Im a new member and looking for some help. I am planning on installing a 351c 4v closed camber head engine in my 73 maverick. The car now has a 302, small bellhousing (157 tooth) c4 transmission, 3,000 stall ptc convertor. I plan on shaving the shock towers and i would like to use the stock exhaust manifolds. My question is there is 2 different design left hand exhaust manifolds, if this will work which do i use.
I don't know the answer to your question but you would get a faster response if the actual question was part of the thread title in some way. Especially with the large amount of 351 swap threads already on the forum.
I would say nobody has a real answer for you because a Maverick never came with a 351C, so saying which factory "stock" exhaust manifold to use is really just a stab in the dark. Most any one "might" work. Maybe somebody who has actually done it will chime in, but I speculate that most who have gone to the trouble of getting a Cleveland in a Maverick has also used headers.
When I first installed my 351C 4V into my Maverick, at that time still keeping the stock engine bay, I used swap headers from Tubular Automotive up in New England
I know this is old....in fact, quite old. Were those headers a custom fit, or a more generic "block huger" ?
I've seen them. They are individual tubes that slip into the collector. The TA headers are the only ones I've ever seen work on this swap, but its tight one. They make them for both the Boss 302 and the 351C .
There is a 70-71 4V 351C on craigslist. It is advertised as a un-rebuilt core motor, complete with carb. I am fighting the urge to go look at it.
These were good street motors, but are on the ragged edge of today's pump gas. I've had several and they can be made to run VERY well with the right cam timing and induction choices. On the flip side, you can really screw one up with the wrong choice of parts. It is a thin wall casting so .030" over is about the limit. I personally never went over +.020". The last one I saw was in a Comet GT owned by a guy in Western, Pa. If it were me, I would go with an MII front end and ditch the towers if you want to run that engine.
How do they sit with only a shock tower shave? I havent made up my mind about any of it.....that 351 is an M code and supposedly has 10.7:1 compression, but the guy selling the engine says it has 165 psi static compression in all but 1 hole which is at 100psi. I would bet it has a burned valve after running some years on unleaded, but who knows. I thought 165psi was more like 9.5:1. It has been sitting a long time. Given the monster ports, have you built any of these to operate as a torquey street motor? How would you compare one to a 351 windsor?
As rotorr22 stated 8 separate tubes that have to be put into the engine bay in sequence with the rear cylinder tubes criss-crossing under the rear of the oil pan going into the opposite collectors that get bolted on after everything is in place. I originally installed my engine in the bone stock engine bay with no shaved towers and it was a bear of a fit. Now my engine is a 1972 CJ Cleveland with 4V heads so my tubes were the larger diameter which made it even tougher. I also have a flaw in my 2 crossover tubes as they it the block and wouldn't go under the pan. Tubular Automotive must have known about this mistake, maybe only happening in a recent run back then, and sent me a small box of mandrel bent pipe to fix it. Before I could finish, I decided to go a completely different direction as seen in my photos and rid myself of the towers completely, go with an aftermarket front suspension and cage the car. If you want to keep the stock engine bay, I would definitely shave back the towers as far as you can possibly go.
The Cleveland is heavier than the Windsor, has an inferior lubrication system, a shorter deck (9.2 vs. 9.5) and has thinner cylinder walls. That being said, the C heads only require a good valve job for decent street performance. You could put together a 13 second Maverick with a very modest cam and induction system that would have plenty of low to midrange torque. Remember, that Maverick is a lightweight, so you don't want some torque monster unless you can put it to the ground. My question to you is it worth the hassle? With today's modern aftermarket heads, a 302 will easily run similar ET's and remain very streetable. It is a bolt in, headers are cheap and you don't have to fab everything around it. It is also much lighter, so the car will not be so nose heavy. Don't get me wrong, people who know me are aware I love Cleveland engines, but this is mostly nostalgia. The Windsor platform is a better choice these days, if for no other reason than the aftermarket has embraced it. Go to Australia and it is the other way around.
Awesome post. Many don't realize or possibly might even ignore that some of these old unibody's, especially this being based off the lighter compact Falcon platform, do not weigh as much compared to many others.. Mustangs and Camaro's(especially newer ones). 350 RWHP in one of these cars is like 400-450 RWHP in those heavier chassis. I love Clevelands too, preferably heavily stroked to wake those sewer pipe sized 4V intake ports up faster. IMHO, unless you're overly nostalgic or married to the OEM heads/maybe way too much already invested into them to ever recoup the replacement cost.. we're just too damned far along with cylinder head development to logically justify not taking full advantage of them. Even the cheaper AL versions are far superior in every way and can be made to run very well on premium gas. Aluminum and better chamber designs also allow higher compression ratios to be run on street gas too. Buddy of a buddys brother has a 393 with Cleveland trick flows small port heads sitting in an original POS looking Fairmont. Around 600 FWHP on premuim.. 4,800 stall.. easily lifts a tire on cold street tires. Makes you want to build one. lol OTOH, you can build a simple 302, not even a stroker version, with AFR heads and simpler bolt on parts that will make 350 to the rear wheels all day long in hot summer heat. Not enough?.. then build a 331 or 347 and get more torque(50 ft/lbs is common) earlier in the rev range. A well built moderate compression 302 with AFR or Trick Flow heads or equivalent will run circles around an unported stock headed Cleveland.. unless maybe you're revving it with a tunnel ram up top. Or maybe you know how to fix those cylinder heads? The exhaust port is one of the worst OEM performance designs ever created and tossing more cam lobe at it will not fix the floors flow separation issues(exhaust port actually howls on a flow bench much beyond .500 valve lift). I've "fixed a couple sets" and they are a major PITA to do. Also used the old MPG port plates and stingers which worked so well they eventually led me towards developing my own ports with grinders and epoxy putty. If you're not ever going through all that trouble then maybe start with a better cylinder head to begin with. OTOH.. if most of your driving happens to be in straight lines.. you can get something out of the Cleveland that you'll never get out of that little short decked 302. BIG CYLINDER DISPLACEMENT! Easier on engine parts.. less gear ratio required.. makes more power any place you put the gas pedal in any gear. Better plan on some suspension upgrades and bigger tires for the lower gears though or it'll just end up being a bunch of wasted effort that goes up in smoke. Crap.. now I'm confused which way to go here too.
I believe stumanchu stated the 351 is an M motor not a Cleveland as was previously posted. stumanchu the 351 and 400 M codes are terrible engines. I wouldn't spend a dime to repair one alone modify one.
