1969 351W 290 hp. stock ?

LouisJeffery · 09-17-2007, 06:44 PM

I am considering running this combo in a fox body Mustang IHRA GT Stock. Has anybody run this combo? Who can build a 4300 Autolite carb.? I noticed in Superstock the rating is lowered to 260 hp. but stock is at 290. I just do not want to invest in something with no future. Thanks, Louis Jeffery

Chris1529 · 09-17-2007, 07:42 PM

Who builds the carb for Jeff Lee from AZ that runs the SS/H AMX? I believe that is the same carb.
I think you could get the stock HP lowered as well after you start running it. I can't recall anyone who runs that right now. I think it would run pretty well.

Louis, I have an original intake for that motor if you need one.

Does anyone know the CFM Of the autolite carbs?

Dwight Southerland · 09-18-2007, 10:30 AM

That you are considering racing IHRA, I would petition for some hp reduction before investing time and money. Here's MHO:
The heads/intake system will flow only about 86% of comparable 350/295 & 300 Chevrolet also rated at 290. The blueprinted compression ratio will be in the 10.5 to 1 range, the Chev 350/300 is the 11.5 to 1 range. The carb is a small Motorcraft 4300 with 1.437" primaries and 1.563" secondaries. In comparison, Jeff Lee's carb has 1.563" primaries and 1.686" secondaries and flows less than 700 cfm. The Chev 350/300 has a Qjet at 750 cfm. The 351 does have more valve lift than the Chev, but also bigger main bearings (3.000") and a heavier crank and rods than the 350 Chev. I know that just the "numbers" don't make it or break it in every case, but there is enough significant indication in these compared numbers to tell you that you will not likely be able to match the performance of a 350/300 Chev which is a common competitive combination. I am using the Chev engine only as a comparison; there are other combinations that are in the same power rating range that could be used to show that the 351 290hp '69 Windsor would probably not be very competitive at that power rating, if that is your primary consideration.

09-18-2007, 11:05 AM

You would be better off running a 71 or 72 Cleveland combo, you get a high flowing head that will afford you to run a whole lot better carb than that Autolite. Just my opinion, if you would like some more info on a Windsor combo shoot me a IM and I might be able to put you in contact with someone.

Smitty

Chris1529 · 09-18-2007, 12:47 PM

what carbs came on the 71 or 72 clevelands though?

Kevin Love · 09-18-2007, 02:18 PM

71-72 Clevelands can use a 780 Holley as a replacement carb

09-18-2007, 03:47 PM

Kevin is spot on, Holley Part number 3310 or 780 cfm carb. I know for sure you can run it on the Boss 351 (71 closed chamber), HO 351 275/305 (72 open chamber), 285/324 (71 closed chamber) and the 280/313 (71 open chamber) combos. I am currently tossing up whether to run the 285/324 or the 275/305 in my Mach 1, the 324 engine will fit SS/HA and the 305 engine will fit in SS/IA.

Chris1529 · 09-18-2007, 04:54 PM

Louis,

do you have in mind what year car you are wanting to put this in? Some of the late 80's early 90's GT's are pretty heavy, but the coupes, LX's and sq headlight cars like mine are fairly light. I think it would be a very good IHRA Stock GT combination. That cam has good lift compared to other ford engines of the era. Those engines can make more torque than alot of people think and the small carb may not hurt it since you wouldn't have to twist the motor very many rpm. The car would launch very will with the smaller carb also. My experience with a 351W is that they don't need turned up as high as a 302.

LouisJeffery · 09-18-2007, 05:35 PM

The car I am going to use is a 1984 coupe that we ran as a crate motor. I currently run a L/CM Maverick with the 215 hp. 302. Our thoughts on the 351W is a higher torque combo that will be more consistant in bad weather. Thanks for all the comments, Louis

Jeff Lee · 09-18-2007, 06:17 PM

For what it's worth, probably zero, I had a '69 Mach 1 in high school. It had a 4-speed and 3.25 gears, headers and a Holley 700 DP on the 290 HP 351W. Nothing else altered from stock except high-tension points. I never lost to a Clevland. Had to prove it's Windsor status more than once. Pulled 6500 RPM (per factory tach) all day long with fresh points.
The Clevland guys never could figure it out...

09-17-2007, 06:44 PM	#1
LouisJeffery Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Detroit Posts: 53 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? I am considering running this combo in a fox body Mustang IHRA GT Stock. Has anybody run this combo? Who can build a 4300 Autolite carb.? I noticed in Superstock the rating is lowered to 260 hp. but stock is at 290. I just do not want to invest in something with no future. Thanks, Louis Jeffery

09-17-2007, 07:42 PM	#2
Chris1529 VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: West Virginia Posts: 1,367 Likes: 6 Liked 57 Times in 27 Posts	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? Who builds the carb for Jeff Lee from AZ that runs the SS/H AMX? I believe that is the same carb. I think you could get the stock HP lowered as well after you start running it. I can't recall anyone who runs that right now. I think it would run pretty well. Louis, I have an original intake for that motor if you need one. Does anyone know the CFM Of the autolite carbs? __________________ Chris Bowman The Mountain State Mustang 1984 Mustang GT350

09-18-2007, 10:30 AM	#3
Dwight Southerland VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything. Posts: 1,980 Likes: 52 Liked 724 Times in 177 Posts	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? That you are considering racing IHRA, I would petition for some hp reduction before investing time and money. Here's MHO: The heads/intake system will flow only about 86% of comparable 350/295 & 300 Chevrolet also rated at 290. The blueprinted compression ratio will be in the 10.5 to 1 range, the Chev 350/300 is the 11.5 to 1 range. The carb is a small Motorcraft 4300 with 1.437" primaries and 1.563" secondaries. In comparison, Jeff Lee's carb has 1.563" primaries and 1.686" secondaries and flows less than 700 cfm. The Chev 350/300 has a Qjet at 750 cfm. The 351 does have more valve lift than the Chev, but also bigger main bearings (3.000") and a heavier crank and rods than the 350 Chev. I know that just the "numbers" don't make it or break it in every case, but there is enough significant indication in these compared numbers to tell you that you will not likely be able to match the performance of a 350/300 Chev which is a common competitive combination. I am using the Chev engine only as a comparison; there are other combinations that are in the same power rating range that could be used to show that the 351 290hp '69 Windsor would probably not be very competitive at that power rating, if that is your primary consideration.

09-18-2007, 11:05 AM	#4
Terrance Smith Guest Posts: n/a	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? You would be better off running a 71 or 72 Cleveland combo, you get a high flowing head that will afford you to run a whole lot better carb than that Autolite. Just my opinion, if you would like some more info on a Windsor combo shoot me a IM and I might be able to put you in contact with someone. Smitty

09-18-2007, 12:47 PM	#5
Chris1529 VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: West Virginia Posts: 1,367 Likes: 6 Liked 57 Times in 27 Posts	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? what carbs came on the 71 or 72 clevelands though? __________________ Chris Bowman The Mountain State Mustang 1984 Mustang GT350

09-18-2007, 02:18 PM	#6
Kevin Love Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: canada Posts: 111 Likes: 3 Liked 18 Times in 9 Posts	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? 71-72 Clevelands can use a 780 Holley as a replacement carb __________________ Kevin Love 5666 STK/SS

09-18-2007, 03:47 PM	#7
Terrance Smith Guest Posts: n/a	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? Kevin is spot on, Holley Part number 3310 or 780 cfm carb. I know for sure you can run it on the Boss 351 (71 closed chamber), HO 351 275/305 (72 open chamber), 285/324 (71 closed chamber) and the 280/313 (71 open chamber) combos. I am currently tossing up whether to run the 285/324 or the 275/305 in my Mach 1, the 324 engine will fit SS/HA and the 305 engine will fit in SS/IA.

09-18-2007, 04:54 PM	#8
Chris1529 VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: West Virginia Posts: 1,367 Likes: 6 Liked 57 Times in 27 Posts	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? Louis, do you have in mind what year car you are wanting to put this in? Some of the late 80's early 90's GT's are pretty heavy, but the coupes, LX's and sq headlight cars like mine are fairly light. I think it would be a very good IHRA Stock GT combination. That cam has good lift compared to other ford engines of the era. Those engines can make more torque than alot of people think and the small carb may not hurt it since you wouldn't have to twist the motor very many rpm. The car would launch very will with the smaller carb also. My experience with a 351W is that they don't need turned up as high as a 302. __________________ Chris Bowman The Mountain State Mustang 1984 Mustang GT350

09-18-2007, 05:35 PM	#9
LouisJeffery Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Detroit Posts: 53 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? The car I am going to use is a 1984 coupe that we ran as a crate motor. I currently run a L/CM Maverick with the 215 hp. 302. Our thoughts on the 351W is a higher torque combo that will be more consistant in bad weather. Thanks for all the comments, Louis

09-18-2007, 06:17 PM	#10
Jeff Lee VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Anthem, Arizona Posts: 2,766 Likes: 0 Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts	Re: 1969 351W 290 hp. stock ? For what it's worth, probably zero, I had a '69 Mach 1 in high school. It had a 4-speed and 3.25 gears, headers and a Holley 700 DP on the 290 HP 351W. Nothing else altered from stock except high-tension points. I never lost to a Clevland. Had to prove it's Windsor status more than once. Pulled 6500 RPM (per factory tach) all day long with fresh points. The Clevland guys never could figure it out... __________________ Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX