Cliff, Jim, et Listers,
I'm also curious as to how Jim responds to this question. One could also
ask to compare the 351W with the 351C, which is, I believe, substantially
the same question you pose. The only real difference between the 351W and
the stroked shorter deck 289/302 block is the rod length to stroke ratio,
which has been beat pretty much to death by this group a few months back.
The taller 351W or 351C blocks allow much higher rod length to stroke
ratios if you think this is important. Obviously, it creates a problem for
installation in a Tiger, although not an insurmountable one. I believe that
the biggest factor that affects the performance of the stroked motor versus
the 351C would be the difference in the heads. The 4V heads for the 351C
are essentially the Boss 302 heads which are huge. Of course, you could put
these heads on the stroked Windsor motor with more or less the same
results. But just putting these heads on the 289/302 block would still
require some additional clearance in a Tiger. One might also ask about the
weight differences between the stroked motor and the Cleveland block. I'm
guessing the Cleveland is a little heavier than its 351 Windsor counterpart
and certainly heavier than the shorter Windors, but there are even
differences between various castings of the 289/302 short deck blocks;
e.g., the Mexican 302s are a little heavier I've heard.
You might want to hear from Ken Mattice about his stroked motor. I forget
the exact numbers, but his horsepower is in the 400+ range and I believe
he's running low, very low, 12s in the quarter mile. You can also get this
kind of power out of a 289 or 302 with 351W or other aftermarket heads; you
just have to go to higher rpms to achieve it. I'm sure everyone else on
this List has an opinion on this subject, and all of them are probably
valid depending on you criteria and objectives. If you don't want to alter
the sheet metal on your car, then stick with one of the shorter Windsor
blocks and Windsor style heads. Stroke it if you like, or build it for
higher rpm, whichever suits you.
Well, TTFN,
Bob
At 08:49 PM 3/21/99 -0700, comorgan@juno.com wrote:
>James,
>
>I've enjoyed the info you've given this last week. I'm new to this list;
>and, perhaps yu've described this before; but, I was wondering how you
>fit a 351C in a Tiger? And, how would this compare with a 347 stroked
>302? You could probably write a book, but a few comments would be
>helpful. Also, someone else might have an opinion.
>
>Cliff 9471187
>
>
>COMORGAN@JUNO.COM
Robert L. Palmer
Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego
rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
rpalmer@cts.com
|