The 351 Ford should have built!!!!!!!!

Stang Runner · 06-01-2001, 10:57 AM

It was an article in the JAN 99 of 5.O. I am thinking about making it. Does any one have one. 11:1 compression and runs on 87-octane 380HP@5000rpm/431ft-lbs@4200rmp. Could it be Supercharged???

06-01-2001, 01:51 PM

How did they get it to run on 87 octane with 11:1 compression? It has to have aluminum heads, did they cut out timing? There's no way you could run any kind of boost with a supercharger on that engine. Sounds really cool though! I say go for it if you have the $$$, but you may want to lower the compression to at least 9:1 or so if you want to add a supercharger.

------------------
'84 Mustang 5.0 LX
My car

Stang Runner · 06-01-2001, 03:33 PM

I will try and put the whole article on the web.

red82gt · 06-01-2001, 04:33 PM

Theres more to compression than just the ratio. The combustion chamber shape, the shape of the piston, and the swirl of the air also play a part. They basically made the flame front travel faster across the piston which allowed them to run a compression ratio that high on 87 octane.

A supercharger would add alot of turbulence and would affect the speed of the flame front which would probably equal disaster.

------------------
GT-40 heads (ported, polished, + milled), B303 cam, 1.7rr's, JE pistons, Offy intake, Carter AFB 625cfm carb, Flowtech 1 5/8" shortys, Flowtech X-pipe, MAC Flowpath exhaust, MAC pulleys, 373's, subframes, Eibachs+Tokicos, B&M ripper, FMS Clutch, Zoom Quadrant+cable, 17" CSA Ultra rims, 235/45ZR17 Yokohama AVS S4's, MSD 6A ignition+coil, FMS 9mm wires, Carbed, Naturally Aspirated, and Nasty!

Stang Runner · 06-01-2001, 04:42 PM

Well I really dont think I would need more power. Would the weight be much more?? or would it only be 30 or 40 more????

Stang Runner · 06-01-2001, 04:55 PM

It might take a bit of time on a 56K, Just scroll down. http://computerconquest.homestead.com/conquest.html

06-01-2001, 10:57 AM	#1
Stang Runner Registered Member Join Date: Jun 1999 Location: Walker, MI, USA Posts: 1,202	The 351 Ford should have built!!!!!!!! It was an article in the JAN 99 of 5.O. I am thinking about making it. Does any one have one. 11:1 compression and runs on 87-octane 380HP@5000rpm/431ft-lbs@4200rmp. Could it be Supercharged???

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Safety Issue 64 - 70 Mustangs	Mach1 Cobra Jet	Classic Mustangs	20	07-11-2005 08:06 PM
Before buying a new Ford consider this.	Lizard King	Blue Oval Lounge	21	03-12-2005 03:24 PM
Carfax	mustangLX92	Blue Oval Lounge	1	04-30-2003 12:20 AM
What's your least favorite ford vehicle ever built?	84LX89GT	Blue Oval Lounge	29	10-28-2002 08:51 PM
2001 Cobra Over Rated AGAIN!!!?!?!!! Wassup Ford?	KillaZ350	Blue Oval Lounge	24	06-29-2001 05:24 PM

06-01-2001, 01:51 PM	#2
84stangLX Guest Posts: n/a	How did they get it to run on 87 octane with 11:1 compression? It has to have aluminum heads, did they cut out timing? There's no way you could run any kind of boost with a supercharger on that engine. Sounds really cool though! I say go for it if you have the $$$, but you may want to lower the compression to at least 9:1 or so if you want to add a supercharger. ------------------ '84 Mustang 5.0 LX My car

06-01-2001, 03:33 PM	#3
Stang Runner Registered Member Join Date: Jun 1999 Location: Walker, MI, USA Posts: 1,202	I will try and put the whole article on the web.

06-01-2001, 04:33 PM	#4
red82gt Sober voice of Reason Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Kelowna, B.C., Canada Posts: 1,514	Theres more to compression than just the ratio. The combustion chamber shape, the shape of the piston, and the swirl of the air also play a part. They basically made the flame front travel faster across the piston which allowed them to run a compression ratio that high on 87 octane. A supercharger would add alot of turbulence and would affect the speed of the flame front which would probably equal disaster. ------------------ GT-40 heads (ported, polished, + milled), B303 cam, 1.7rr's, JE pistons, Offy intake, Carter AFB 625cfm carb, Flowtech 1 5/8" shortys, Flowtech X-pipe, MAC Flowpath exhaust, MAC pulleys, 373's, subframes, Eibachs+Tokicos, B&M ripper, FMS Clutch, Zoom Quadrant+cable, 17" CSA Ultra rims, 235/45ZR17 Yokohama AVS S4's, MSD 6A ignition+coil, FMS 9mm wires, Carbed, Naturally Aspirated, and Nasty!

06-01-2001, 04:42 PM	#5
Stang Runner Registered Member Join Date: Jun 1999 Location: Walker, MI, USA Posts: 1,202	Well I really dont think I would need more power. Would the weight be much more?? or would it only be 30 or 40 more????

06-01-2001, 04:55 PM	#6
Stang Runner Registered Member Join Date: Jun 1999 Location: Walker, MI, USA Posts: 1,202	It might take a bit of time on a 56K, Just scroll down. http://computerconquest.homestead.com/conquest.html