351 Windsor head info needed - Ford Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-21-2009 Thread Starter
Rookie
 
jezzam's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 11
 
351 Windsor head info needed

Hey guys
Fairly new to this but need some help working out my heads.
I live in Australia and have a set of reconditioned C9OE 351 windsor heads,the confusing part is they have 1.45 and 1.78 valves and all I have read says they should have bigger ones, maybe this was just an Aussie thing as the 351 windsor only came out here for a couple of years before we switched to the Cleveland.
Also they have 3/8 press in rocker studs with 5/16 threads,what rockers do I need without machining the heads.
They are going on a 302,there seems to be a heap of conflicting info on what needs to be done to fit these I have the steam holes and dfferent head stud thing worked out but pushrods are still the big question,what length do I need ?
Any help will be apprieciated as its hard to try and get this info.
Cheers
Stuart
jezzam is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-21-2009
MACH I Member
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
The Greek's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 3,184
 
Those C9OE heads should be the large valve heads. There should be 351 and WF (Windsor Foundry) cast into them. Another thing to check to see if they are 351 heads for sure is the coolant passage. On the early 351W heads, at least here in the US, the passage going into the intake should be "L" shaped. (Don't forget to get the right gaskets for this).

These heads use the "Rail" type of rocker arm and the pushrod length going on a 302 is 6.876" with a 5/16" dia. to the P/R itself.
The Greek is offline  
post #3 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-21-2009 Thread Starter
Rookie
 
jezzam's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 11
 
Thanks They are definatly 351 heads as it is cast into them,there are also a few 4's so I guess they are 4v even though that doesn't seem to mean much with windsor heads.
They have been fully reconditioned with new valve seats so maybe they had to use smaller seats and valves for some reason.
So I should be able to use 3/8 rail rockers as long as I get the 5/16 lock nuts.
I am still wieghing up wheather to use these or stick with my 66, 289 heads for a bit more compression.as there will be not much benifet with the same size valves and a bit less compression using the 351 heads only a bit better flow.
jezzam is offline  
post #4 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-22-2009
MACH I Member
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
The Greek's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 3,184
 
The C9 heads should offer a decent compression ratio. The combustion chambers weren't opened up until later model years. As long as you use the rail rockers with your stock set up, you should be fine.

There is one more thing to do if using the 351 heads on a 302. You will need to get the step washers for the head bolts. This is to fill the gap and keep the bolts aligned because the 302 uses 7/16" head bolts, the 351, 1/2" bolts.
The Greek is offline  
post #5 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-22-2009 Thread Starter
Rookie
 
jezzam's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 11
 
Thanks for the info any idea what the compression difference would be between the 289 heads and the 351's
We cc'd the haeds and there was about 4cc difference.
jezzam is offline  
post #6 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-22-2009
MACH I Member
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
The Greek's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 3,184
 
My references state that the C9 and D0 351 heads had 60cc chambers. The 66 289 had chambers that veried from 52 to 55cc.

The 66 289 2 barrel had a comp ratio of 9.3:1
4 barrel had 10.0:1
351W had 9.5:1

You'll have to do the math for the pistons that you have. The piston may be dished or it may have just valve reliefs. I believe that both were used and this is why there is a difference between the two engines in comparison to the combustion chambers.

My guess is that 4cc would be worth about a half a point or .5.
The Greek is offline  
post #7 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-23-2009 Thread Starter
Rookie
 
jezzam's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 11
 
Any idea how long the heads were produced with 5/16 threads I am having a bit of trouble getting lock nuts in that size,well over here at least.
I purchased some correct lenght pushrods from the US I guess I will have to get the nuts and rockers from over there as well.
Its frustrating trying to get windsor info over here you just cant find the people who know enough about them when it comes to what will fit what.
The pushrods that were in my motor 68 302 with 66 289 heads were 6.750 long which also seems a bit of an odd size.
jezzam is offline  
post #8 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-24-2009
MACH I Member
Classic Member
5.0L Member
 
The Greek's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 3,184
 
The rail rocker set up with the 5/16" nuts was used from 1966 1/2 to 1976. The nuts shouldn't be that hard to find when you consider the number of model years and the number of engines that used hydraulic lifters. Maybe you need to change the part supplier that you are using.
The Greek is offline  
post #9 of 9 (permalink) Old 07-24-2009 Thread Starter
Rookie
 
jezzam's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 11
 
From what I can find out all the Australian windsors used 3/8 studs only heads that came in from the US had 5/16
jezzam is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang 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, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

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



Posting Rules  
You may 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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

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


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182