351 Cleaveland conversions

Discussion in 'Technical' started by Al Martin, Oct 21, 2008.

  1. Al Martin

    Al Martin Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    35
    Location:
    central michigan
    Vehicle:
    72 maverick
    Anybody done the above? Any info appreciated.
    Thanks.
    Al
     
  2. PaulS

    PaulS Member extrordiare

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,858
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Seattle area
    Vehicle:
    1966 Mustang, 1972, 73, 73 and 73 Mavericks
    More information?
    Convert 351 C to what?
    Convert what to 351 C?
     
  3. Al Martin

    Al Martin Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    35
    Location:
    central michigan
    Vehicle:
    72 maverick
    Whoops!
    That was 72 maverick Paul. Sorry about that.
    Regards.
    Al
     
  4. newtoford

    newtoford Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    5,475
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    157
    Location:
    New Castle Delaware
    Vehicle:
    '76 Maverick, '76 Comet, 78 Monte Carlo, '85 Cutlass Supreme, '86 Regal Limited, '87 Grand Prix
    your asking about putting a 351C into a maverick?
     
  5. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    Lots of folks have done it.
    It is tight, but dynamite!
    :D
     
  6. rotorr22

    rotorr22 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,302
    Likes Received:
    259
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Location:
    Columbiana, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2018 F150 XLT/5.0, 2014 Focus 5 spd manual,1974 Maverick Grabber, 1986 Thunderbird Elan 5.0/AOD
    My choice would be a 347 Boss 302 derivative. It fits better between the shock towers, has a better lube system, is lighter and has thicker cyinder walls. You have your choice of Aussie closed chamber iron 2v heads, the awesome CHI heads or Edelbrock Cleveland heads. You could take a late model roller 5 liter block and do one up very nicely.
     
  7. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
  8. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    I know you aren't insinuating a roller 5.0 block is strong!:rofl2:
    Clevelands are known for thin blocks, but they certainly aren't known for splitting in half.
     
  9. rotorr22

    rotorr22 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,302
    Likes Received:
    259
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Location:
    Columbiana, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2018 F150 XLT/5.0, 2014 Focus 5 spd manual,1974 Maverick Grabber, 1986 Thunderbird Elan 5.0/AOD
    It's all about how much power you are looking for. No, I would not run a stock 302 roller block at 600 HP+ with a blower:naughty:, nor would I run a cast iron crank at that level. Up to 450 or so, yes. You always have the option of going to a Boss 302 block or an aftermarket World block or similar. Clevelands are great motors, I've run a number of them since the 70's. I just feel a 302 stroker would be a better fit in the maverick. I'm actually looking at doing one in mine.
     
  10. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    Where's the fun in being able to reach the spark plugs? ;)
     
  11. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    Personally I think the Cleveland gets a bad rap of being weak.

    Back in the 70s/80s, when fancy parts weren't available, these engines ran everything from Nascar to Pro-stock with stock blocks, heads, and cranks.
    No steel crank was ever made by Ford for a 351c, nor were there ever aluminum heads. (2 sets got out, 1 set survives, but they don't really count.)
    Iron heads, thin block, and prepped iron crank... that's all they got, and they kicked butt. Some of the lucky ones, later in the 70s, started having Ford import kangaroo blocks in for Nascar. But that was late in the game and purely for endurance.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2008
  12. rotorr22

    rotorr22 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,302
    Likes Received:
    259
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Location:
    Columbiana, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2018 F150 XLT/5.0, 2014 Focus 5 spd manual,1974 Maverick Grabber, 1986 Thunderbird Elan 5.0/AOD
    No argument here. I used to watch Dyno Don, Glidden and Gapp & Roush dominate Pro-Stock with them. Nicholson had so much trouble with cylinder walls that he would bore out the existing cylinders, install sleeves and and furnace braze the whole assembly together in a siamese configuration. They made awesome power.
     
  13. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    Isn't he the one that started doing that and wasn't telling anyone?
    I know someone was doing that long before the others, and kept it secret.


    Oh well... I guess this is officially a highjacking!:jack:
     
  14. TSMAVERICK

    TSMAVERICK New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    BRUNSWICK MD
    Vehicle:
    1970 maverick
    First thing to figure out is how fast are trying to go and do you want to be able to drive on street.is reliablity a factor if so build big " engine that you will not have run the dogsh#t out of.302 or 351 base engine will fit with stock towers and c-4 will take a lot of power 800 plus horse power not a problem and live and they don't take a lot of power away unlike c-6 it is heavy and robs a lot of power.351C as week cylinder walls if your thinking of running any more than 11 to 1 compression more than likely you will have trouble with cylinder cracking.
     
  15. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    :16suspect Wha???
    They are not known for "cracking cylinders".
    351c engines are known for the thin cylinder walls making them overheat intensely when they are overbored too much.
    Most 351c engines will overheat when you bore them beyond .030".
    Some will make it to .040", or even .060" overbore, but they are the exception, not the rule.

    Now I suppose if you overbore too much, then overheat all the time, you could potentially crack or otherwise damage a cylinder head. Could also blow a hole in a piston, as overheating often causes spark knock.
    But block damage... and with only .030" over, it ain't happening.

    Misinformation.:naughty:
     

Share This Page