled
T/S 53
sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 7 days 13:52

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
<crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:

>
> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely page)
> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.

They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.

However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
freeloading bastard.

--
CobraJet

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost


"CobraJet" <shedding@skin.molt> wrote in message
news:110520071905550567%shedding@skin.molt...
> In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
> <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:
>
>>
>> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely
>> page)
>> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.
>
> They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
> distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.
>
> However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
> freeloading bastard.
>

I guess I'll take your word for it. I thought the Cleveland and Windsor
power plants were completely different in each of the areas you just said
they are common.

I remember as a kid (with my father in car business) that when a car was
listed with a Ford 351, the first question was, Cleveland or Windsor? The
performance specs were different, and the physical size was different. Or
that's what I remember thinking at the time.

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost


"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote in message
news:Xq91i.3318$NY3.1344@trnddc03...
>
> "CobraJet" <shedding@skin.molt> wrote in message
> news:110520071905550567%shedding@skin.molt...
>> In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
>> <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely
>>> page)
>>> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.
>>
>> They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
>> distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.
>>
>> However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
>> freeloading bastard.
>>
>
> I guess I'll take your word for it. I thought the Cleveland and Windsor
> power plants were completely different in each of the areas you just said
> they are common.
>
> I remember as a kid (with my father in car business) that when a car was
> listed with a Ford 351, the first question was, Cleveland or Windsor? The
> performance specs were different, and the physical size was different. Or
> that's what I remember thinking at the time.
>

As different as they are there are many similarities, same cylinder size and
spacing, the heads from one will bolt directly on the other, and actually
work with some water jacket modifications. They are BOTH small block
engines if Ford has small block engines...

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

On Sat, 12 May 2007 02:15:19 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
<crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:

>
>"CobraJet" <shedding@skin.molt> wrote in message
>news:110520071905550567%shedding@skin.molt...
>> In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
>> <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely
>>> page)
>>> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.
>>
>> They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
>> distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.
>>
>> However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
>> freeloading bastard.
>>
>
>I guess I'll take your word for it. I thought the Cleveland and Windsor
>power plants were completely different in each of the areas you just said
>they are common.
>
>I remember as a kid (with my father in car business) that when a car was
>listed with a Ford 351, the first question was, Cleveland or Windsor? The
>performance specs were different, and the physical size was different. Or
>that's what I remember thinking at the time.

You're right Jeff. 351 C's and W's are totally different blocks. The
W is more or less a 302 with 351 heads. The C is a big block.
This dude it an idiot.
--
Old Crow "Yol Bolsun!"
'82 FLTC-P "Miss Pearl"
'95 YJ Rio Grande
BS#133, SENS, TOMKAT, MAMBM


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http :// www .teranews,com

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost


"Old Crow" <walliscrow@yahoo,com > wrote in message
news:mk2b43p4d218veji2all16v437hvs773ri@4ax,com ...
> On Sat, 12 May 2007 02:15:19 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
> <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:

>
> You're right Jeff. 351 C's and W's are totally different blocks. The
> W is more or less a 302 with 351 heads. The C is a big block.

Christ!
The original 351 Cleveland (from 1970~1974 Only) was absolutely NOT a BIG
BLOCK!!!
Small block transmission bolt pattern, identical to the 302, and identical
motor mounts.

Besides the 351 Windsor is not more or less a 302 with 351 heads. It is a
taller (hence wider) block, with basically 302 heads.
This whole 351 Windsor head myth is just that a myth, unless you are talking
about a 1 year only 1969 351 Windsor 4-bbl head.


> This dude it an idiot.
> --
> Old Crow "Yol Bolsun!"
> '82 FLTC-P "Miss Pearl"
> '95 YJ Rio Grande
> BS#133, SENS, TOMKAT, MAMBM
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http :// www .teranews,com
>

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

On Sat, 12 May 2007 02:15:19 +0000, Jeff Strickland rearranged some
electrons to form:

>
> "CobraJet" <shedding@skin.molt> wrote in message
> news:110520071905550567%shedding@skin.molt...
>> In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
>> <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely
>>> page)
>>> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.
>>
>> They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
>> distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.
>>
>> However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
>> freeloading bastard.
>>
>
> I guess I'll take your word for it. I thought the Cleveland and Windsor
> power plants were completely different in each of the areas you just said
> they are common.
>
> I remember as a kid (with my father in car business) that when a car was
> listed with a Ford 351, the first question was, Cleveland or Windsor? The
> performance specs were different, and the physical size was different. Or
> that's what I remember thinking at the time.

No, they are externally similar (so that they can be used in the same cars).
However they are completely different inside. The 351W is based on the
small-block. The 351C is not.

--
David M (dmacchiarolo)
http :// home.triad.rr,com /redsled
T/S 53
sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 7 days 23:07

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost


"David M" <NOSPAM@nospam,com > wrote in message
news:464599c3$0$4703$4c368faf@roadrunner,com ...
> On Sat, 12 May 2007 02:15:19 +0000, Jeff Strickland rearranged some
> electrons to form:
>
>>
>> "CobraJet" <shedding@skin.molt> wrote in message
>> news:110520071905550567%shedding@skin.molt...
>>> In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
>>> <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely
>>>> page)
>>>> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.
>>>
>>> They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
>>> distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.
>>>
>>> However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
>>> freeloading bastard.
>>>
>>
>> I guess I'll take your word for it. I thought the Cleveland and Windsor
>> power plants were completely different in each of the areas you just said
>> they are common.
>>
>> I remember as a kid (with my father in car business) that when a car was
>> listed with a Ford 351, the first question was, Cleveland or Windsor? The
>> performance specs were different, and the physical size was different. Or
>> that's what I remember thinking at the time.
>
> No, they are externally similar (so that they can be used in the same
> cars).
> However they are completely different inside. The 351W is based on the
> small-block. The 351C is not.
>
> --
> David M (dmacchiarolo)
> http :// home.triad.rr,com /redsled
> T/S 53
> sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 7 days 23:07
>

My hazy memory might be bad but I seem to recall that the "C" was desirable
to build up because it could be bored. The "W" was bored as much as it
could be .... in fact I think I remember there were some problems with it
due to "thin walls".

Also ... one (forget which) had a version setup for truck use, IIRC.

RCE

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

RCE wrote:
> "David M" <NOSPAM@nospam,com > wrote in message
> news:464599c3$0$4703$4c368faf@roadrunner,com ...
>> On Sat, 12 May 2007 02:15:19 +0000, Jeff Strickland rearranged some
>> electrons to form:
>>
>>> "CobraJet" <shedding@skin.molt> wrote in message
>>> news:110520071905550567%shedding@skin.molt...
>>>> In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
>>>> <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely
>>>>> page)
>>>>> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.
>>>> They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
>>>> distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.
>>>>
>>>> However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
>>>> freeloading bastard.
>>>>
>>> I guess I'll take your word for it. I thought the Cleveland and Windsor
>>> power plants were completely different in each of the areas you just said
>>> they are common.
>>>
>>> I remember as a kid (with my father in car business) that when a car was
>>> listed with a Ford 351, the first question was, Cleveland or Windsor? The
>>> performance specs were different, and the physical size was different. Or
>>> that's what I remember thinking at the time.
>> No, they are externally similar (so that they can be used in the same
>> cars).
>> However they are completely different inside. The 351W is based on the
>> small-block. The 351C is not.
>>
>> --
>> David M (dmacchiarolo)
>> http :// home.triad.rr,com /redsled
>> T/S 53
>> sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 7 days 23:07
>>
>
> My hazy memory might be bad but I seem to recall that the "C" was desirable
> to build up because it could be bored. The "W" was bored as much as it
> could be .... in fact I think I remember there were some problems with it
> due to "thin walls".
>
> Also ... one (forget which) had a version setup for truck use, IIRC.
>
> RCE
>
>

Actually the C was the one that had the thinner cylinder walls, as
compared to the older W blocks anyway. This is according to the old Ford
Performance book I have here. I'm not so sure if Ford lightened their
castings for the Windsor in the later years or not.

The Cleveland was a nice engine to build for drag racing because of the
huge intake ports in the 4V heads. Too bad they messed up the exhaust
ports by dog legging them down at a relatively sharp angle. Before the
days of aftermarket heads for the Cleveland, people used to mill about
1.25" of the port away and install what was called a high port plate.
This basically removed the dogleg in the port and significantly
increased the exhaust flow for these heads. The Boss 302 head had
basically the same problem.

Chris

Re: Subject : Pictures Please - Ford 351 - Ford351C - Ford351W - Repost

In article <Xq91i.3318$NY3.1344@trnddc03>, Jeff Strickland
<crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:

> "CobraJet" <shedding@skin.molt> wrote in message
> news:110520071905550567%shedding@skin.molt...
> > In article <3Y81i.427$b67.111@trnddc06>, Jeff Strickland
> > <crwlr@verizon,net > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Wow, I can't believe somebody put together a site (or even a measely
> >> page)
> >> that says these two engines share anything beyond displacement.
> >
> > They have the same motor mounts, bellhousing pattern, starters,
> > distributor cap, balancers, flywheels, and lifters.
> >
> > However, the dickhead with the website is still a lazy, stupid,
> > freeloading bastard.
> >
>
> I guess I'll take your word for it.

I do own several of both engines. However, the easy way to check is
to run those parts through eBay, and notice that they will cross over.

> I thought the Cleveland and Windsor
> power plants were completely different in each of the areas you just said
> they are common.

Historically, one of the most common Windsor-to-Cleveland swaps was
in the '69 Mach I. It would bolt to the trans and mounts, and you just
had to work the exhaust and do something about the driver's side water
pump inlet ('69' W's were pass side). This was done so often that many
"experts" claim the Cleveland was introduced in '69, which of course is
BS.

>
> I remember as a kid (with my father in car business) that when a car was
> listed with a Ford 351, the first question was, Cleveland or Windsor? The
> performance specs were different, and the physical size was different. Or
> that's what I remember thinking at the time.

Performance ratings those days were arbitrary at best. However,
either Cleveland could, in most cases, outrun either Windsor. The
Windsor actually has a higher deck height than the C by .3", but the C
is overall wider, I'd say due to the canted-valve heads. The C is about
50 pounds heavier.

Aside from the Bricklin that Stu mentioned, the 351W was used in the
DeTomaso Longchamps. Ski Supreme used it as well as Ski Nautique, but
I'm sure there were many more marine applications.

>
>
>
>
>

--
CobraJet