HOW MUCH POWER DID THE 1971 BOSS 351 REALLY MAKE? WAS IT THE HOTTEST SMALL BLOCK EVER OFFERED?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- FULL DYNO RESULTS ON 1971 BOSS 351 AND 1965 HiPo/SHELBY 289. I n this video, I compare my most and least favorite Muscle car SBF motors. The 1971 Boss 351 was the most powerful factory small block ever made, while the HiPo 289 was the most disappointing to me! I think a good 1988 5.0L LX would walk it! Tell me why I'm wrong about the little 289!
- ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
In Australia that Cleveland Boss 351 went into our 1971 Ford falcon GT HO production car , which in that year on the race track and our version of Trans am (production car) motor racing series, absolutely smashed all race track lap records by at least 10 second a lap everywhere. Imagine that, mind blowing. It was truly untouchable, legendary and unrivaled here in Australia for the next coupe of years. Until our Government at the time pressured local manufactures and insurances to ban these type of race cars for the roads.
It actually wasn’t the boss we dismantled std 351 engines and added some boss parts and some Australian machining and Australian parts it was similar but not a boss
yup all Aussie made imagine that lol
Aussies had the good stuff. Like to try out the closed chambered 2v heads on a mild truck engine build.
71/72 was the peak of Australian performance, you had the xu1 toris with factory hotted up 186's/179s and even 192's, you have the e49 charger that was the most powerful aussie production 6 for a fair few years, and was the most powerful na 6 for even longer, all of them held race records and were the fastest in some way, best times for aussie production
US performance consumers got screwed when Ford discontinued the small block Cleveland in favor of the truck based Windsor small block.
Dropped in a 625 lift solid roller cam, combined a Holley strip Dominator manifold with an 850 dbl pumper on my 71 Boss 351 and it made 525 hp @ 7200 rpm ! She's a beast!
Hows she doing nowadays?
Why such a big carb?
@@DominatorGaragehat’s not very big for 500hp and leaves room for more upgrades without buying a new carb. Power Nation did a test from 600cfm-1000cfm carb on a 302 ford and it made power with every carb upgrade. Drive-ability might be a concern but if he’s got that big of a cam he isn’t worried about it.
I use a 800 dp. But an 850 is easier to come by.
Face it the boss 351 engine is good. When you consider the lt1 and 340 6 barrel only have .450 to 485 lifts against a 517 lift in the 351. Shut up it should have more power . You didn’t have a real 340 6 barrel to compare it to. Come on get the true engine to compare!!!
I owned a 1970 Mach 1 (351 W) back in the mid 70’s and still love the body style. I totally agree that the Boss 351 engine was the hottest factory small block made back in the day. Heck, even in the bloated and fugly 1971 Mustang it was good for mid to high 13 second 1/4 mile ET’s bone stock. Testing back in the day showed the Boss 351 was quicker than any stock Mustang ever tested. I have always felt that the ultimate ‘Stang would have been a 1969-70 Boss 351. If only...
agreed
Hell Yeah, hard to believe that the 1971 Boss 351 was the quickest. Those Cleveland's flat out love to run above 6500 rpm, Ran a Cleveland in my 1986 Mustang for years, went Low 11,s Currently have a 521 Stroked BBF, going Low to Mid Nines on a 275/60 Drag Radial. Still Love those Cleveland's tho, still holding on to my 1972 Short Block with 4 Bolt Mains.
Thats Exactly what I have in my 69 Mach 1 ! Only 1803 Boss 351's built in 71. Found mine on someones garage floor for 30 years .See Mustang Connection video..
@@robertstewart3086 - I am as green as my 1970 Mach 1 was!
The 71 - 73 mach 1s are beautiful my favorite car period but the interiors in those are truly far and above any ever made in my opinion
A high school buddy had a 351 BOSS mustang. The thing ate tires. Crazy fast...
Please try Some C3 and D3 Yates heads on these engines.
my till 93 Cobra ran 13.86 in the quarter mile @100 mph with bolt-on parts. my good friend had a 66 mustang with a hypo 289 and all the correct parts. tri-y headers carburetor all that. I destroyed him every time we raced. not even close. and he had a lighter car
That LT1 should have pulled some more RPM than 5500.....🤔
Chett Rockwell the heads hurt it, it can pull kore rpm but no more power
I would really like to see what the 340 TA six pack could do. Show some love to us Mopar guys. Thanks.
When NASCAR changed to small blocks, Ford went with the 351 Cleveland it was faster on the highs speed tracks than the GM's because of the boss heads, The Chevy's still dominated on the short tracks because of better torque. Dale Earnhardt won driving a Bud Moore Ford but he had too many engine failures and went back to Chevy with Childress. When Ford decided to put the Cleveland heads on the Windsor blocks they solved the engine failure problem of the poor oiling system of the Clevelands. The Fords were so dominant on the Super speedways thanks to the Elliots NASCAR used the excuse of "the cars are too fast" because Bobby Allison went into the air at Talladege that they put restrictor plates on all engines to slow them down,.This hurt the Fords more than the Chevys and that's why the restrictor plates were kept. When Robert Yates tweaked the Cleveland heads so that even with the restrictors they were dominant, NASCAR decided GM needed and engine with heads just like the Fords, that's why all NASCAR engines have canted valve heads just like the Fords. If you can't beat them join them.
Interesting, way cool!!.. as we all know, the LS is based off the sbf as well..
Absolutely right and this is from a long time Chevy guy . Michigan showed the real power of the Ford heads and didn't get restrictor plates for years . Ford owned that track for years. Chevrolet had the drivers and money but Ford had the ponies.
I would love to see some of the Westech Dyno graphs of nascar engine spec'd builds from over the decades (original or replicas) Specifically the evolution from the older big blocks or even back as far as the 40s until current race tech.
I think it was Terry Labonte that made the statement after GM got the heads the cars were faster with the Ford heads From what I understand the guy at Yates was the guy that designed the heads you can correct me if I'm wrong
Chevy guys will point out that the Cleveland came out after the BBC, which the Cleveland head was supposedly patterned after
Back in the day a friend and i was coming back from the drags where he won his class in his GTO feeling pumped up we headed into town when a hi po 289 falcon pulled out behind us , when he started to pass my buddy says watch this and down shifted and put it to the floor seconds later we watched his tail lights disappear .
I wonder what head this guy had on his 289 because my uncle had a 67 GTA and I'm sure no box stock 5.0 wanted any part of that car
Big diff between a between a GTA and a GTO.@@charleswaynewright2042
Leonard Wood made the Boss 351 dominate in nascar for many years until the useable parts became scarce. What Bob Glidden did with the 351 C was legendary.
You’re not wrong about the 289 , I had one in a 65 Mustang that was built to the max, heads ported, roller cam, 12:1 compression and dry sump oiling, all that for 375 ish hp and it was all done at just over 7000, it’d pull 8,000 but it was just making noise at that point. I also had a 67 Mustang coupe that had a Boss 351 and 4 speed swapped in and the standard bolt on speed parts, Weiand single plane intake and a Holley 4 bbl (I forget what size but I do know it could have used a dominator) cam, Headers yada yada the car consistently ran high tens. So for me to the Boss 351 is at the too of the heap. Now a friend had a 70 ‘Cuda with s 340 six pack and that thing was a rocket ship! You definitely need to test one of those.
The 289 Ford - in any form from stock 2v to Shelby spec - is one of the all time greatest engines. Nothing else sounds like a 289, and they just will not die.
Amen.
They also won't make enough power to beat anything.
Oldtimmer - If you had a Boss 351 you wouldn't say that especially running against a Boss 351 it would slap the HP 289 silly but I respect the HP 289 it does do very good.
Richard either I don’t think you sleep or west tech is just heaven and there’s never night time there 😂
These are runs from years ago, well some of them are.
lol
They have multiple dynos
Corey Brewer he posts at like 2-4am sometimes
I'm with you on the Boss 351, what an engine! I have been a Cleveland fan my entire life, it's still my favorite engine. I have had three 1972 Mustang Mach 1's, a 351C-2V, a 351C-4V and a 351 CJ. I would probably have another Mustang with a Cleveland if not for the Pontiac G8 GT. When that car came out I fell in love with it and the L76, LS engine with the rec port heads. That said, I've NEVER been impressed with the Windsor engine. I've had 2 cars with Windsor engines and I was very disappointed with their performance, the Cleveland is the BOSS! I forgot to mention I had a 1974 Ford Gran Torino with a 400 in it. I put 351C-4V closed chamber heads on it using Weiand spacer plates hogged out from their 2V size to the 4V and put an Edelbrock Torker intake on it with a Holley 750 double pumper carb. I put a Crane Fireball 302 cam in it to utilize those high flowing heads. You think the BOSS 351 is good, that 400 was a MONSTER!!!!!
Totally agree re: the 351C. I am curious about your 351W comment. When did you own/run a 351W? I had a ‘70 Mach 1 with the 351W 2 bbl back in the mid ‘70’s and it was definitely slow even with standard bolt ons. The problem back then was that there was very little aftermarket support for the W back then such as good heads, cams, etc. The FE and the Cleveland got all the love from the aftermarket. That definitely is but the case today. The W now has TONS of support and can be built with off the shelf parts to easily make 500-600+ HP in a streetable pump gas form.
It's in the rear end. Do you want to go fast, or get fast quick?
Im getting sick of seeing Lit mobile and their goddamned solar powerbank
Get an ad blocker.
think of ad watching as supporting the channel
@@richardholdener1727 oh ive got no problem supporting you bro, but this past week that same ad has played every two seconds, im sure you've seen it, i did some research and found out it's a scam too so it irritates me even more
Here's my two cents on the 289....
I've been to quite a few vintage road races, including multiple visits to the Monterey Historics/Motorsports Reunion, and early 289-powered Mustangs are quite common at these. And I just love the sound of a race-tuned 289! I don't know what exactly was done to the engines in these cars - surely some work has been done to improve the head flow, along with bigger cams - but the best ones sound like they're revving clear to the moon.
There is no other V8 that sounds better than a 289 Ford at 7500.
I've been to a few Vintage races as well. Road America in particular. Talking to several "289" Mustang drivers, I've learned the engines are all 302-305 C.I. with modern heads, per the rules. Claimed H.P. numbers are 540 H.P. at 8400 RPMs. Note: that would not be a "street-able" engine.
I would prefer to "camouflage" a stroker 363 C.I. with a decent street cam and be satisfied with 500+ H.P. at 6500 RPMs.
there not 289 there useless,,there moded 302,with heads cam injection pushing over 500 hp..balanced ect ect,most reliable easy power engine for street is the 351c.hands down,better design than windsor.ive never blown one up or had any problems.there a truck engine,strong..
@@phantomwalker8251 Please, enlighten me. What is the deck height of a "Cleveland' VS a 351
Windsor?
@@terraboundmisfit 9.208" Vs 9.503" from memory actual 9.206" and 9.480" (1969-1974) 9.503" (after 1975). My memory was off a little on the Cleveland but not too far.
My first motor build was a 351C. I was 14 years old, in 1984. That motor was crazy! I later had a 289 HO in a 1967 Cougar, and it was a quick, high rev motor and was a lot of fun. The 351C was just more of a street monster for a 15 year old kid in a 1973 Mach 1.
Street monster
I had a 67 cougar xr7 in 86, it had a HO 289 but was smogged for California, first day I got it, I overheated it racing a 5.0 mustang (i won btw lol) and seized the engine. So Had the engine built to the nuts by Honest performance in Seattle. (barely made enough vacuum to operate the brakes)
Never got to take it to the track but I raced an 1100 yamaha from a stand still and stayed side by side up to 80 and we both let off. Never lost a race as long as I had it.
@@jskyg68 barely enough vacuum to operate the brakes i like that.
@@dennisrobinson8008 Rolling up to a stop at idle you could feel the brake booster was struggling. Who cares it sounded awesome. :P
@@jskyg68 Do you remember the rpm it ran up to?
I wonder what a 289 would do if u built it with parts available today, like some good flowing heads and a cam to match? I think it would make pretty good power
Best episode yet! Calling out Dulsitch too. 🤣 Perhaps a build off between 351C vs 340 six pack is due. 🤔 For braggin rights.
No comparison. The canted valve Cleve will run over the 340
@@chadkent1241 Agreed. Now if we give the 340 W2 heads...
The 340 is a great motor but the Cleveland heads are just better than the X heads in stock form.
I'm a Mopar guy but the 340 is kind of a disappointment on the dyno. Nick of "Nick's Garage" tested a basically stock 340/6 pack and didn't even crack 350hp. I was truly surprised and truly disappointed. Especially since I had owned a 340/4 speed '71 Demon back in the day and I thought it was faster than shit!
Gotta say I would be keen to see that.
When the Boss 351 Mustang was new, road testers at the time quartered the car and it was the fastest Mustang over the quarter to that time. Quicker than the Boss 429 in showroom specification
Wow amazingly to know
some how ya have to get that thing to lock up. Burnouts look cool to some but when it locks up and just goes is when it the sweetest thing.
With the tires of the day...not surprising. Care to speculate on the two cars with 10.5 Sticky Micky's on 10" rims on both cars? The Boss 429 would have eaten the 351 alive. Everyone agrees, Ford stifled the 429 excessively in stock form. A 428CJ would beat either car by a wide margin, in stock form. and did.
Well you can put 2v head's on the 289 block! I'm getting about 500hp 410 tq. Track Boss intake
Hey Richard, I love this video about the 71 Boss motor. Like you I've always thought that was the best Boss motor made in the small block trim. One note I would like to add to your upcoming pursuit of the 340 six pack test. When you talk to Dulcich about it, ask him if he can Source a correct camshaft for the 68 340 4 speed engine. While you have the 340 on there you might as well swap the cam to the 4sp engine configuration that they did only in 68 and put the four-barrel on it and try it. I think you'll be surprised what that 340 4 speed engine in 68 actually made. Starting In 69 all 340 engines had the smaller automatic camshaft. In regards to the 351 boss I also believe the factory compression ratio was rated at 11.7:1.
Love the videos buddy, keep them coming...👍
I bought a new 1966 red Mustang fastback 289 hp, I loved this high revving little engine. I took it to the drags, with a little tune, open exhaust and 6" slicks it ran 14.54 @ 98 mph. I raced it for a couple of years, I made some changes, headers, Shelby thin head gaskets, 7" slicks and 4.57 gears. At Fremont Baylands raceway it ran a best of 13.78 @ 100 mph. ( all with the stock, little autolite 470 cfm carb. that carb was never rated at 600 cfm ) I wish I still had this little car, but my wife got it in the divorce
The 289's obvious handicap is its small port and valve heads. A little engine like that should rev well over 6000.
If you replaced the heads you'd get close to 350 hp.
Look up Joe Sherman 400 hp 302.
He did it with ported iron heads on 289 and a 302,
flat tappet and stock rockers I think.
Google Joe Sherman 400 hp Ford 302.
Marlin Davis article Mustangs and Fords magazine April 99.
BTW the heads shown are stock ports/ valves with the larger chambers.
There are no pictures of his head porting.👍
The torque curve of the 88 5.0 is good because of the roller cam. If you put a roller cam in the Hi-Po 289 it would out perform the 5.0 in both torque and power.
@@hotrodray6802 that's true but not a stock engine as he is talking about.
Richard, don't forget that Ford and Shelby won the FIA World Manufacturers Championship in 1965 with 289 powered Cobras! Slightly different induction system with the Weber carbs and such but those motors made 375 HP if I remember correctly!
Could have been stock Hipo was 271 hp
It’s just too bad Ford got out of the trans am series in 71. That Boss 351 was a beast. And the 71-73 Mustang sports roof is my favorite
cubic inch limit in Trans Am was 305 so no go for a 351 ci motor.
@@kimmorrison9169
Look up the 302 Cleveland
@@roninkraut6873 why?
I've never owned a hi performance model but I've had stock 289s, 302s, 351Ws and 351Cs in old Mustangs and Torino's. The stock stock 351C 2V was far superior than any of the others. Great motor.
I recall the Hi Po 289 in a 1965 2 door hardtop Falcon. It was equipped with a 4 speed top loader transmission with a Hurst shifter and a Detroit Auto Locker 411 differential. It ran the quarter mile in the mid to low 13 seconds. I recall 13.2 as one of the best times. It was likely launched at the peak torque which would be around 4000 rpm. It was a long time ago so my memory might be off. I do remember being enthralled with that car and its performance.
If you know what you are doing with a 289 hp you can make great power at very high rpms!!
AIRFLOW.
Joe Sherman made 400 on his dyno with factory iron head 289 AND 302.
I recall a magazine article from years ago where in Super stock , a 289 powered mustang convertible in the STOCK class would pull the front wheels and run low 12's. I believe the class only allowed cam, very minimal porting, and headers... even had to run the stock autolite carb!
I am a big 289 fan and I would really like to.see you test the combo that I run in a 67 fastback off the top of my head specs
1968 Mexican block 302 1963 289 crankshaft has been indexed light weight rpm international 289 rods race tech forged done top pistons .040 over comp cams 300b-6 cam with Cam kit
Air research heads 58cc chambers 2.02 intake valves 1.60 exh pro comp single plane copy of Parker funnel intake and a proforma 750 double pumper. I run a close ratio top loader and a 9" with Detroit locker and 4.11 gears p245 60 15 tires.
The car pulls hard to 7250 haven't ran this combo down the 1/4 mile
But it holds it's own on the highway.
Back in the day 1980's you had to build a set of heads with Chevy valves to get a 289 to run and I built several. With today's heads the 289 is in the same class as the boss 302.
Look at this combo and tell me what you think
You know why we liked the 289 hipo? Because it’s what we had available. Comparing engines 10-15-20 years later doesn’t make much sense. I have a 3.5 EB in my truck. Makes most of those engine look silly!
In Australia, our fastest car for more than 20 years was the 1971 Ford XY Falcon GTHO Phase III. It had a high compression 351 4V Cleveland and made similar power to the Boss 351.
“… the Clevo is back, and it’s mad as…”
Has the *F.O.R.D. sound,* too…
You should have tried a single plane intake on the Boss 351, I bet it would make over 400hp. Older brother got me into the Cleveland Engines in the mid to late '70's, have built a dozen maybe, have 1 now stroked to 408 with chi 3v 225 heads & 4500 intake , 14:1 Cr with flat tops, 56cc chambers, makes around 780hp. 8500rpm build, shift point 7800rpm
1.47am hurricane coming through south Georgia tomorrow night..
Love the video
Phord's problem has always been their exhaust flow.
Bought a 289 for my 73 mav in the 90s . Cast pistons had crane fireball 2 cam ,edlebrock f4b intake 650 Holley ( almost identical intake as the Shelby intake ) 3:80 gears and ran 13.6 at 104mph . Changed the cam , first small valve rpm heads and victor jr intake 750 Holley ,crane 238/240 solid flat tappet cam shifted at 7300 with 4:11 gears ( shorter tires ) with street tires went 12.40s at 112mph Needed 462 gears and slicks the short block was still stock , it had a cranking compression of 125psi I figured actual compression to be around 8:1 .on the “street “ I definitely embarrassed a lot of people . ( the car wasn’t pretty) I Was even accused of running nitrous. If you have a 289 don’t be afraid to rev it won’t let you down 6000rpm minimum will put you in the happy torque zone .
Very informative video on these Ford small block motors. I think you have to put the performance of the Hi Po 289 in perspective. It was developed early on in the muscle car era certainly a few years earlier than the Boss 302. Also being 13 cubic inches smaller in displacement, that is a torque penalty of at least 13 foot-pounds. What surprises me is that I recollect that the 289 Hi Po factory rated power was at 6000 rpm achievable by using solid lifters. Your dyno shows the peak around 5500 rpm.
It would be cool to see some of the other factory muscle 350ish cube muscle motors to see how they compare:
350 H.O. Pontiac
350 W-31 Olds
350 Buick from 1970
340 Six pack mopar
360 AMC Amx motor from 1970
Also lets see how the smaller displacement solid lifter offerings from 1964 compare:
289H.P. Ford
273H.P. Mopar
283H.p. Chev
Those motors might not make big numbers but from my experience they make for nice driving cars on a day to day basis.
james martin & a big block comparison too, would be great to finally see behind all the smoke & mirrors to what the actual truth was, I am pickingLs-6 454 tone at the pointy end
all 350,s are rubbish,unless you re build them with decent heads crank rods ect..there a chunk..waste of space..or,they should be in space..
The Pontiac's claim to fame is its special 6X heads. But in the hands of a good engineer, its a poor man's LS (similar bore, stroke and connecting rod length to a 346 LS). The Buick 350 had great flowing heads--better than Chevy fuelie heads--but those right angle bends in the oiling passenges do not help. That Olds Ram Rod/W31 was a honey, getting a lot of engineering. Roger Huntington claimed Dr. Olds was targeting the Z28 with it--less weight in the nose, put it in an F-85, and use the 4-4-2's superior-for-the-time suspension. With the right rear gearing, a W-31 could match acceleration with a regular 4-4-2.
The "trans am" choices for 1965 would be interesting (Ford's was the 260 in 1964). The K code Challenger 289 was really a basic 289 with no vacuum advance in the distributor, a hotter solid lifter cam, and screw in studs in the heads rather than press-fit. Ford tends to use smaller carbs and port sizes than Chevy, in order to build torque. A D code 273 making 275 hp would be a beast, but I'm trying to remember a 283 without fuel injection that ran solid lifters for performance.
I never forgot the Boss 351. It was on of the best engines in Pro Stock at the time and It had to carry more weight per cubic inch to try to allow the other makes to compete. Kinds a cheat way to go to make the Ford carry more weight per cubic inch compared to the Chevy but that's what they did. If you could mill the exhaust on the heads and put on a high port plate, it was unstoppable. Always wanted to do this. Some of the Panteras that are heavily modified with the 351 are definitely freeway monsters.
351 Cleveland is the most under rated V8 there is. It’s a monster. I have one in my 2WD 1979 F150 that was pulled from a totaled Torino. It’s the biggest sleeper in town. It dominated the high school drags. Slam you back in the seat power
Do you have any L03 305 videos? If not I’d be interested to see some tests with one of those someday.
only the TPI stuff up
I think the 289/283 were great in their day due a lot to tires & chassis. Along with valve sizes and port volumes available. The 351 boss was overlooked due to the body change. It was built for a fight that was over. I think the Cleveland also tips the scales almost 600 lbs.
Cleveland,stock is 550 lbs, Chevy 350 is 575 lbs! So your point is?
Notice. A lot of " I thinks ".
@@jesse75sounds like a lot of "but hot rod rag sez chivvy is better..."
You are correct that the Boss 351 came to late in the US as emissions controls were coming in and the oil crisis was just a few years away. The ‘71-‘73 body styling was also controversial plus it weighed considerably more than the way more popular ‘69-‘70 fastback.
I had a couple of 289 Hi Po''s - a cougar and a caliente comet. My opinion is that it was a very good engine. The Commando 273 Mopar was also a very good small block.
The key to the 289 was to port the head . Original killed it ! I ported my own closed chamber 4 barrel heads and it came alive a real game changer. I always wanted to put Cleveland heads on one to see how much that would change it.
Well as you are usually very good at comparing apples to apples. Rather than comparing the 351C and the Shelby 289. What ever did Chevrolet have in a 283 that could compete with the 289 Ford. That's what I want to see!
I'd love to see a set of tunnel port heads tested. Saw a set with intake at Carlisle 25 years ago for 10K! Pretty sure I could have fit my hand in the intake ports
There is a Ford engine builder in Kentucky that has a video channel on TH-cam. I can't remember his name offhand, but he has a couple of videos on his channel of Tunnel Port 302 heads on engines he's built. He says (and showed) two different sets of TP heads for small block 302s, and ran air flow and dyno tests at different times with both heads. The heads required special blocks to be cast by Ford, and he goes over the reasons. The smaller heads were designed for street use but were never put into production because the "Boss 302" heads were right around the corner. The bigger heads had the big valves but did not flow as high as we might think. They had they typical Ford restricted exhausts, with Ford engineering's typical philosophy of "the air somehow got into the engine, so the exhaust gases will somehow find their way out of the engine." He's got videos of Ford engines with both the High Rise 427 and Tunnel Port 427, both work ups on the heads, engine assembling, and dyno tests. Interesting, I forget offhand the power output of the TP 427 heads, but on some dyno pulls he gained 55 hp with just a 1" spacer under the carbs. Where his customers find these heads, I don't know, but he shows them and runs dyno tests as well. His TH-cam channel is very interesting. And some of the intake manifolds Ford had in the day were way out there. His HiPo 302 Tunnel Ports had a dual quad intake, and for somebody to find and then buy it must have cost a lottery winner his entire prize.
You speak of the 5.0 vs. the Hi-Po 289, but what about the 5.0's in-house contemporary/rival?: The SVO Lima OHC 2.3L-Turbo, in inter-cooled trim running pump "premium". They actually de-tuned the SVO 2.3L Turbo after '85 because it was nearing the 5.0's numbers, making the 5.0 look bad. And if GM's example with the Corvette is anything to go by, then no automaker wants it's "prestige" product to look bad next to something "lesser".
I did a lot of SVO turbo Mustang testing back in the day
Richard, not sure if you are aware of Bob Gliddens results with the 351 C engine? If I remember right and I would have to look up the specs, Glidden revamped the heads with added material he welded in himself to get the fuel to flow directly towards the spark in the quenched chambers. If I recall he made 808 hp on 115 octane fuel. Of course it was a pro stock motor but it for the most part this was contributed to his head design. Just thought U ought to know. Thanks
I'm familiar with Glidden
When I was in high school, I was a Cleveland guy for sure.
i had a 64 fairlane 289 2 barrel and i would run 289 hipos and they would barely beat me, hightly over rated from what i saw. i talked to an engine rebuilder and he
said the 351 C was his favourite engine period.
I would like you to test the cleveland with the port plates in intake and exuast. Big topic with us cleveland guys. Do they work?
I would love to even see a set being installed in the heads!!!!! I have NEVER seen anything about them other than conversations on internet.
Come on Richard...... teach the goods bro!!!!
I saw some info on this many years ago. Wasn't there a dead spot in the bottom of the port?
I have a set I'll donate to the cause. I'm curious enough.
@nvdirtbiker It all started after Ernie Elliot found some magic. I'm sure the aftermarket manufacturers were capitalizing on it at the time. It's all hazy to me now but I was into it at the time. Ernie eventually revealed his secrets years later but he wasn't building drag engines :)
20+ years ago a major magazine [ dont remember what one ] did a small block muscle car engine shootout...in the end,,they picked the boss 351
It was Hot Rod-less than 20 years ago-it was my story
@@richardholdener1727 ok..cool
A 260 289 302 351w is a small block the 351 Cleveland 351 m and the 400m never had a official weather or not it was a big block or a small block
a 351C has a shorter deck than a 351M or 400-it is definitely a small block, the others are medium (meaning not as big as 460)
Would love to see the factory 6 pack engines do a shootout, the 390 FE 6 pack was rated at
401 hp at 6000
430 tq at 3500
At 10.6 to 1 compression and I'd love to see some real tests done on the mighty 390 not the "Powerblock" way of tossing mix-matched parts from their sponsors and just doing enough to say they did it
Great idea! Do a 390 six-pack vs. Chevy L71 vs. Mopar 440 Six-Pack.
You could also get the 3 2s set up on 406 and 410 FEs offered by Ford and Mercury, now those are really obscure "other guys."
You forgot the 406 six pack.
PowerBlock always half asses any Ford build because they don't want to outshine their ranted about G M products !!!
I had a friend that had that same 65 mustang and every friday nite he would head out to motorhead and race big blocks he was hated at motorhead because he won alot but i cant say if it was stock or built this was the 1970’s
340-6 was about 350 hp stock with headers. The cam was very mild compared to Boss 351. With 224/230 cam was comparable, with 380+ hp
I would like to see The real horsepower Of A69Z28 302 cross Ram😮😮
me too
I have owned a 66 mustang since 1971, my high school car. Over the years it has had a 289 & a 302. Best 1/4 mile times was with the 289. First thing I did was a port & polish with 351W valves. Then an F4B manifold and 650 cfm holley. Next an isky .480” lift by 280* duration cam. Running 351W exh manifolds. Nice strong stock looking motor. The is an article in the 1967 Complete Book of Engines magazine talking about what ford was doing with the 289. They had a HD engine that had a tougher block and heads with 1.875” intake and 1.625” exhaust valves, big ports and an open chamber with better spark plug location. Equipped with the Shelby cam, long tube headers and Webber carbs. Was hitting 400+hp @ 7000 rpm with points.
Shelby's 289's were running 385hp with dual 4's in the Cobras. Always thought that was very impressive. That said think what he would have gotten out of a Boss 351? Wonder why Ford didn't stick with canted valve better breathing heads? I can understand wanting the ports a little smaller but still you would have thought they would have kept making the Boss 302 style heads or heads that flowed well. Well that's why when you look through classic cars that normal people can afford half of them have 350's in them. Not because Chevy made a better engine but they offered better support for the hot rodder.
Gotta say I agree with you about the boss 351 , but I still like the Clevland in its pure form, let's take a 400 m engine, put proper pistons to correct the compression and see how that runs with vintage 2v closed chamber heads.
Let's add some boost to the Boss 351 and see what happens 😏
He did already! Paxton
Small blocks fords always suffered from lack of tumble and swirl, that's why it takes extensive and careful porting and a few tricks plus a dual pattern cam to really wake them up. Once that's done they run like a 2 stroke chainsaw with instant throttle response all the way to 7k rpm and of course properly built balanced and blueprinted bottom ends with cylinder to crank alignment corrected, lifter bores bushed and aligned and fancy lightweight valvetrains with roller rockers and stem caps etc, but that's not something most people do to a ford, most tune it, put on bolt on like cams intakes pipes etc snd and send it hoping for the best.
Sounds like the C351 would make a great turbo motor!! 😊
It would except engine cores are hard to find here on the US. Ford stopped making the Cleveland after 1974 in the US. Aftermarket support here is also not as strong as it is for the Windsor. Lastly you have to correct the Clevelands non priority main oil system which is pretty simple.
Hey Richard. I read somewhere that Jack Roush's favorite car is a 1st Gen Mustang with a 289 K code motor. He made the comment that the sound of that 289 at 8K RPM is one of the sweetest sounds, paraphrased. I've never had one but a K code 289 is on my list of 'hope to have some day' (and I'm not even a Ford guy). I also hope to get more that 306 hp out of it, even if I have to throw NOS at it.
Your comparing different years of technology. Yes we took those 289 to extreme rps . If you change the heads on a 289 yes way more power. Remember 351 is 60 cubic inches more and technology is was way more advanced
I'd like to see what a 71 AMC 10:1 compression 401 would do on the dyno. Supposed to 330 horse, 430 ft-lbs.
They're lazy...
That would be cool. You don't see many AMC motors being tested but then again, they are pretty few and far between in this day and age.
Had a 65 4 speed hi po mustang high school 1969, bought a new drop top V6 mustang in 2000 and no comparison about which one was quicker, the V6.
I had the 2nd 289 Hi-po in the KCMO area in early 1965. It was pretty goid; then I did some mods: 11.5-1 forged pistons, Edlebrock medium-riser intake manifold, re-worked heads, ported and polished with Chevy valves, Crane cam ground by Melling, 625 and 630 lift, 320 duration and a 94 degree overlap, with a then-experimental Holley 600cfm double- pumper. The engine was insane
when did this thing run?
@@jamesmedina2062never. It's in his fantasies. Melling never ground cams for Harvey Crane.
No, all hard core Ford fans have been aware of how good the Boss 351 was. It would have been even better in a lighter, smaller, body. Yes, the HiPo 289 was not at all what it could and should have been, with heads that had the same size valves as the ‘standard’ 289 heads, and which flowed no better than the ‘standard’ 289 heads. Good heads for the 289 that were touted were very much modified, and good ‘stock’ heads did not come out until ‘67 (GT-40 heads), and they were expensive. These were modified slightly to become the 69 351W heads in late ‘68. Finally decent heads for the 289 were readily available at a much reduced price. The HiPo 289 should have come with improved (GT-40) heads. Joe
Another great video Richard.....makes sense that the Boss 351 made the most power.....cam, compression, head flow...its got the goods.....really apprwacite all the effort you make to replicate these muscle car engines.....and the lie detector (dyno) fixes all those BS claims guys used to make.....thanks again for all your great work
I knew (rip) a short track racer that ran the 351c . He made exhaust plates, basically it took the downward turn out of the exhaust port. It took serious time because he would cut ~1" off the port and add his plates. He said that would gain more power than any camshaft. With that said, with his plates plus a aggressive cam this combination won him many Championships here in Indiana. People said he was cheating some how. He was not a fan favorite. I was a fan though. He was a big fan of the 427sohc too !
When I was a kid I owned a 68 Cougar with 351 Cleaveland a 65 Galaxy with 2 speed 352 it was pumped up cop car
and 68 javelin fastest of all 3 by far Cougar was pretty strong
The 351 Cleveland is the best small block ever produced in the muscle car area . It is quite easy with mostly stock part to make over 550 hp . Your right about the 289 although with some head porting and a bigger cam you could maybe make 350 hp . The crankshafts start to fail if you go over 7500 rpm
Any Ford from that era broke cranks at any real rpm.
Always have been a huge fan of the 67-68 Mustangs...then skip straight to the Fox 87-93s.
I owned an 88GT and later a 91 LX5.0.....the LX was a let-down for the following reasons:
•3-speed automatic.
•Living in mile-hi Denver thin air.
•It was a convertible (heavier frame).
The GT was a 5-sp I owned while living at sea level. Much more powerful.
My brother had a Boss 351 intake. It looked like it would flow better than any factory intake I’ve seen. I bet it would good for a few more HP. Unfortunately he sold it a few years ago when they hit the $1000 mark.
The Standard 289 was a work Horse used in Cars, Pickups and Cab Over Tractors. It was a Great little Engine in the Evolution of Ford V8s. With that said, the hypo was an improvement, but, can't compare to the BOSS 302 or BOSS 351.
As always Richard, great video thanks for posting. As a lifelong Ford guy it’s great to see the Cleveland finally getting the recognition it deserves in the sea of Chevy performance. My buddy in high school had a brand new 5.0 5 speed and that thing had torque for days considering it was 302 in.³. My brother at the time had a 65 coupe with a hipp spec 289 in it and a four-speed and the 5 L was all over him lower in the RPM range. And as much as the cylinder heads are restrictive, Shelby race cars still made north of 400 hp with these things so obviously improvements to the stock heads can be made. The racing rules required that OEM parts be utilized so the claims of 10,000 RPM hipos is incorrect. Nonetheless they were sufficient to be Chevrolet in 1967 with only 289 in.³. So there must be some magic and making those cylinder heads work. Just my two cents. Keep the great videos coming. I always look forward to what you post. Have a happy holiday.
I had a 289 with 11:1 compression, Engle mechanical cam, dual point Accel distributor, 650 double pump on Offenhauser 360 aluminum intake, tube exhaust headers. Rev'd to 7,800 and regularly beat my friend with '69 Camaro (I think) SS396.
I had a 1970 LT1 short block swapped into my 70 Nova (originally was a junky 307) when I was a kid. It had an upgraded solid lifter Clay Smith in it with Brodix heads. It was fun!!!
Have you seen "Vice Grip Garage" budget build and dyno test on a 307? I was amazed. I don't remember the exact horsepower right off hand but with some 305 HO heads and a good cam and intake it made well over 300. I never thought that 307 could make 1 hp per cubic inch much less more than that but increased air flow makes any engine run good!!!
Having owned a boss 351 which I ended up totaling in 1975 nobody would even pick the auto light carburetor that those things were laying all over the salvage yard in Tucson similar to a Rochester no not Jack Benny's first thing everybody grab was a ram air the way around the rev limiter was soldered the smallest nail you can find and it would just fit right between the connector there were no evidence of it being tampered so you can retain the warranty the four-barrel manifold weather aluminum or cast iron bolts right on the two barrel heads which does help two barrel heads were far better on the street as far as street racing because you didn't have to keep the revs up to keep the flow in those big heads the Cleveland manifold would be reversed I watched a guy put one on got it all torque down only to find out he had it the wrong way because the linkage mounting holes were on the opposite side
You'd like the Aussie xy falcon phase 3
we also produced the most powerful factory naturally aspirated modular ford small block the boss 315, 422hp and 406 lb-ft
Essentially the same engine. Except the intake and exhaust were choked to keep the power figures down.
Solid cam, 11.5:1, 780 holley, H&M headers, and if you paid $250 for the QC option the engine was blue printed and assembled by the same guys that built the factory team engines. These were unofficially rated at 380hp.
I like any Ford V-8 that the Aussies built!!! And their DOHC inline six kicks ass as well!
@@terraboundmisfit the Barra is a great engine.
Good motor .. but i still prefer The Machine from 1970. With the group 19 v code service package .. the 390 small block had 472 hp. And easily turned out 12 second quarter miles. It was the only muscle car that year that made 15 inch wheels standard.
Rich have you tested a ford 390 with cobra jet heads
The only cars I had from this Era was a 1969 Chevy Impala SS 427. and a 1969 428CJ Mustang Mach1. The MACH1 would consistently run faster 1/4 mile times around 13.60ish but I think that was more because it was a 4 speed Mustang vs a slushbox Impala.
It would be nice to see a 5.0 stock short block 87-93 cam size myth buster. What is the largest you can run with out notching pistons. There are alot of people building hci builds that get all sorts of wrong info. Love the content keep it coming.
Back in the day,mid 80's I built a 302*.030 with a Trw preformance cam. I dont remember the exact. numbers but was close to.500 lift and around 288 duration. And the typical accessories. Accell 600cfm holley with the 351 D0oe 4v heads with the 4sp top loader 3:50:1 9" diff in a66mustang fb. Any way it ran pretty good any Idea in approx. Dyno Numbers it could of recorded. I know guessing is guessing.
This is a call out for everyone with the SCCA racing engines! Lets get these old race engines dynoed!
SOCALDEVILDOG : Everyone of them knows how important air fuel, igntion advance and K code head porting is. All the things that Shelby did from the factory. Oh, and a good ported Buddy Bar 4bbl and 780 spec carb or Quad ID whatever's.
@@deanstevenson6527 Heck yes!!!! I'd just love to hear one of those rip on @richard_holdners dyno
Nobody asked for my opinion, but that's never stopped me. My top 3 small blocks; 351C, 340, 327. I'm a Ford guy, but Chevy had some great small blocks. Mopar had very few, but they sure had a good one with the 340. To me, Ford and Mopar always had better big blocks.
Well yeah we're talking stock yeah they may not have been very impressive but for what they were they were good power plants
Back in the day, my dream cars were either '69 Z28 or a '70 Boss 302. However, my dad, aka co-signer, thought a brand new '74 Mustang II with a 2.8 LTR V6 and a 4 speed was a better usage of my hard earned money. I'm sure he was probably right but to settle for a Mustang II was an embarrassment in those days. That body style eventually offered a V8, 302, I think. After I got the Mustang II, I was hoping I could somehow manage to raise the cash for a SpearCo turbo kit. They had recently come out designed for smaller 2.6 LTR in the Capri (another car I would've taken over the Mustang II.
Thank you Richard! IMHO, the takeaway from all your testing is that an engine needs to breathe. No amount of CID, cams, compression will compensate for a poor flowing head!
That’s what I am learning to! He is changing the game.
First car was a 67 comet, solid lifter 289,long tube headers! NEVER got out out ran but the leftover 350 Chevys in mid 70's Chevels, or stock Camaros! Now, it had cam, intake, headers.I t was a stick, they were autos! The mid 70's stock 350s were pigs! They were all slow by today's standards, but the earlier 289 hp heads were better, they didn't have smog humps in the exhaust ports! Compared the times of the Shelby gt 350s with the 72 up smog motor chevies! With those soda straw exhaust the 66 gt350 ran 14.6 in the 1/4! Pretty impressive for the time! But Ford just put a cast iron intake and an Autolight card, with the mild solid lifter can! No headers! The first 5 liter motors were faster than the later, I watched them on the street and on the track. Chevy guys started buying up the fox bodies!
How's the 289 compare to 283, or 273
Exactly a 289 compared to a roller 5.0 is gonna come up short but in 1965 it was the leader of the pack
The 273 has some torque the other don't.
the 289 and 283 are similar
How bout a Shinona body (69 - 70) mustang with a 351 boss engine? No, you wouldn't yank the 71 351 boss engine out of a 71 mustang. Even though they were, well ugly. To me anyway. Saw a fella use 351 Cleveland 2 barrel engine, improved the oiling issue and came real close to the 351 boss engine specs. Wow, 12 sec car using street tires!
Soooo glad u did this. The car that made me diehard ford and mustang obsessed my entire life. My uncle bought a one of a kind special ordered 71 boss 351 when he got out of Vietnam. Lots of good childhood memories with that car, would love to reunite with it but I'd never be able to afford it.
The reason that the carburetor (Autolite 4300D, NOT to be confused with the standard 4300 series, which is as common as dirt.) is so expensive is because NOBODY knew how to make them perform, back then. The engineers, back at Ford totally screwed them up in the name of emissions and the dealership mechanics were not allowed to "make them right", even if they knew how to, which they didn't. So . . . . . they ended up in the trash or the junkyard. They aren't expensive because they're good, they're expensive because they're rare. There are, however, quite a few out there IF you can afford one BUT you need to find a carburetor whisperer that understands their faults and knows what to do with them. There are several modifications, inside and out that need to be performed to correct the engineers "improvements".
You truly deserve way more subscribers than you have
they are coming-the channel is growing faster than expected-its all good! thnx for the support
Our Aussie XY GTHO 351 Clevo was rated at 380hp and 380ft/lb,I can't remember the compression ratio of the top of my head or cam specs but them 4v heads are a jem on the top end.Nothing factory could come close 👍👍
Rich I know this video is a bit old
But I think an Oldsmobile
W31 350 would be a worthy challenger to the boss 351 crown. It would definitely be an awesome other guy’s build and comparison. That w31 is a stout package.