I dont know what to say.... The cleveland is my favorite motor and I have run them in many cars including my Eliminator (granted, it has much higher compression) . But all of my 2V motors ran awesome...no hesitation what so ever anywhere in the rpm range (1-6000). Only thing I can say is that you must be doing something the same to all your motors that might cause this problem such as over camming for your application or swapping ingition parts from one to the other. There must be something in common with your clevelands for all of them to do this?? I am not trying to insult anyone...... I am just confused as to why you have clevelands that have a hesitation. From my understanding the reason that you need restrictor plates on a 4V is to get the air/fuel mix some velocity not because it is getting to much gas. I am currently building my first 302...we will see how they compare. I figure if you can get these heads (4V) to produce power and run good on a 302, then the extra 50 cubes in a cleveland should run great and not flood out the motor as you suggest. The 302 Boss does not have much low end torque but it wasnt designed to. The 2.05 valve size compared to the 2.02 is minimal, that .03 difference in the valve would not take a set of heads from champ to chump. All the chevy guys would love to get their hands on a set of 2.02 heads because they run good, adding .03 is not going to make a difference. The problem is probably somewhere other than the heads, especially if you are running a 2V. I have had a couple of factory original 2v cars and they were pretty torquey and ran great. My only problems with the cleveland has been over heating..if everything is not in good shape they seem to get pretty hot. Good luck and let us know if you find the problem. my .02
dear roadrage: you seem to be missing the point. we are not trying to be insulting, just help. all of us answering have either made a 2v cleveland run right, or know people who have, without any magic potions except getting everything working together the way the parts should. no big tricks here. maybe you have been using the same carb or distributor on each engine? most of us have had a problem sometime that keeps eluding our cures. when we find the answer we all feel like idiots for not finding it sooner. we're not trying to be insulting. 351 2v clevelands are good torquey engines. valves aren't too big on the 2v. these things were used stock in station wagons heavier than your car. yes it had a 2v on it, but so do you until the vacuum secondaries come in when needed (if adjusted properly). unless you have a double pumper on it , you should be okay. the edel manifold is decent, and is meant for your situation. is cam installed properly? degreed in for proper phasing? distrib advance working properly? when you rev it with a timing light on it does the timing advance up to around 32-36 degrees? got the accelerator pump working properly? got the right size shooter on it? what is vacuum reading at idle? i think you have something off (or somethings off). others on here seem to agree with that assessment. please feel free to do whatever makes you happy. try a 351W. they're good torquey motors, too. by the way, i believe in '72 ford retarded the crank gear for emissions purposes. if you used your stock timing set when you installed cam and didn't discover this by degreeing the cam, this could be adding to your problem. at least i think it was in '72. maybe try an early timing set? have a nice day.
no offense meant i want to defend the honor of the cleveland too. anything capable of flowing so much fuel will be fast if you can efficiently burn it. i know that ralph nader essentially killed production of this engine, as it spits out a lot of emissions. i know ford retarded the cam timing and dropped compression ratio's to help it. "is the cam installed properly?" A. i would think so, it runs. i dont know if erson factored in the factory retard or not. in an earlier post, in this thread, i stated the cam specks. its an RV cam, nothing radical @ all. all i was looking for was a healthy/streetable motor. actual racing was not intended, but i wouldve hoped i could get the car into the 15's with my setup. im stuck with a car that has awesome midrange, weak top-end, and a soggy bottom. the car will burn the hell outta some tires if i want to brake-torque it, but i dont like to abuse my cars in such ways. anyways... i appreciate yalls interest/or rebuttals. this engine has all new/all good stuff in it. it should run really well. it sounds as wicked as any car youve ever listened to idle, but its that "off idle" thing that kills it. ive never owned an earlier model cleveland. i believe its a really good motor, but a dinosaur, and very hard to find. here are the clevelands ive owned... 1. 72 cougar with stock 351 2V. ran great, reliable, better gas mileage than expected. wasnt fast, but did have acceptable low end torque. however, i did once race a stock 2V/302 mavrick in this car, and the maverick outran me. this car got wrecked and totalled before i ever got to anything to it. 2. 72 Mustang with stock 351 2V. previous owner had rebuilt it to stock specks. ran well, but was slow. slower than the 351 cougar. the car was beautiful, but all show and no go. i dropped a fresh 351 4V motor into this car. (the previous 351 was still good), and that car was a dog. especially @ low rpms. it was awful when a nova ate it up, but when a pontiac fiero wasted it, i realized it wasnt worth throwing all my money at. i sold the car for a nice price and bought another cougar in a junkyard. i rebuilt the old mustang motor, and it resides in the current cougar. 3. 72 cougar- has the old mustang engine it, but its got erson cam, headers, mallory comp 9000 distributor, 3:35 gear, edelbrock intake. i started with a 600 cfm carb, but it always acted starved. ran better and idled better with the 750. i love edelbrock carbs, as they are soooo easy to tune. believe me... ive tried every possible spring/jet/metering rod combo in the "edelbrock strip kit". i even tried different squirter clusters and accelerator pump positons. yeah... i dont get it either. i sold this car to my brother a few years back, and he totally killed it. i was just tired of messing with it all the time. he has given it back to me, and im just hoping i can find the energy/advice to get this thing going. there is no reason for this car to be sluggish. if anything... maybe something crummy has come up from the gas tank and clogged the carbs. if i had to do it all over again, it wouldve gotten flat top pistons, a stall speed, and possibly a better intake manifold. to me... i have to question edelbrock's commitment to ford performance. especially for a cleveland. have you ever seen an edelbrock performer 4V? the intake ports on the manifold are smaller than the ones on the head. edelbrock claims it flows better, but my car ran better with the stock intake and motorcraft carb. the intake ports looked like they'd match up to 2V heads, which makes me wonder why they just didnt make 1 manifold for both heads. oh well.. peace yall
Cleveland Engine The Cleveland 351 Engine is the predecessor to the current NASCAR 358 that is run today.... There are no Windsor powered NASCAR Ford Tauruses. The 9.2 deck height , The smaller crank main journals , and the canted Large Valve heads all originated with the 1970 Cleveland Engine . Ford has improved on the original design over the years with Forged Cranks, SVO Blocks and Yates Aluminum Heads. 750 HP, wide open at 8500-9000 RPM , for 500 miles can`t be done with a 351W. Also In the Drag Race arena - Dyno Don did some amazing things with the 351-C. Is the 351 Cleveland an overated Engine ?? ........ I don`t think so. For the street a Windsor engine has more user friendly characteristics and probably makes for better overall street performance - especially with all the after market accesories and power adders available, but for all out performance ..... make mine a 351-C.
Okay, that's enough beating of the chests. I've heard REALLY bad things about the edelbrock 750's. That doesn't mean that there aren't people out there who get them to run beautifully, but maybe that i just haven't met them. In fact, i was talking to a guy a little while ago who was having tons of problems with his 750 edelbrock (it was on one of those bikes where you're literally sitting on top of a 350). He called the edelbrock tech line and they basically told him they had been having problems with the 750 and that he might want to consider a brand "H" carburetor. I know it's not what you want to hear, but you can pick holleys up on ebay pretty cheap...might be worth a shot! I don't know a lot about edelbrocks, but there are a lot of untuneable factors on the holleys (like airbleeds) that can really affect driveability...and i'm sure edelbrocks are the same way.
