| This forum is for all years of the Ford Galaxie and all other Full-size Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury cars. This is a place to share information, skills, pictures, and stories for the purpose of building friendships and furthering the enjoyment and restoration of these cars |
1 2 Jump to
Offline
I have a "new" 302 in my 62 galaxie (less than 2000 miles) aluminum heads and intake, high compression, and low end torque type cam. Car runs great, with the T5 transmission and 3:25:1 rear end, has good power BUT being that the car is huge the power to weight ratio is no where near as good as my Mustang with its 289. I am thinking seriously about selling the 302 and dropping in a 351W. I estimate 1 hp per CI so the 351 is going to buy me roughly another 50 horses. Do yo think that will be very noticeable with such a big car?? Would love to hear about your experiences swapping out a 302 or 289 for a 351. (I don't want to go with a big block, the only options I'm considering are keeping the 302w or building a 351W)
Offline
Sounds to me like you need another project!Haha
Just went thru this with a friend with a Fairlane. Swapped out a 289 for a stroked out 351. He wanted more power for tire burning performance.
Something tells me this isn't what you are after? My two cents is to leave as is. You basically have a new engine that will give you years and miles of reliable driving. You have already livened it up so you have given it a performance increase already. Unless you want to burn some serious rubber, what would you gain with 50 more hp in a heavy old girl? Just saying!
BTW...kind of funny you asking a question when we are the ones always looking to you for advice😀😀😀
Last edited by dan_6776 (February 5, 2018 4:04 pm)
Offline
Are the extra 49 cubic inches worth it? Depends! It probably doesn't matter what the horse power is, as much as how much torque it is making, but I'd think you have a pretty healthy 302. I'd think that if you're building a new engine it would be a 408, then you'd have stroker torque, which would really make the difference. If it is just a 351, then why bother?
Offline
Here is a little more info. Comparison of configurations:
302 .040 over
9.5:1 compression
58cc aluminum heads
. 1.94 intake
. 1.60 exhaust
. roller rockers 1.6:1 ratio
low end torque hydraulic flat tappet cam
Edelbrock Performer intake 302/289
shorty headers to X pipe, free flowing mufflers
MSD ignition
600 CFM Edelbrock performer AFB carb
351 .040 over
10:1 compression
58cc aluminum heads
. 1.94 intake
. 1.60 exhaust
. roller rockers 1.6:1 ratio
low end torque hydraulic roller cam
Edelbrock Performer intake 351
shorty headers to X pipe, free flowing mufflers
MSD ignition
625 CFM AFB Carter carb
Here is the power curves for both engines based on all the engine specs.
302
351
Thes are vurtual numbers at the flywheel and are on the high side but they paint a fairly accurate picture of the over all curve.
Thread StarterOffline
dan_6776 wrote:
Just went thru this with a friend with a Fairlane. Swapped out a 289 for a stroked out 351. He wanted more power for tire burning performance.
Something tells me this isn't what you are after? My two cents is to leave as is. You basically have a new engine that will give you years and miles of reliable driving. You have already livened it up so you have given it a performance increase already. Unless you want to burn some serious rubber, what would you gain with 50 more hp in a heavy old girl? Just saying!
I am not looking for a stroker or to burn the tires off, I just want a little more get up and go. In is current configuration the car is really well balanced in relation to drivability and RPMs and has good power, it just doesn't set me back in the seat like the 289 in my Mustang does when I step on it. (Galaxie easily weighs 1000 pounds more than my Mustang)
BTW...kind of funny you asking a question when we are the ones always looking to you for advice😀😀😀
I may know a lot about cars and fab work but I don't know everything 
there is always more to learn.
"As the circle of light increases, so does the circumference of darkness around it."
-- Albert Einstein
In other words the more I learn the more I find that I don't know. In this case I am hoping to find some real world insight from others experiences.
Thread StarterOffline
Is that torque curve really a whole bunch better? For just cruising around how much time do you spend above 3500 RPM? Can you run a simulation with a 408 - 411? I really doubt the 351 will give you any where near the feeling of your Mustang, maybe with 4:10 gears.
My experience with my 351 may provide some insight. My rebuild was stock bottom end, stock heads, Comp XE262 cam, Eddy Performer intake, 670 Street Avenger carb and long tube headers. I did add a slightly looser torque converter, but retained the original 2.75 gears. It certainly makes more power than it did before. I think, but without any actual reference, it now performs close to what I think a base, 2V 390 might have driven like. From a stop it probably doesn't have the grunt, but when rolling, and on the highway, it is probably in that ballpark. I might expect my 351 is similar in output to your 302. I rebuilt the engine because some stuff was worn out. If I was building something because I wanted more performance, it would have to be a stroker, or a power adder, but the stroker might be the best starting point. Maybe make your 302 into a 347? Although, that is a whole other can of worms.
Offline
here is some more food for thought:
The whole purpose of my question was to get feedback from others that had swapped out a 302 for a 351 and to see if those swaps showed good improvement. I was after real world experience as to weather or not that 50 extra HP would translate to noticeable power improvement in the car. I got some good answers and an idea that gave me some numbers I can use to help with my decision (I love match and numbers!!)
weight to horse power ratio
Assuming what ever engine built will get 1 HP per cubic inch AND be built to maximize low end torque:
Mustang weight to HP with 289
2500/289= 8.65:1 #/HP
Galaxie weight to HP with 302
3500/302= 11.59:1 #/HP
Galaxie weight to HP with 351
3500/351= 9.97:1 #/HP
The 351 will not get me to the same ratio I have with the Mustang, in fact it only gets me about half way there, but there is a big enough difference between the two cars so I know there will be a noticeable improvement with (half way)
Then If I do the math in reverse (galaxie weight / Mustang ratio) I can get the actual engine size I would need to have the same performance level (roughly)
3500/8.65 = 404.62 CI
To get over 400 CI I have to go with a big block or a stroker and I don't want to do either of those things so now I just need to decide if the $ to improvement ratio is worth it for the 351.
Thread StarterOffline
UPDATE:
Part of the dilemma I had was $$. I had been looking for a used 351 and all the “cores” I found were around $800 or more so I had decided to save up for a creat engine short block. Tonight after I made the post before this one I did as I have done hundreds of times and did a craigslist search and found a “running” 351 with all its accessories. It came out of a 94 F150 for $250. Even though the seller said it’s a good engine, I figured even if it’s not for $250 I have a core. I had to drive an hour each way to get it, but glad I did.
Thread StarterOffline
What is the reasoning for not building a stroker? A key factor would be be the cost of a stroker kit vs. the cost of machining and reconditioning the core crank and rods. I do expect there would be some cost difference, but it would probably be good bang for the buck.
Offline
A big part of it is the heads. Right now the heads on the 302 are slated to go on the 351, which will give me a CR some where in the range of 9.7:1. That is a good CR and pump gas is still an option. but if I stroke it to a 393 the CR goes up to 11.6:1 and then pinging is a real concern even with premium. I have about $1200 in heads I have and I don't really want to invest that kind of money into another set of heads.
Thread Starter
1 2 Jump to