351 rangie

[yella_rangie]

anyone done a 351 or similar ford conversion to a rangie? im looking at doing it if i can get the adapters

[Maggot4x4]

Should be eaiser than a chev as you don't have to worry about the dizzy getting in the way.

You can get ford to TF727 adapters so should be fine.

[Loanrangie]

There is a guy in wa with a 351 windsor and i think a c9 auto in a 2dr rangie , and its yellow !

[CRUSHU]

I helped my brother do a 351 clevo in a rangie. the rangie already had a c9 conversion, with a custom adapter for the extension housing to transfer, and a adaptor for the engine. it made our choise very easy for the engine conversion, as it would bolt up straight to the box, without the adaptor. small firewall rework was required, with a heat torch and a BFH. engine mounts were easy, as we bootyfabbed up a bolt in x member, and modified some falcon extractors. we had a custon fabricated alloy radiator madeas well. the engine went like sh1t of a shiny new shovel, it went so well, he rolled it less than a couple of weeks later. he pulled the engine and radiator, as sold it off.

want to buy a nearly new radiator for the conversion??

[yella_rangie]

hahah i am only toying with the idea at the moment. my old 3.5 lt is a bit tired. has alot of blow by and aint exactly a powerhouse engine. im thinking the 351 simply because great power...easy to find parts for..and im a ford man! i just wanted to make sure i could find a adaptar for it as i wouldnt mind keeping the original gearbox and transfer. i guess i could always mate an aussie 4spd to a rangie transfer...hrmmm......has to stay a manual....

how much for the radiator?

[Loanrangie]

Aussie 4spd ! it would drop its lunch at the sight of a 351! If you want a manual, keep the lt95 and make an adapter to suit.

[yella_rangie]

oh..ok..has anyone made their own adapter? is it a fairly easy job? im thinking the 351 is gonna be the go. get a good worked one on gas for around $1500

[Loanrangie]

i WOULD GO WITH A LATE MODEL 302 WINDSOR EFI OUT OF A FALCON ED OR LATER OR EARLIER BRONCO. Non efi windsor unless from the US are too old and you will have emissions probs getting it certified- sorry for the caps lock, too lazy to retype it

[jessie_xa]

Hi Yello, Thourght of it myself a few year ago, but went with a 3.9 upgrade, if your thinkin of the 351 try getting a late model complete with gear box/trany as loanranger mentioned and getting an addapor plate for the transfer case im still thinking alone these line or 4.6???


jessie

[cloughy]

I know this is an old post but i'm currently running a Ford injected 5.0 windsor from an eb falcon with standard management fitted to a c10 tranny which i've put twin turbo's on but currently having trouble sourcing low poundage waste gate actuators if interested can give details of conversion

[cloughy]

I know this is an old post but i'm currently running a Ford injected 5.0 windsor from an eb falcon with standard management fitted to a c10 tranny which i've put twin turbo's on but currently having trouble sourcing low poundage waste gate actuators if interested can give details of conversion

[hotrod4x4]

and in regards to the motors

a clevo would b ok .....obviously depending on year of your rangie
but clevo has much more torque than the windsors
and ran in later models.......up until the EFI windsors


but hey
the twin turbo one sounds good also
but windsors ( unless SVO ) , tend to drop their bottom ends with big turbo setups.......seen it happen in the flesh
very messy
so watch the boost

[cloughy]

will only run low boost hence trouble getting actuators turbos are of new navaras and run about 12 pound i only want six to eight windsors are a better fit due to 60degree angle on the v which leaves bucket loads of room, will run upside down and are lighter than a cleveland

[Ralf the RR]

I know this is an old post but i'm currently running a Ford injected 5.0 windsor from an eb falcon with standard management fitted to a c10 tranny which i've put twin turbo's on but currently having trouble sourcing low poundage waste gate actuators if interested can give details of conversion

I'm keen on more details.
I'm a Ford man from way back (in fact I still have an XE ESP 351) so I can't force myself to fit a Holden (yes I know the RR V8 is a Buick).

Photos and description/hassles/dramas/engineering etc would be great.

[slosh]

and in regards to the motors

a clevo would b ok .....obviously depending on year of your rangie
but clevo has much more torque than the windsors
and ran in later models.......up until the EFI windsors


but hey
the twin turbo one sounds good also
but windsors ( unless SVO ) , tend to drop their bottom ends with big turbo setups.......seen it happen in the flesh
very messy
so watch the boost

It sounds like you know your stuff hotrod- but I read somewhere that the 351 windsor ran larger crankshaft or something, hence the appeal of the boss motor? Could you shed light on this?

[cloughy]

what sort of details would you like i currently have the c10 hooked to a g60 nissan transfer but in the process of swapping to early rr, using an early ritter transfer adapter. i run factory engine management with a smartlock overide from emf in queensland it's not engineered but wouldn't be a problem if you apply with adr's of that motor e.g. catylitic convertors, charcoal cannister etc. i will pm my phone number if you wish to contact me for more accurate details.

The advantage of a boss is the windsor has a strong bottom end which is more free revving than the clevo put hugely restricted in the ports hence the use of clevo heads as are capable of alot more flow

[hotrod4x4]

yes slosh u r correct

the 351 windsor is a totally different size motor
289 / 302 windsor part dont "easily" interchange , as the block is actually bigger.....and as far as i'm aware , the crank is also.....in journals and stroke......in early versions anyway , not as sure the 351 windsors in the F series were built as solid

the windsor in both motor versions had better oiling systems than the clevo standard

and the little swap / mod of clevo heads on a windsor bottom end , 302 or 351 , produced a very strong motor.........thats the basics of the boss motor. secret was the good windsor bottom , with the clevo heads that breathed really well

but theres alot of aftermarket alloy heads etc that can do the same now

[cloughy]

yes slosh u r correct

the 351 windsor is a totally different size motor
289 / 302 windsor part dont "easily" interchange , as the block is actually bigger.....and as far as i'm aware , the crank is also.....in journals and stroke......in early versions anyway , not as sure the 351 windsors in the F series were built as solid

the windsor in both motor versions had better oiling systems than the clevo standard

and the little swap / mod of clevo heads on a windsor bottom end , 302 or 351 , produced a very strong motor.........thats the basics of the boss motor. secret was the good windsor bottom , with the clevo heads that breathed really well but theres alot of aftermarket alloy heads etc that can do the same now

I believe the 351 windsor 60 degree V8 is the same as 289 and 302 except for a larger deck height for the longer strock.just like the 400 is to the 302 and 351 cleveland 90 degree V8

[Ley269]

[/quote]
I believe the 351 windsor 60 degree V8 is the same as 289 and 302 except for a larger deck height for the longer strock.just like the 400 is to the 302 and 351 cleveland 90 degree V8[/quote]

I hope that was just a typo. They are NOT 60 degree V8's! They are all 90 degree...Why does everyone think that they are 60 degree if the deck height is lower. ie Chev v8 is narrower between the heads than a Cleveland, but they are still both 90 degree v8's...but the Chev has a much lower deck height.
PS Sorry to hijack someones thread, this is just a pet hate of mine.

[cloughy]

I believe the 351 windsor 60 degree V8 is the same as 289 and 302 except for a larger deck height for the longer strock.just like the 400 is to the 302 and 351 cleveland 90 degree V8[/quote]

I hope that was just a typo. They are NOT 60 degree V8's! They are all 90 degree...Why does everyone think that they are 60 degree if the deck height is lower. ie Chev v8 is narrower between the heads than a Clevland, but they are still both 90 degree v8's...but the Chev has a much lower deck height.
PS Sorry to hijack someones thread, this is just a pet hate of mine.[/quote]

Would be ok if you were right angle has nothing to do with deck height 60 degree is the angle on which the pistons are from each other so tell me if all are 90 how are windsor motors so much narrower than clevelands, better yet tell me the difference between the two see if you can get that wrong

[Ley269]

Hey settle down there! I'm by no means a Ford fanatic like you are obviously but I stand by my original statement that they are 90 degree V8's. Why don't you help yourself and do a search on Google for 60 degree V8 and see what you get. There are a few newly designed V8's that are 60 degree but apart from a couple, all early design US V8s' are 90. Whay is the deck height lower on a Windsor than a Cleveland? Either it has a smaller stroke/conrod length. Would you agree that a P76 V8 is a lot wider than a Rover V8? Please explain how a P76 crank will fit into a Rover then. Show me documented proof that a Windsor is a 60 degree V8 and I'll gladly appologise.

[cloughy]

p76 is wider at the top yes due to deck height but the angle is the same where your confusing width with angle i could always research the 302 windsor in my rangie or the 302 clevo sitting on my shed floor trust me windsor 60 clevo 90 and if your not a ford nut why argue the point

[Ley269]

I'm not confusing myself at all. An engines 'angle' is the measurement in degrees between each crank pin (4 in a v8) Each crank pin is at a 90 degrees angle from the previous, so that viewed from the end the crankshaft it forms a cross. You say the Windsor is a 60 degree v8 and the Cleveland is 90. The rest of the world has got it all wrong then. Just 2 of about 10000 results when putting '90 degree Windsor v8' into a search engine:

http://www.madabout-kitcars.com/kitcar/ ... rview.html
I QUOTE: "The Windsor engine is a 90-degree small-block V8 from Ford Motor Company. It was introduced in 1962, replacing the old Ford Y-block engine. Though not all of the engines in this family were produced at the Windsor, Ontario engine plant, the name stuck. It was replaced in 1995 with Ford's new 4.6 L modular V8 engine."

Also:
http://www.ford-trucks.com/article/idx/ ... ngine.html
QUOTE: "In 1962, Ford introduced its first V8 engine with lightweight, thinwall block castings, the small block 221. This engine was also the first design in the 90-degree small block family that would ultimately grow to include the 260, 289, 302, and 351 Windsor."

I have provided you with a sample of proof, where is yours?
Oh and by the way, one of my cars IS a Ford.

Also, in answer to the actual question before this ugliness occured the 351W is a different block altogether to the other Windsors

The 351 Windsor featured an even longer stroke thanks to a taller deck. It produced 250 hp (186 kW) with a 2-barrel carb or 290 hp (216 kW) with a 4-barrel. There were many other changes to this engine, including the intake, heads, rods, and firing order. Though the engine family is the same as the 289 and 302, and employs the same bell housing and head interchange as well as a few other small parts, the block itself is different. The block is taller and wider than other windsor small blocks, with larger main caps and thicker connecting rods. Also the distributor is slightly different to accommodate a larger oil pump shaft and larger oil pump.

[ISUZUROVER]

p76 is wider at the top yes due to deck height but the angle is the same where your confusing width with angle i could always research the 302 windsor in my rangie or the 302 clevo sitting on my shed floor trust me windsor 60 clevo 90 and if your not a ford nut why argue the point

I am not a ford nut either, but a little research seems to show that YOU are wrong - they both seem to be 90 degree V8's.

How the heads are designed gives the impression of the block being narrower, which it is.

But its not because of a narrower V as most would think.

The other thing that gives the common idea of a narrower block is how they fit into a narrower engine bay where a clevo struggles.

The exhaust port outlet face is a lot more vertical, and so is narrower.

The blocks are both 90 degrees afaik.

T Series Specifications
Vehicle Type - Four door sedan
Engine data
Engine type 5.6-litre OHV V8
Displacement 5605 cc
Bore 101.67 mm
Stroke 86.36 mm
Compression ratio 9.6:1
Power 250 kW @ 5250 rpm
Torque 500 Nm @ 4250 rpm
0-100 km/h 5.9 seconds
Cylinders 90-degree V8
Head Cast iron
Block Cast iron
Intake manifold Aluminium alloy
Crankshaft Nodular iron
Valve gear Roller rockers (1.7:1 ratio)

http://www.fordforums.com/archive/index.php/t-54784

[cloughy]

I've been trying to find the information which led me to believe the 60 angle can't find it seems alot of confusion on the topic and will aspire to get facts direct from ford tomorrow if i'm wrong i'll formall apologise and be better of in my knowledge. atleast noone is callin noone a "knob jockey" like on the ford forum!

[mopar rangie]

in the end the efi 302 is thin across the heads and makes a good clear fit.sitting beside my rover with a 318 chrysler its easy to see the diffrence.you could have a party down beside the 302.the 318 is a 90 with a tall deck hight and long con rods.

[FIXR7]

G'day lads, just joined up because I'm looking at doing a 351 powered range rover. I am a Ford nut and I can tell you that Ford has never made a 60 degree OHV V8. They are all 90 degrees.
It's a common misconception that 221-302w engines are 60 degrees purely because of their very short deck height...they appear very narrow and they are because......
221,260,289,302w = 8.2" deck height
351w = 9.5" deck height
302/351C = 9.2" deck height.

So you can see that in fact the 351W is the largest, although a cleveland looks big because of the canted valve heads.

If and when I do my conversion I'll be using an EFI 351W from an F-series and the reason is simple...ridiculous low rpm torque. Bonnet clearance may be an issue with the height of this engine but a switch to an aftermarket Edelbrock performer 5.8 intake reduces the height considerably over the stock(and very tall) 5.8 truck intake.
I've done over 45 ford EFI conversions over the last 18 years including two T-bird 3.8 SC engines into a couple of late 70's range rovers...these went very well.

Cheers!

[flexytj]

anyone bolted a range rover auto trans (89 model) to a efi 5.0 litre windsor or know of an adapter to make it possible ?

[FIXR7]

I've searched for this flexy,

It seems the usual suspects don't make them.

The T-bird 3.8 SC V6 engines have a Ford smallblock pattern and the adaptors were made here in Perth. Assuming the rover V8 block didn't have a different bolt pattern for the ZF auto it should be the same? Maybe only a starter location difference possibly? Either way it shouldn't be a difficult task.

I've sent an email to Dellow about this so I'll post back with the results.

[TRobbo]

a body lift would probably help with fitting eveything under the hood. You can fit a SB chev with HEI dizzy with 40 mm body lift.