Vintage Mustang Forums banner
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Discussion starter · #22 ·
Read here. The GT40 heads are better then stock but not enough to justify stroking it.

347, stock H/C/I enjoy!
I understand that a stock cam would be a dog. I have no intention of following in that person's footsteps.

I would leave the motor a 302.
I would stick with J-code heads then. Heck, I'd probably just freshen up my engine.

I'm not married to the GT40 heads if you are suggesting that they will never work with a stroker. I could go aftermarket and do some grinding and painting.

But I appreciate you pointing out that there are a lot of ways to make a terrible engine.
 
Easiest route would be to get a 302 and pop on an edelbrock top end kit, or do the same with a 351... Just go with stock looking valve covers and air cleaner. I second the vote for the summit 600 carb.

The 351 and 302 are deceptively similar looking to the untrained eye, and a trained one would probably notice any external changes anyway. Depends which group you're trying to fool.
 
Don't give up the idea of a stroker if you want one. Tame it back to 331 and go for it. There are plaety of parts choices that will work well for what you want to do.
 
All it takes is time and money...how much is up to you.

I'm running the N351 iron head. Not recommended by anyone outside of a class specific category, but they fell in my lap so I'm running them. Had them ported and larger valves installed. 3.25" crank, flat top pistons and my 331 has about 10:5:1 compression and with my custom cam it's a fairly serious street bruiser.

A set of link bar lifters will allow you to run the roller cam in the older non roller blocks but they are pricey. I understand that you can easily run a Flat Tappet, I just don't like the stories of failure during break in and there are a lot options/advances in lobe design when you get into the roller cam profiles.

And if you are in the mood to spend money, just have a set of exhaust manifolds extrude honed, should free up some flow and look bone stock.

Without the fancy stuff on it (FI, March pulley system, headers) mine would look 95% stock. It can be done, just pick the heads carefully. I would grind and paint a set of aluminum heads before I stuffed gt40s, E7's or whatever on a 347 cubic inch motor, but you aren't looking for a max hp build, just know what the expectations are before you start stock piling parts.

Seems like a lot of effort just to choke off a 347 with small heads and exhaust manifolds.

For your HP goals and appearance goals, I still like 22gt's post the best. No reason to go crazy on the budget to build a dog 347 when you can spend less and have a nice running 302 that is cheaper and fits the bill.

My understanding is if you build the 347 with similar parts that you would have put on a 302, it has the same hp level, a little more tq and the power band is moved down the rpm range. Is that basically correct?
 
For those that have done a "sleeper" engine, how many times has the surprise factor come into play -- i.e. someone views the engine casually, notes nothing of interest, and then sees the car perform beyond the usual envelope (or reverse the order -- but in reverse order the sleeper victim will probably give the motor a much closer look)?

Sounds like fun but how often does it pay off?
 
Discussion starter · #30 ·
I appreciate all of the thoughts and comments. I realize my desires are not typical and thus it's worthy of a good-hearted debate.

So far I'm seeing a pattern emerge though. If I go with a 347 it might be a waste without headers (some debate still to go on this topic I'd imagine). And with headers it doesn't look like it does now (original) so I'm really not interested in them.

If the HiPo manifold won't work well enough I certainly would think about dropping down to a 331.

But I'm not going to put an unadulterated F code in when I yank the J-code. There's something incredibly offputting about that.
 
Discussion starter · #31 ·
On a related note- I might have found a 68 F-code donor engine on Craigslist.

1968 Ford 302 Engine - $500 (Lodi Ohio )
I have a 1968 Ford 302 2 bbl engine. It's out of a '68 Fairlane. Cylinders are std bore, crank is std/std on rods and mains. There is some light rust on cylinder walls, needs honed, maybe bored .010. Heads are good, will need valves seated but none are burned or pitted. Includes manifold, motor mounts, oil pan, Melling oil pump, balancer, pullies, water pump, distributor. No carb.
 
331 is just a more reliable engine, regardless of what exhaust you use. If money isn't a big problem, have the exhaust manifolds extrude honed. You will pick up some flow. Some nice iron heads with some port work, roller rockers and cam, painted intake . . been there done that :)
 
I'd disagree that a 331 is any more reliable than a 347. Maybe years ago when there were oil ring problems- but they've long been solved. Wouldn't worry at all about not having headers and you can port the hipo manifolds out. If you stroke it go to 347 and get the extra torque for no extra cost. John
 
I agree with you John on the 331/347...built right they are just as reliable as the other...cap walk on the other hand is a stroker issue and I think it would apply equally to either setup.

My biggest reason for endorsing 22gt's post is the combination of parts that Leeds was outlining...wanting to run cast intake, less than desirable heads in a stroker build, exhaust manifolds...

If 300 hp is his goal, cheaper and better ways to get there and still look factory.

However, if everything is bought new, then no reason not get the stroker kit, but from the looks of it, he is fairly open the used market.
 
I'd disagree that a 331 is any more reliable than a 347. Maybe years ago when there were oil ring problems- but they've long been solved. Wouldn't worry at all about not having headers and you can port the hipo manifolds out. If you stroke it go to 347 and get the extra torque for no extra cost. John
The ring land area has been addressed, but the physical fact is still there, it can't disappear. I just like the 331 I guess :)
 
It has been raining all day, so dark pictures and no progress on the car today :0/ The engine is still just mocked up at this point....more work to be done before it is done and ready to start. Just a few pictures for now.

This one is the best shot to give away the fact it is not what it seems..
Image


Cheap cell phone pictures...pushed the motor to the front of the garage. What a mess.....3 projects at the same time.

Image


Image
 
It has been raining all day, so dark pictures and no progress on the car today :0/ The engine is still just mocked up at this point....more work to be done before it is done and ready to start. Just a few pictures for now.

This one is the best shot to give away the fact it is not what it seems..
Image


Cheap cell phone pictures...pushed the motor to the front of the garage. What a mess.....3 projects at the same time.

Image


Image

You mean the one showing the GT-40 heads (3-bars)? Surprised you didn't hit them with a grinder and the pein-end of a small hammer.
 
Why bother? This is just a fun, cheap engine to push the car around for a while. I knew someone with your knowledge would spot it quickly! I'm talking about the car guy that swears his dad had a 1965 Boss 429 Mustang when he was in High School. The air cleaner does not have the 289HP tag either...of course, if the hood is up, one only need to see the K in the vin.......
 
I built a 347 out of my 289. She is a runner! Doesn't look that stock with cheap alum. heads, intake and all that. I'm getting ready to pull the motor to install a new cam. Bigger of course.... LOL
 
21 - 39 of 39 Posts