1951 Mercury Do you go 350 or 351? - Page 2 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 05:22 AM
Hippie's Avatar
Analog man in a digital world.
 

Last journal entry: HEI comparison.
Last photo:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,255
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 3
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
I'm a GM guy and primarily Chevy but if I had a '51 Merc I'd be inclined to use some type of Ford/Lincoln/Mercury motor in it. I've always wanted to find a 410 FE out of a mid-60's Mercury to put in something just because most people have never seen or heard of one.

For that matter when was the last time anybody here saw a '49-'51 Merc that still had a Flathead in it? How cool would that be? I'd like to see one with a tricked out Flattie with a tweaked AOD bolted to the back of it...............

As much as I like my Chevies PLEASE don't put a Chevy engne in it, P-L-E-A-S-E................. that is SOOOOO boring.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 05:27 AM
rlackey's Avatar
Rich Lackey
 

Last journal entry: Rich Lackey is back on Hotrodders!
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Centurion, South Africa
Age: 34
Posts: 331
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
A tricked out flathead is the only way to go.

Rich
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 07:02 AM
docvette's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: Rebuild an alternator Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Lafayette, california
Age: 62
Posts: 7,362
Wiki Edits: 12

Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts
Engine

Doc here,

Now if ya really wanna be diff...go solar Powered Electric....

Chrome the motor...use the solar panels as a trick sunroof...and a 1/2 ton of battery's as "Trunk Balast".... LOL J/K

I once did a similar swap about a gazillion years ago with a 50 ford Sport Coupe...Choice was 350 Vs 390...and if I remember correctly, going he 390 route..was easier...(this too was back before you could Order mount kits to fit anything..)

And If I remember the 50 Coupe was about the same layout as the (49 Merc I owned at the time) maybe a little more cramped in the coupe...

This was back in the days when My Engine Puller was a big wood "A" frame made from wayy old fence posts, a (and never do this ) a Chain fall device without "locks"..Engine stand made from "Foremost milk Crates" and tools manufactured in Bedrock usa....

Stick with Ford in a Ford!

And Flatties Do have a nice "Sound and look to them...If your into retro" So don't rule that out either...

My 2 C worth...

Doc
__________________
Aftermarket Solutions
Electronic & Electrical
Innovations
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 07:07 AM
Member
 

Last journal entry: JB's 37 Pickup
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Smoky Mountains
Age: 76
Posts: 2,358
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Put what you want into your car. Funny how die hard Ford guys want a Ford in a Ford. Does not mater that this is a 51 Merc which had its own Flathead Merc, not Ford.

Now for the real decision. The front sump on the Ford motor presents a challenge when oil pan meets the cross member. You have a couple of choices there: 1. Use a 66-77 289/302 oil pan (if they will fit your 351) or make your own. 2. Modify the cross member (you still have to do a little of that with 1 above, or set the motor much higher than you should)

Centerline, if you drove your rods the way I do mine, availability of parts any where in the USA on any day of the year is important. I certainly would hate to sit in Timbuktu for 5 days waiting on a part to be shipped in to get me going again. That, plus the ease of installation of the SBC in the older Fords, vice the 2.5 inch longer SBF, means a lot to me. The SBC "Cookie Cutter" became just that because of the millions made, the glut of after market parts, interchangability over 50 years of production, and just plain old reliability. Many of us have seen so many ingenious engine swaps and have nothing but great words for this ingenuity.

Trees
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 07:43 AM
stepside454's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: St. louis area
Age: 47
Posts: 1,074
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
trees, this same topic is goin on in a nother thread cause someone started it complaining about people putting chevy engines in street rods. All the reasons you mention have been talked about there. I personally understand the logic of using a sbChevy..., however, I personally, enjoy seeing something other than a SBChevy...rods are supposed to be unique..so I like to see unique is all. but clearly the SB Chevy is generally the cheapest & easist route
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 07:45 AM
rlackey's Avatar
Rich Lackey
 

Last journal entry: Rich Lackey is back on Hotrodders!
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Centurion, South Africa
Age: 34
Posts: 331
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by trees
Put what you want into your car. Funny how die hard Ford guys want a Ford in a Ford. Does not mater that this is a 51 Merc which had its own Flathead Merc, not Ford.

Now for the real decision. The front sump on the Ford motor presents a challenge when oil pan meets the cross member. You have a couple of choices there: 1. Use a 66-77 289/302 oil pan (if they will fit your 351) or make your own. 2. Modify the cross member (you still have to do a little of that with 1 above, or set the motor much higher than you should)

Centerline, if you drove your rods the way I do mine, availability of parts any where in the USA on any day of the year is important. I certainly would hate to sit in Timbuktu for 5 days waiting on a part to be shipped in to get me going again. That, plus the ease of installation of the SBC in the older Fords, vice the 2.5 inch longer SBF, means a lot to me. The SBC "Cookie Cutter" became just that because of the millions made, the glut of after market parts, interchangability over 50 years of production, and just plain old reliability. Many of us have seen so many ingenious engine swaps and have nothing but great words for this ingenuity.

Trees
Haven't we all heard this argument done to death, lets not turn this into another Chevy vs Ford debate please. Notice that quite a lot of us who suggesting sticking with a Ford motor are actually Chevy guys. I think even the die hard Chevy guys are getting tired of seeing the same motor in everything.

Rich
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:53 AM
Biggarmike's Avatar
Chief Procrastinator
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Florida
Age: 58
Posts: 358
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'd definitely go with a flattie. They are very reliable, make decent HP, and sound like nothing else through open lakers. A rebuildable 8BA can be had for 3-400 bucks if you look around a bit. There are tons of really slick speed parts available too. Maybe a Lincoln tranny as well. They are available if you look around some. Few people except restorers want them anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 12:31 PM
cboy's Avatar
Member
 

Last journal entry: Finished
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Atwater, CA
Age: 69
Posts: 3,918
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts
nostalgia correct = flatty hopped up

period correct = flatty, 265/283 sbc, 331 hemi (had one in my 52 Ford back in early 60's so I'm sayin' it's period correct)

cheap & easy but it's been done = 350/350

cheap & easy plus you get bonus points = sbf or bbf

unique = early olds or nailhead buick

Take your pick. Nuthin' wrong with any of them.
__________________
Always learning...and sharing what I've learned. The Scratch-Built Hot Rod.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 07:52 PM
Mighty Mouse S-10's Avatar
Cleverly disguised as grownup
 

Last journal entry: Hollman & Moody
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Huntersville, N.C.
Age: 56
Posts: 140
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
[QUOTE=Hippie]I'm a GM guy and primarily Chevy but if I had a '51 Merc I'd be inclined to use some type of Ford/Lincoln/Mercury motor in it. I've always wanted to find a 410 FE out of a mid-60's Mercury to put in something just because most people have never seen or heard of one.

My neighbor is always going on about the potential of the 410 Merc. engine. This sounds like a good option to me. Keeping it in the same gene pool is always a good idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:00 PM
Registered User
 
Last wiki edit: Mopar tapered axle rear brake conversion
Last journal entry: What I'm doing now...
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,267
Wiki Edits: 49

Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by trees
.....Centerline, if you drove your rods the way I do mine, availability of parts any where in the USA on any day of the year is important. I certainly would hate to sit in Timbuktu for 5 days waiting on a part to be shipped in to get me going again. That, plus the ease of installation of the SBC in the older Fords, vice the 2.5 inch longer SBF, means a lot to me. The SBC "Cookie Cutter" became just that because of the millions made, the glut of after market parts, interchangability over 50 years of production, and just plain old reliability. Many of us have seen so many ingenious engine swaps and have nothing but great words for this ingenuity.

Trees
No argument about the reliability and parts availability of the SBC. However, there are a zillion other reliable engines out there too (just try telling a Ford guy that his small block isn't reliable, or a Mopar guy that the small block Mopar isn't the same). It just seems that a whole lot of people build their cars without giving proper consideration to other options besides the SBC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:01 PM
Max Keith's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fort Madison,Iowa
Age: 66
Posts: 2,391
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
410 Merc

The 410 FE, which was essentially a 390 with a 428 crank in it, was a very torquey engine. They could pull pretty hard, but werent a high revver due to the bore/stroke combo, being almost square.
I think the idea of the 351W in the Merc is a great idea. The double hump pan off of the later 302's used in the smaller mustangs wont fit on the 351, nor wil any SBF pan due to the big difference in front and rear main cap sizes, However, there are a few companies out there making aftermarket double hump pans for the 351W. I am not sure that the pan will be a major problem, however. If there is anyone that has put an SBF in a similar car, will have knowledge of your project, as putting a 351W in it will be no different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:15 PM
Hippie's Avatar
Analog man in a digital world.
 

Last journal entry: HEI comparison.
Last photo:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,255
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 3
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Keith
The 410 FE, which was essentially a 390 with a 428 crank in it, was a very torquey engine. They could pull pretty hard, but werent a high revver due to the bore/stroke combo, being almost square.
Exactly why I always wanted to do something with one, gotta love those stump pullers!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:21 PM
Max Keith's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fort Madison,Iowa
Age: 66
Posts: 2,391
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
FE History

From what Ive gotten in reading in the past, it was the 428 bore/stroke configuration that killed the 427 (not the block design), rather than the 429.
The 428 was capable of putting out as much HP and Torque than the 427 bore/ stroke configuration, at 1000 RPM less. Not bad for just a 1/4 inch more stroke, even with the smaller bore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2005, 05:06 AM
Hippie's Avatar
Analog man in a digital world.
 

Last journal entry: HEI comparison.
Last photo:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,255
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 3
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Keith
From what Ive gotten in reading in the past, it was the 428 bore/stroke configuration that killed the 427 (not the block design), rather than the 429.
The 428 was capable of putting out as much HP and Torque than the 427 bore/ stroke configuration, at 1000 RPM less. Not bad for just a 1/4 inch more stroke, even with the smaller bore.
Back in the day (Dammit! said it again... ) we all viewed 428's as stones but most guys were trying to build them to rev to the moon instead of playing to their strong point, low and mid-range torque. If we'd only known then what we know now................
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2005, 07:18 PM
Max Keith's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fort Madison,Iowa
Age: 66
Posts: 2,391
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
IN the Good Old Days (Oops, I said it too)

Back in the Good Old Days (early and mid 60's), a new magazine hit the racks called Stock Car Racing. While at that time a fledgling magazine, I was lucky enough to find that they had some very insiteful articles on engine building that not only applied to stock car racing, but were pretty effective on the street. It was in this magazine, I think, around 72-73, that I read the article on how the 428 bore stroke combination overtook the 427 setup, in about 68.
Another historical footnote, was that the Wood Brothers, with their fantastic Clevelands were what rang the death nole for the big blocks, as they were able to garner more out of them with the minute 390 CFM 4 bbl. than could the guy running the Big FE's, and Hemis. They managed to stay ahead of the game for about half the season til the others figured out what they were doing, then everyone started running small blocks, and within a couple years, the 7 Liter rule ceased to exist, going instead to the 5.8 rule.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
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.
Email Address:

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.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Distributor Tuning and Theory - Part 1 Rick WI Engine 35 04-26-2011 12:38 AM
Port or Full time vacuum cool rockin daddy Engine 129 10-05-2010 03:00 PM
Cam/Lifter Question about Ramjet 350 Jake Harsha Engine 20 07-07-2010 06:22 AM
Bog/Black Smoke on Olds 350 at 3000 rpm JohnTN Engine 4 03-17-2009 11:39 AM
350 sbc in a 1951 ford 51FordDuff Engine 9 07-18-2005 11:10 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.