HOW MUCH POWER DID THE 1971 BOSS 351 REALLY MAKE? WAS IT THE HOTTEST SMALL BLOCK EVER OFFERED?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 вер 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!
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!!!
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?
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 .
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.
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...👍
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.
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.
I had a Boss 351 mustang, 1971. 4 speed, red and black. I remember the old poly glass G 60x15 inch tires, real howlers and it took a lot of revolutions to get them to smoke, LOL! This thing made a lot of power for being stock. 330 hp if I remember right. I hope here in the near future to own another but I also know I will pay for it if it is in great condition. My next project is a Factory 5 Daytona Coupe, going old school with a 351 Windsor stroked to 427, just my thing. Thanks for all the good engine combos and results, love your channel.
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.
LOVE these builds and comparisons!!! Many thanks!!
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
Try this some time. I have a 289 .30 over (293 c.I.) short block. Forged rods and pistons and stock crank zero balanced. With GT40 iron heads with mild intake work, big exhaust work, port match to an old X-cellerator Weiand intake and a custom solid roller cam. A 750 CFM Holley road race carb. I did spend big money on a shaft Jessel roller Rocker system.
I did this as cheap as possible buying used intake, carb and roller rockers. With less than 4500 dollars in the motor it makes 368 hp to the wheels of my 85 Mustang GT. It takes your breath away when it is up on the cam! Long tubs with a big x pipe and boom tubes it has a wonderful exhaust note. It does take work an a lot of rear gear to wake the 289 up. And this build looks very factory in appearance.
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.
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…
My friend had a 65 289 Mustang with some aftermarket parts, 4 speed and 456 gear. It ran 12.20 in 1980, fast for a street car at that time. I was impressed.
Alright, beings you asked. Everyone knows how bad the small block ford heads flowed, but it was the only option available at the time. When the 271 HP came out, again it was the best at the time. When Trans-am racing got going in 69-71, ford came up with the 302 Boss (which everyone knows). That really changed the game in ford's favor. I for one, would have loved to had one of those engines, but life gets in the way sometimes. Then the 351 boss came out, which you showed. Those were great engines, without question. Back in my day (yes, I am old), 289, 302 were about all we had till the 351 came along, then the boss engines after that. I feel you are correct in your comments, but if all you had was a 289, you might different thoughts. They were great at the time, but time marches on. BTW, I really like your channel. Much respect.
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
My friend Johnnie Torres in 1969 ran a 1965 Mustang in hot rod class AHRA at National Speedway Long Island. It was a 289 with Mondello heads and ran an 11:83 in the 1/4 mile. He held the track record in his class. When visitors came to the pits they would ask us what kind of Chevy engine was in the car. Johnnie would say nothing he just lifted the hood and watched the awe. I told them anyone can make a small block Chevy run, but it takes a real mechanic to make a 289 Ford run. It was Carrol Shelby's favorite motor too. I do agree with you the Boss 351 is my favorite too. I believe it was Bob Glidden favorite as well.
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.
Boss 351 was the best high horsepower Ford engine ever made.
Boss 302 second in small block category.
Boss 428 or Ford 427... was awesome. Dad had a medium riser 427 f e 63 galaxy as I was growing up. The motor screamed like no other.....😁
Great video as always!... thanks for posting
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 !
Richard this is Steve from Annapolis keep up the good work I was brought up on all the old engines using carburetors computers are boring and a pain in the ass keep up the good work I'm 56 years old and I still do believe in the old engines I'm a Chevy man but I like the Fords more and more after watching your reviews thank you
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.
I ran a 318 72 Duster in the 70s. The engine was warmed over really good. 340 heads and Edelbrock 4 bbl intake with Carter 750 cfm carb. Cam dynamics cam. High lift. Long duration. Headman headers and dual point distributor. It had a manual 3 speed and 8 3/4 rear gears. This car ran really strong in the day. The 318 got very little respect as far as high performance. All the mags said “don’t waste your time on a 318. I think because the engine was a 2 bbl. Small valve heads it was mostly endeared as durable. And reliable. But with the right parts, it screamed right up to 5800 rpm. Stop light to stop light it held its own. Boss 351 C. Now that’s a well put together engine. A lot of good parts. Starting with compression and very big valves. No wonder it would be on the top of the list of the most powerful small blocks. Also can’t count out AMCs 390. Talk about stroker. Thanks for the video.
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.
Shinoda was the designer that other designers thought they could match and never will. I've always loved my Fords but when I go to the strip I raced Chevy. The one exception: I have a Ford 427 side-oiler that made me understand what torque/power meant. Believe it or not I won it in a pool game. The guy that lost it had tears in his eyes as big as road apples.....I gave his several games to win it back but he couldn't. He later admitted that he really didn't have plans for the engine....I did!
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.
Back in 1988 I ordered a '88 Mustang LX 5.0 COUPE, and deleted every option - no A/C, no power windows but kept the sound system. It was damn fast! The kid who bought it from me totaled it in three weeks!
!
It's in the rear end. Do you want to go fast, or get fast quick?
I always knew that 351C was dynamite package!! I remember many articles written about the 69 Boss 302 and its' power potential because of those marvelous
cylinder heads! Except you had to rev that thing to the moon to get power out of it. The writers said, in the '70 model, the valve sizes were cut down just a bit,
and by adding the additional cubes made the BOSS 351 an absolute monster! I also remember writers saying, for years Ford made engines that either didn't
breathe well (in the case of the Windsor 289/302 or the FEs 352/390), or had engines that flowed too well, (in the case of the original Boss 302 and the
Shotgun BOSS 429)!! I also heard/read the best Cleveland combination for street power was to run the 2 barrel 351C head on your 351/400, and watch it fly!!!
Great video!
bullshit
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
You must always remember the difference in technology over time. I'm 70 now and had a 1964 Comet Caliente with one of those engines and with very few upgrades at the time late 60's I was a Chevy eater with their 283's, Dodge's 318's which were support to be compatible. My next car was 67 Cougar with 390, 330 hp in 1970, which was underrated for insurance purposes That was a suicide car in anything but a straight line, but I loved it so and surprised a lot of cars. Those days can never be repeated because this was happing at the time with the current technology. I now own a 1971 Boss 351C and is 90% restored as I write this Red/Black, so I agree with your choice of one of your choices. Fastest 1/4 ever recorded by a Mustang ( stock)
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 can say from experience, be glad you didn’t use the Autolite carburetor. My 1970 Cougar M-code 351C picked up a little over a second when I dumped it for a 750cfm Holly. Great video.
Love both the 289 and the 351 for totally different reasons. Dad has a 289 powered car that is super smooth and a willing revver but we know its not super powerful. Ford Australia on the other hand chose the cleveland as its base v8 from early seventies through to early eighties and for that i am truly grateful. In the early eighties you could find 351 four speeds with 9 inch diffs cheap. Not so any more!
my friend's dad had a 289 powered high 10 second mustang back in the 90s. he was proud of it being a 289. it had a c4 automatic. 456 gears
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
My 87 5.0 LX Mustang with cat back flowmasters, 160 T stat and opened up air box and 3.08 gears and street tires ran 13.80s @ 100mph all day long with a best of 13.71 @ 101mph at Capital raceway in Maryland. Short shifting was the key. I shifted from 3rd to 4th at 4600 rpm. Most everyone else were screaming 3rd gear threw the traps at 5600 to 5700 rpm.
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!!!
HI, RICH....
After rewatching both the M code & the Boss.....
Excellent results with a 'Bossed' Cleveland.
Any further testing, such as single plane Vs. dual olane... Fuel inj. V. carb, header shootouts ( the Boss will never thumbs down a set of good v. Exoensive, shorties v. Long tube..)
Always a pleasure.
Never watch after having had a Big touch of the grain. ...
Keep it coming!
Thanks,
BRIAN.
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.
HI, RICH.....
THAKS FOR THE " MID BOSS" build up!!!!
A friend ( late) had a 71 351 in pewter.
Awesome car & a BOSS LOOKER.
And it rumbled- not the SBC burble- Bob grumbled the o'Brien truckers big-into-smaller headers and do not forget Ford used some 'cheap-ro-lay' needle bearings on the rockets & the squeeze on Bill's Boss was 11.7:1& NOT THE LT-NONES 11.1
HIS BEST RUN WITH SLICKS, LADDERS & A MOTORCRAFT ELECTRONIC @ 6200 RPM WAS 13.31 @ 114.
SKUNKS LT NONES, NO?
BRIAN.
Back in the 1980's one of the most successful street racers I knew ran a 289 in his Cougar. It was mostly a full on light weight drag car, tube chassis, 4 link, big tires, and full race engine build. He would get no respect from the 289 and get race challenges all the time. I never really understood why they would doubt the setup as it looked and sounded so great.
Hi Richard, I used a lot of 289 & 302's in the 70's/80's, but now my car has a 289W. Choices are the key word. I'm using a eagle 302 crank 3.00" stroke( 28oz), 302 rods 5.090 and 302 (DSS) forged pistons 4.030 (9.7:1 comp), in my 1965 daily Street Mustang. After Break in, say 5000 miles , I'll most likely will Up-date the Heads. I think there's more more for the 289 then you covered, like the Jon Kaase's, new P-38 small block heads as a up-date (for 289, 302 or 351W), ( if I can afford them, I'll get them!!) , maybe adding a 50 or 75 shot of NOS. 306 HP was so limited to the 1965/68 parts. Todays parts make it Fun to build old Engines!
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.
I remember your 1988 Mustang in the Silver State Classic. I ordered the VHS tape and watched that tape many times, and there you were; taking a relatively stock Mustang notchback with a few modifications and racing it for 90 miles against some serious (for the time) cars. I had a '86 Mercury Capri 5.0 with a 5-speed that I bought from Bob Beatty Ford in Simi Valley in 1989, and later bought a brand new '93 GT from Metro Ford in North Hollywood; later still I bought a '85 Mustang SSP (former CHP car). You started to get featured in Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords magazine and other Ford performance magazines. Glad to see you are still at it!
still have that car!
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.
My gf’s brother bought a new 351 boss… he was beautiful black with silver trim boss on the side in big letters, that thing was a monster I think its greatest attribute was the flat torque/horsepower curve it just made a lots of power then just just keep making more! It was quick and powerful.. There were lots of hot rods and lots of fast cars around mustangs, Camaros, corvettes, chevelles, the mopars, but that boss was the boss!
As usual, so much good info. I love these test, the testing method, and this channel. Keep it up!
I had a 65 289 Hipo Mustang GT, 4 speed solid cam , dual point, ,it's what got me started in proformance cars, if you talked to me then it could do anything and was faster than most , today I have learned much and now i know the difference, mostly almost every 3rd weekend I readjusted the valves or broke something. Today I have built a 302 hydraulic "almost equilvent ??" 79 Mustang Pace car , C-4 auto w/stall, long tube headers, 68 close chamber 11 to 1 comp, larger valve , not bad wont rev as high but works well. I wont ever get my Hipo back so this is a nice alternative. I really liked the Hipo 289 the 302 is good and a 351 windsor is heading to the engine stand soon. Thanks for 351 Cleveland Info, not sure I'll ever get there but Thanks, you do good I enjoy watching and learning from your video's.
I liked my 65 HiPo too-just was not as fast as I wanted in stock trim
@@richardholdener1727 at the time I had mine (age17) it was the fasters thing on the road , just ask me then! I had more fun with that car burning up rear tires, it did long burnouts. I did lose a burnout contest to a 68 Mach1 Mustang , thats when I started learning things about race cars.
@@richardholdener1727 Richard, do you think gearing had anything to do with your feeling that the HiPo was slow? The Toploader trans that came in HiPos had the 2.32 first gear - combined with 3.50s in the diff, it's a dog setup for an engine that doesn't make a lot of torque. It really shines up high though, those are impressive numbers for mid 60s OEM tech.
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.
I don't care about any tests, I will always have a spot in my heart for the 289. Even stock it was a high revving blast to drive. Not huge horsepower numbers but still a lot of fun.
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!
I built a nasty 351c 4bolt mains, bored 20 thousands. pop up Pistons 12.8-1 closed chamber heads that were machined to solid lifters., SS tulip cut valves stock intake with 1.4 exh. Running a Ford motorsport cam. 657 lift 326 dur. Found a NASCR Dominator intake, with a 2" spacer using a 1050 Dominator. 3.00 rear, close ratio top loader. No idea on the HP but beat a11.02 runing Grand National on the street. Got kicked off the track in Miami-Hollywood since I ran under 13 without a roll cage. Oh and 1/7/8 hooker headers, was in a 70 Mach 1. Beast of a car
1.4 exhaust valve?
@@richardholdener1727 Opps sorry oversized I ment 1.70 1.62 was stock
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.
Ford new the 289 and basically the whole Windsor engine family was dated and they would need to step up to compete with the small block Chevy in Z28 302 and LT-I 350 trim. This is the reason the Boss 302 and Boss 351 were created. None of the Windsor engines received any further development after those engines came out. Even the Boss program was short lived after the government along with insurance companies basically ended the muscle car and factory racing involvement at Ford in the early 70's. The Boss 351 became a very strong engine in NASCAR and Pro Stock trim for many years even though production and factory development was long gone. In the early 80's Ford begin to come back to factory performance cars and parts. This began the long run of factory involvement that has continued to this day. Yes the Boss 302 and Boss 351 were called the "Baby Rat" :)
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.
Back in the mid 70s my uncle had a 1971 Boss 351 Mustang with a few aftermarket parts. I can't recall what modifications were done, I was only 8 or 9 years old. I also remember it being a rocket and the fastest thing on the streets for years. I was with him when he took it to the track once and would lift the front left wheel without a problem.
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.
In the early 80's my brother had a 67 Mustang with a 289 and a 4 speed top loader. A guy really into mustangs sold it to him cause he needed bail money. Then he built the engine based off what the guy told him. Things I knew about it was it was .30 over and had some unbelievable head work done on it. The guy who did the work built drag engines and used Chevrolet valves because they had the biggest for the application. Along with porting and polishing. I remember my brother racing guys and them getting pissed because they didn't believe he had a 289 under the hood. I think what really have the car gusto besides my brothers unbelievable ability to drive was the 8-track tape player with the matches jamb in to get it to play right.
When I was in high school, I was a Cleveland guy for sure.
There was something wrong with your k code 65 mustang! Mine was much quicker than any of my 5.0s until the coyote which is in another league. Some don't consider the 335 series a small block but it's small cubic inches compared to a big block and a very well rounded performance engine if you can afford 8 mpg but who cares about that when making the kind of power that engine is capable of,it's a big block killer for sure. My hydraulic cammed Cleveland was good for 490 at 7600. Nothing but a 300 degree hydraulic with 520 lift,torker intake and hooker comp headers. A little exhaust port work and all factory stock other than these few mods. With a good solid lift flat tappet cam it was a beast but 3&7 rod bearings wouldn't last but one season at 8500. Sig Erson 630lift 307/314 advertised duration. It was dirt track stuff I bought from a friend. $300 for boss 351 heads and the cam. Wish I could find a deal like that again. My employer has some boss 302 stuff for sale right now if you are interested. He ruled the dirt tracks in south Arkansas and northern Louisiana. That car sounded completely different from everything else on the track and most tracks hated to see it show up. Wonder why,lmao.
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.
I had a 68 Torino GT 289 with pop ups and 4 speed my uncle sold it for $500 all it needed was a steering stabilizer motor knocked but ran Ok I got it from another uncle 30 yrs ago I was gonna rebuild the motor I was mad as hell I never saw a penny and had the chance to buy a 70 fastback fo $200 with a 351 HO Cleveland 4V i bought the 65 Chevrolet truck he wanted $700 told him I’d give $900 to hold till next day all I had to do was tell him to hold mustang person came by after me and bought it for sale in front yard He said the next day he would of held it if I wanted it but I didn’t tell him too
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
Back when I was a teenager whose friend's Dads had plenty of money, I had the chance to ride back to town in one of my friends Camaro with a 327. At one light, a 289 Hipo pulled up next to us, also one of the guys. When the lights turned green ,they had a good start but in 2 races, the Mustang pulled away from the Camaro. The guy driving the Camaro was in such disbelief that he let the Ford driver drive his car and one of the other guys drove the Mustang with identical results. I may be wrong but I believe that advertised HP was 250 for the 327 and 289 for the 289. ???
289 Hi Po K code rated at 271 HP
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 UA-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 UA-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.
I had a number of 67-68 XR-7 Cougars. My 67 GT started with the S code 390 4v. Yanked it for a very built 71 Boss 351. I spent days porting and polishing the heads. Loved that engine. Another of my Cougrs, a '68 XR-7, sported a '67 cross-bolt side oiler. If you want a 427, get a REAL ONE. Not a stroked Windsor...
Great comparison Richard! There are just some engineering realities vs the muscle car advertising , word of mouth, and results on the street back in the day. The 289 HIPO was a total surprise for me. But in reflection, back in it’s time and in its car -it was a hot rod compared to stock cars in its class. But now the 289 HIPO seems completely outclassed. For the Boss 351: (and 351 CJ)it was unique engineered package that worked well if left alone. Due to the large port heads and huge intake runners, after a camshaft change lost all the low speed torque and became peeky miserable engines in the big Torino and mustang bodies they came in. Richard how I’d like to see a comparison between the ford 390 Gt and Chevys 396 from the 1967 pony car wars. Have you done a 428 CJ yet????
351cj was actually a detuned engine compared to M code 351c from 70 and early 71 mustang. compression was lovered with open heads, but they throw in higher lift cam and larger manifold. So CJ made less low end torque and slightly less power then M code.
70 and 71 M code is exactly the same engine. Ford miss advertised 70 engine and corrected ratings for 71
The second engine I ever built was a 1964 289 2V block for my brother's early 65 Mustang.12.5 to 1 pistons, mild port matching to intakes only, Tarantula single plane intake, 650 double pumper carb, Ford dual point distributor, Ford LeMans cam, headers. It would turn 8,000 RPMs. We decided to shift it at 7,500 RPMs to keep it together. It was never beaten on the street while he owned it. Lasted 14 years and two owners before it expired. Beat the fastest car in town, 375/396 Nova by 5 cars. Nova stopped in to look under the hood at our little engine and couldn't believe it. His comment was he needed to get a 454.
What gears were you running in the stang?
@@will7its 3.89 open with G60/14 tires with wide ratio small block top loader Ford 4 speed.
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
I loved my 71 Boss 351 Mustang it was glow in the dark green with black stripes. I found the Boss in 1979 at a tiny car lot i saw the color and knew it wasn't a normal Mustang I paid $600 for it. The HP 289 was not impressive to me I ran against a few. The Boss 351 is a monster it will take on most. I had a 69 Boss 429 I like the Boss 351 better and if you find just a 71 Cleveland two barrel carburetor it will surprise you against four barrel the big two barrel was 580 cfm if remember right. Any 351 Cleveland before 72 is good especially a M code I believe the 71 year was best for any 351 Cleveland after that they dropped compression.
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.
Thanks for all the effort. I’m learning so much.
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
289hp ate push rod and rocker arms at Manassas drag strip Va back in the 70s. Both neighbor's had mustang factory drag cars. Rebel Ron came over also.
Dad raced a 66 Shelby when I was a kid. He had a lot of the trick stuff of the day including Crane heads and a rev kit. Aluminum flywheel and a 6:00 gear. He tried different intakes from Shelby dual carb and cross ram. The biggest limiter I think was the slicks of the day and lack of susp Mods. He just had slapped bars. I believe 12.10 was his best.
He later raced with a Boss 351 in a 65 Mustang running about a full second quicker.
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 had a Boss289 that turned just under 20,000 rpm. Lol.
Over the years I've noticed engines with long, flat power curves always feel better in the car, and engines with almost verticle power curves (no matter how high the numbers) always "lackluster" on the street. I guess that makes me a Big Block guy. ?? That said, I agree the Boss351 is the best Ford Small Block. Hands Down.
If you have the money to slightly modify your Ford engine, put a set of CHI 3V heads, and install a modern hydraulic roller cam set up on any Ford Small Block and you're done.
One of the most underrated engines ever built for the street. You'll have LS guys scratching their heads. Hands down the best looking Ford engine too.
Let's face it, Boss is Boss.
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
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.
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
I have a blue 71 boss I got in 84. 36k orig miles, still on orig tires, car is an animal. Thx for showing that.. I ran 13.33 104 mph with Goodyear eagle gts bk in day
If I ran drag radials it would run high 12s.. great car and engine. Hi po 289 is fun car and can make power..
Well you can put 2v head's on the 289 block! I'm getting about 500hp 410 tq. Track Boss intake
Ran around with a bud who had a 351C 4V in a Ranchero. It was a respectable street machine 😁
The Cleveland was an excellent engine.
Please try Some C3 and D3 Yates heads on these engines.
Great videos! Real thorough and informative. So the Boss 351 is it!! Cool. Thanks for your vids.
Over the years I've had a few Mustangs as well:
•'65 w/retrofitted 351 Cleveland, B&M shifter. That was around 1982. Lots of surprises (not in a good way) with that car. But it was fast!
•'88 GT 5-sp hatchback. In the '92-'95 timeframe. Practical, fun, quick, sea-level power.
•91 LX 5.0 Convertible in the '98-99 timeframe. Not impressed; between a 3-sp tranny , weighty convertible and mile-hi Denver it was a dog!
3-speed trans in a 91?
A match between the 340 six pack and boss 351 would be an awesome test, but also a W2 headed 340 against the boss 351.
That Cleveland doesn't have a prayer against the W2, just my opinion....
That being said I have a 1976 casting econo set I could have available for such a test.
Not a Ford guy at all, but there is no question the Cleveland heads flowed a lot. The 351 Cleveland engine is massive for a small block, however. I had a friend with a 70 Cougar with a 351C 4V and I worked on it quite a bit. That engine was a very tight fit in a Mustang / Cougar.
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 !!!