351 m vs. 351 windsor - Ford Bronco Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-26-2008, 10:23 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
firstford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: florida
Posts: 198
Bronco Info: 79 bronco 10" lift 36's 351m 4barrel edelbrock combo ..83 f150 cab
351 m vs. 351 windsor

the engine was supposedly rebuilt about 4 years ago and only has 20,000 on it along with the trans .
it sat for so long ,it seem'd so rough at first BUT ,,bam today my bud came by and set the vacuum timing and the dist timing ,adjusted the carb and choke .

i cant beleive this motor spun all 4 tires in the grass and sounds good too.
which engine is better and why .
why do they call this motor 351 modified what is the modified?

however i am suprised at the available power this engine produces.
compared to my friends yota its night and day .

think before you type sometimes the guy on the other side is a BADASS!
firstford is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-26-2008, 10:37 PM
Fullsize Member
 
highhorse78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,804
Bronco Info: 78 Bronco-408ci, 6" Superflex lift, 4.56s, Detroit lockers, C6 wide ratio slushbox, twinsticked 205
Modified just means that it is not a Cleveland or Windsor. Thats just the name Ford gave it. By the way modified has nothing to do with Fords newer "modular" motors like the 4.6 or 5.4
highhorse78 is offline  
post #3 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-26-2008, 10:50 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
firstford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: florida
Posts: 198
Bronco Info: 79 bronco 10" lift 36's 351m 4barrel edelbrock combo ..83 f150 cab
cool thanks ^^^^^^^
i heard that the 351m is a big block is this true?

think before you type sometimes the guy on the other side is a BADASS!
firstford is offline  
post #4 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-26-2008, 10:53 PM
Fullsize Member
 
highhorse78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,804
Bronco Info: 78 Bronco-408ci, 6" Superflex lift, 4.56s, Detroit lockers, C6 wide ratio slushbox, twinsticked 205
The 351m/400 is a small block but shares the same big block bellhousing bolt pattern as 429/460
highhorse78 is offline  
post #5 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 12:08 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NORTH ALABAMA
Posts: 3,795
Bronco Info: 80 BRONCO 400 NP435 NP205 Detroits , SAS, 5'' lift on 36'' TSL's
A 351m = a 400 that is destroked. (modified from a 400 to make it a 351)

The only difference between the 400 and 351m is the 351m has a shorter stroke due to the crank and the piston deck height is taller.
redbeast9 is offline  
post #6 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 12:32 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Mtn Home, Ar
Posts: 268
Bronco Info: 79 Bronco, 460 36's c6/205, 78 Bronco, built 400 c6/205
If you read a ford book from that era, it is actually a 351midland because that's what plant they were built in.
Timothypm is offline  
post #7 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 02:32 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: vancouver, b.c. canada
Posts: 35
Bronco Info: 1995 f 150 I6, 5 spd, 7" lift, 35's
is there a difference in fuel consumption between the 400 and the 351. if there is, is there any major difference between a windsor or the modified for example horsepower, reliability, and of course mileage?
suburbanpat is offline  
post #8 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 02:53 AM
Registered User
 
Big Wurmb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Jefferson County, Missouri
Posts: 1,264
Bronco Info: 79Bko:400,c6,np205,d44,9",35"tires.
funny, I thought it to be a Modified Cleveland block....and thus have a Crap load of interchangeable parts......
I thought ford took a 351C made it taller, to fit 400 Cu., then also had it destroked to 351 for light cars ans trucks... there goes that theory .

Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbanpat View Post
is there a difference in fuel consumption between the 400 and the 351.
depends, but usually 2 or 3 Mpg seeing teh 400 is hungry...er
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbanpat View Post
if there is, is there any major difference between a windsor or the modified for example horsepower,
yes, the 351m was a torque engine, the 351w was a hp engine
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbanpat View Post
reliability,
depends
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbanpat View Post
and of course mileage?
GOSH yes. main bearing #4...5 I forget, are last to get oil and usually increased mileage = decreases oil pressure ALOT sooner then a Windsor

and I think it goes along the line of 351m = torque, 351w = horsepower

2003 Ford Lightning SVT F-150: Sonic Blue, 2.76 upper, CAI, OBX exhaust
2003 Ford Cobra: Metallic Silver Vert, 2.76 upper, CAI, MAC's exhaust
1988 Ranger: Flatbed, 33" xtreme terrains, 2.9L, 5-speed
1979 Bronco XLT (ex-freewheeling package): 6.6L, C6, NP205, D44, 9", 35"tires, Flowmasters, K&N.
Big Wurmb is offline  
post #9 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 03:21 AM
Registered User
 
rkymtnbrnc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,448
Bronco Info: 79 Ranger XLT 302 engine
a 351M is a 351M. No idea where the misnomer "modified" comes from.

351M/400 is correct.
rkymtnbrnc is offline  
post #10 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 09:03 AM
is hazardous to others
 
hav24wheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: ND
Posts: 1,656
Bronco Info: Wagoneer, 351M, C6, upside down 205
I've also read that the M in 351M is just a M. that stands for nothing.
hav24wheel is offline  
post #11 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 09:08 AM
FSM Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: an island near Maryland
Posts: 4,117
Bronco Info: '66-'78 bunch o' Broncos...and one Filly
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkymtnbrnc View Post
a 351M is a 351M. No idea where the misnomer "modified" comes from.

351M/400 is correct.
Correct. It was simply a 400..which is all that Ford called it as part of the Cleveland or 335-series engine family when it came out in '71. A few years later (1975) Ford decided they needed a smaller-displacement version of their 'big' Cleveland, crudely destroked the 400 to 351 CI, and slapped an "M" on the end of it so it could be identified as different from the 'other' 351 that was in production at the same time..the 351W..and the one that had only a year before ceased production..the 351C.

'M=Midland'.??.LMAO..why does that keep popping up?...all of the blocks were cast at Michigan, Dearborn and Cleveland foundries. That one was easy.

bmc69 is offline  
post #12 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-27-2008, 11:06 PM
mrw
Registered User
 
mrw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Rehoboth, MA
Posts: 56
Bronco Info: 78, 79, 66, 73 +
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmc69 View Post
'M=Midland'.??.LMAO..why does that keep popping up?...all of the blocks were cast at Michigan, Dearborn and Cleveland foundries. That one was easy.
Oh, Mr. know-it-all has to ruin everyones fun . . .

(Side note: should I get my dive gear together to pull that project of yours off the bottom of the bay?)

mrw is offline  
post #13 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 12:27 AM
fender hacking extremist
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gloucester, MA
Posts: 905
i would hesitate to say that the 351m is a torque engine and the 351w is a hp engine... ive got a 351w that makes an awful lot more torque than horsepower.

1998 formula, LS6 430rwhp/395rwtq

1991 yoter "truck", rust
SMurray is offline  
post #14 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 01:31 AM
Registered User
 
rkymtnbrnc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,448
Bronco Info: 79 Ranger XLT 302 engine
I'm thinking with those gears you don't lock that up in 4WD too often.
rkymtnbrnc is offline  
post #15 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 08:59 AM
FSM Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: an island near Maryland
Posts: 4,117
Bronco Info: '66-'78 bunch o' Broncos...and one Filly
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMurray View Post
i would hesitate to say that the 351m is a torque engine and the 351w is a hp engine... ive got a 351w that makes an awful lot more torque than horsepower.
I would not hesitate to say yr right. Kinda hard to explain in an engineering sense (as opposed to a parochial sense) how two pieces of iron that each have 4" bores and 3.5" strokes are going to be much different at the end of the day..ain't it? In fact..it can be argued that the W, with its smaller intake runner volume, snaller head ports and smaller valves, is more likely to be the one with higher low-end torque, between the two. But that's just a wild guess..er..no wait...something just poked through my alcohol-ridden Alzheimer's-clouded memory..Edelbrock created the SP-2P intake manny for one reason: to reduce the intake runner volume and CSA on the 351M/400 (and a few other 'big breathing engines like those) to increase the bottom-end torque..making it more "Windsor like' in that sense.

bmc69 is offline  
post #16 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 09:01 AM
FSM Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: an island near Maryland
Posts: 4,117
Bronco Info: '66-'78 bunch o' Broncos...and one Filly
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrw View Post
Oh, Mr. know-it-all has to ruin everyones fun . . .

(Side note: should I get my dive gear together to pull that project of yours off the bottom of the bay?)
What?..you don't think I can keep that thing afloat with the 8 bilge pumps I got in it?

Thread pirate....

bmc69 is offline  
post #17 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 01:58 PM
Registered User
 
Big Wurmb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Jefferson County, Missouri
Posts: 1,264
Bronco Info: 79Bko:400,c6,np205,d44,9",35"tires.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkymtnbrnc View Post
I'm thinking with those gears you don't lock that up in 4WD too often.
sorry its been awhile since ive had a 351m. Ive upgraded to 410, and my 351w bko cant match it.

2003 Ford Lightning SVT F-150: Sonic Blue, 2.76 upper, CAI, OBX exhaust
2003 Ford Cobra: Metallic Silver Vert, 2.76 upper, CAI, MAC's exhaust
1988 Ranger: Flatbed, 33" xtreme terrains, 2.9L, 5-speed
1979 Bronco XLT (ex-freewheeling package): 6.6L, C6, NP205, D44, 9", 35"tires, Flowmasters, K&N.
Big Wurmb is offline  
post #18 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 02:19 PM
Registered User
 
rkymtnbrnc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,448
Bronco Info: 79 Ranger XLT 302 engine
Not you Wurmb. SMurray says he's got 4.10's out back & 3.55 up front.
rkymtnbrnc is offline  
post #19 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 07:18 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
firstford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: florida
Posts: 198
Bronco Info: 79 bronco 10" lift 36's 351m 4barrel edelbrock combo ..83 f150 cab
IVE got the performer 400 edelbrock intake and edel 4bbl carb .

the engine was rebuilt and my mech beleives he did summin to it!
the son of a bitch is crazy strong .
now that the timing on the dist and vac are set this thing starts right up and idles good .
considering my truck has a lot of added metal stuff all around and a rail road rail for a bumper ,i thought it would be slow and heavy BUT NO ,it will burn the rear tire at a light its wierd ,,i almost cant beleive it ,its like a ****ing hot rod,ill take some video and youtube it ..

think before you type sometimes the guy on the other side is a BADASS!
firstford is offline  
post #20 of 24 (permalink) Old 03-28-2008, 07:26 PM
Fullsize Member
 
highhorse78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,804
Bronco Info: 78 Bronco-408ci, 6" Superflex lift, 4.56s, Detroit lockers, C6 wide ratio slushbox, twinsticked 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by firstford View Post
IVE got the performer 400 edelbrock intake and edel 4bbl carb .

the engine was rebuilt and my mech beleives he did summin to it!
the son of a bitch is crazy strong .
now that the timing on the dist and vac are set this thing starts right up and idles good .
considering my truck has a lot of added metal stuff all around and a rail road rail for a bumper ,i thought it would be slow and heavy BUT NO ,it will burn the rear tire at a light its wierd ,,i almost cant beleive it ,its like a ****ing hot rod,ill take some video and youtube it ..
Seeing a vid of your rig doing a huge burnout would make my day.
highhorse78 is offline  
Reply

  Ford Bronco Forum > Bronco Discussions > 1978-'79 Bronco Tech

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Bronco Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself. DO NOT USE Gmail.com accounts. If you only have a Gmail.com email please contact the administrator here

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome