351W heads on a 289/302 - 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
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-29-2008, 10:44 PM
kleen56's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Santa Clarita CA
Posts: 802
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
351W heads on a 289/302

Has another put 351W heads on a 289 or 302 Ford? I was wondering if it's a straight bolt on and was there a increase in performance with the switch?

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 12:35 AM
4 Jaw Chuck's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Age: 46
Posts: 5,090
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 112 Times in 90 Posts
Its a straight bolt on but you need hardened washer under the head bolts of the 289/302 because the 351W bolt holes are larger in diameter. Increase in power depends on what you upgrade to go with it, just a straight swap with no other changes and I doubt you will feel much of a difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 06:59 AM
FEDDO's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: middle ga
Posts: 369
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
depends on the 351 heads. some have the same size valves as the 302. using the 69-70 heads the valves and ports will be larger, but so will the combustion chamber. with minimal mods you can see a gain.like 4 jaw said its a must to use the special spacer washers, or at least the hardened washers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 08:10 AM
Irelands child's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last wiki edit: Ford engine specifications Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 4,981
Wiki Edits: 8

Thanks: 20
Thanked 242 Times in 218 Posts
Not much of, if any gain. Additionally, some of the 351 heads were even more restrictive without removing the flow bump in the exhaust port. Then there is the potential of loss of Hp with additional combustion chamber volume. You do have to use the correct intake manifold gasket plus bushings to size down the head bolt holes from 1/2" to 7/16" (Summit offer them for $30- $50 depending on the brand)

Dave W
__________________
Irelands child
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 10:52 AM
kleen56's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Santa Clarita CA
Posts: 802
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Thanks for the great info. I was looking for a set of 69-70 351W heads. I heard about grinding the exhaust hump in the port and was planning on doing that. I met a guy who had a 302 w/ 351W heads on his 86 Mustang. That engine would run circles around mine and keep up with most BB. Don't know what he did, but it was on strong running 302. I currently have stock 289 heads, so the engine is need of something. I may go with the aluminum AFR heads or Pro Comp instead. They are more costly though. That's why I was looking at the 351W heads instead. Thanks again for the great info everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 01:54 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,172
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Depends on what you have.
most every 289 heads are 54 cc, except '68. with 124 cc ports.
W heads are 61 cc, but slightly bigger valves and 144 cc ports (if they have the big spark plugs. Small plug heads are same as 302.)
Depends on piston dish, too, Ford juggled pistons to change compression in the 60s.
Later model 302 and 5.0 have 60-61 cc heads already and better pistons, but still small valves and small 289 sized ports.
Various years have the smog bump in the port that needs to be ground out.

W heads on a 289 used to be the hot ticket in the 70s, except the compression dropped to 8.0 with the stock pistons.

GT40 heads are the same as the 69-74 W head, but with different rocker arms and small spark plugs.

Big valve & ported 289 heads work well, but will cost several hundred dollars.

69-70 W heads sell for $25 each here. Few takers.

IMO 69-70 144 cc port heads are barely big enough to feed a 289.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 04:34 PM
kleen56's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Santa Clarita CA
Posts: 802
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoTFrenzel
Depends on what you have.
most every 289 heads are 54 cc, except '68. with 124 cc ports.
W heads are 61 cc, but slightly bigger valves and 144 cc ports (if they have the big spark plugs. Small plug heads are same as 302.)
Depends on piston dish, too, Ford juggled pistons to change compression in the 60s.
Later model 302 and 5.0 have 60-61 cc heads already and better pistons, but still small valves and small 289 sized ports.
Various years have the smog bump in the port that needs to be ground out.

W heads on a 289 used to be the hot ticket in the 70s, except the compression dropped to 8.0 with the stock pistons.

GT40 heads are the same as the 69-74 W head, but with different rocker arms and small spark plugs.

Big valve & ported 289 heads work well, but will cost several hundred dollars.

69-70 W heads sell for $25 each here. Few takers.

IMO 69-70 144 cc port heads are barely big enough to feed a 289.
It appears the most of you don't care for the 351W switch on heads? Interesting? The info makes sense. I know my pistons are the flat top, I have no idea on the compression ratio. If you had a 289, what heads what your recommend I go with?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 09:44 PM
4 Jaw Chuck's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Age: 46
Posts: 5,090
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 112 Times in 90 Posts
If I were you I would put some bigger valves in the 289 heads and port those, any head you buy (except new) will likely need a rebuild anyway why not do the ones you have?

Those 289 heads have nice small chambers so your CR will stay up where you want it. Lots of meat in those ports for getting in there with a grinder and you could do them the way they should be done.

Of course a brand new set is a pretty sweet deal too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 06-30-2008, 10:31 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,172
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kleen56
It appears the most of you don't care for the 351W switch on heads? Interesting? The info makes sense. I know my pistons are the flat top, I have no idea on the compression ratio. If you had a 289, what heads what your recommend I go with?
If you have true flat top pistons with valve reliefs, then you could use the early W head. Your compression would be in the 9s.
You could also get the .025 copper head gasket for better quench if you pistons are still below the deck surface.

Remember the 289 heads have 124 cc ports, and the W has 144 cc ports. Most 289 heads when moderately ported only get to 134.

You have to ask yourself= How much money do you want to spend to get heads with bigger stainless valves and full porting.

If you are friends with a machine shop that does circle track engines, you might get a set of 1.94/1.6 Chevy valves that are being pulled out of a used engine for free.
1.94/ 1.5 stock factory valves or used race 1.6 stainless exhaust make a good cheap conversion. Of course, new budget valves are less than $100 per set. Either way you will need new hard exhaust seats installed.
If you stick these in the W heads, milled for compression, you will be ok.
Then all you need is a good head man to do the work for free.
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:
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
HiPo heads RJL Engine 16 06-29-2009 10:18 PM
FE blocks SAATR Engine 27 03-14-2005 05:35 PM
Good heads for a 65 289 junkyardjeff Engine 20 02-03-2005 07:58 AM
Heads novatech Engine 10 01-17-2004 02:27 PM
AFR Heads DTL504 Engine 9 12-09-2003 03:55 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:56 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.