351c EFI intake manifold

Doug,

Raised port heads? Has somebody other than Thomas Tornblom done the conversion? I am aware of only two conversions, Thomas' and an american's, a gentleman named Jim Murch.

the basis for the conversion is the Trick Flow 351W FI manifold base. The runners of the manifold are pretty much in the same location as the 351C 2V, they are a tad smaller and more rectangular, whereas the 351c 2V runners are a bit more oval (corners more rounded). There is plenty of meat in the Trick Flow intake casting to grind them to the same size as the 351C 2V. Thomas Tornblom mated his manifold to a Aussie 351C motor, with small port 2V heads. Jim Murch, has done the same conversion mating his manifold to the 4V heads. He found plenty of meat around the runners to grind them open to "almost" the same opening as the 4V head ports. (see pic below). A 2V port lines up in the lower right hand corner of the 4V port. The Windsor/2V runners also line up with the ports in the Ford/SVO heads, only needing a height adjustment. For instance, David Berman's engine builder modified an Edelbrock Performer 2V manifold to mate up with the high port Yates heads on David's motor. Since the Windsor block is taller, making the "vee" wider, the wider Windsor manifold sits higher in the "vee" when it is installed on the 351C block, since the Cleveland "vee" is narrower. I can't say if it aligns properly with the ports in the Ford/SVO heads (A3, B351, C302), but it can be adjusted one way or the other.

Ignoring the un-needed water neck in the front of the manifold, there are 3 operations that must be performed to the Windsor manifold base to mate it with the Cleveland heads & block.

(1) The rear "valley rail" of the Windsor block curves outward, the rear valley rail of the Cleveland block curves inward, so the manifold's rear valley rail mating surface must be welded up to create a new inward curving mating surface, machined flat and then cut to the Cleveland shape. You can see the outcome of this operation in the picture below, looks like it was cast that way from the factory.

(2) The Windsor manifold bolts are all oriented vertically, whereas the Clevelands manifold bolts are a mixture, the two in the middle on each side are vertical, but the outer bolts are perpendicular to the head. The manifold base must be redrilled for the perpendicular orientation of the outer bolts.

(3) The Windsor block has a 9.5" deck height, the Cleveland deck height is 9.2", so some material must be machined from the manifold base to allow it to sit at the proper height in the narrower "vee", unless of course the intake is being mated with a high port SVO head.

So Doug, are you ready to put the A3 heads & Webers on the shelf and bolt on a set of C302s and an FI intake?

cowboy from hell

Here's a couple of pictures comparing the port layout of 4V vs 2V vs C302 svo. In the lower picture, the roof of the C302 port is 3/4" higher than the roof of the 2V port.

I'm still working on making the wheel round and I'm close to fixing a rainy day.
I need to get those completed first.
Yikes.

I know this has been covered but why do you need to do this? Are you gonna use the Ford EFI from the Windsor?

I don't need to do anything, but thanks for the inquirey.
I'm always looking for better alternatives.
I am presently still in the IR FI mode.

The IR FI components are all there. I am told that the technology is manageable. Hell F1 teams use it all the time. I can do that, right? DeTom has faith in me.

The Weber IDA "look" seems appropriate to me for the Pantera.

For me this is the way the Pantera should go. I love the sound of the FI Lamboghinis. (Yes I know v12's don't sound like 5.7 v-8s), but part of that whine/scream is the IR FI at work. No question about that.

Because of the costs of the IR FI I am reluctant to jump in head first. Also I don't have the bucks. The buy in is around $6,000.

A Ford EFI would be interesting IF THERE WAS A MANIFOLD FOR IT, i.e., a "bolt on manifold".

I can tell by some of the responses that I am getting from the "FI experts" ( I don't mean you guys here on the forum) that supply complete running systems that there are some "implied pitfalls" that haven't been worked out yet.

The IR FI system had a starting problem. Whether or not the still do is unclear.

I suppose it depends on the definition of the word "running" or like what Bill Clinton said about how it depends on what "is, is".

The buyer has to work this all out.

That whiney SoCal, "I'm too cool for YOU to understand me" and "you're wasting my time" additude is unmistakeably present in those sellers.
That characteristic is part of the traditional snakeoil salesmanship that I have run into so many times before, seemingly passed on from generation to generation, that goes with buying a a bill of goods.
It sets off the flashing caution light immediately in me.

I don't know. I shouldn't doubt "them". Maybe they can walk on water...new technology ya' know.

quote:

DeTom has faith in me

Absolutely Doug. In fact, if I ever win the lottery I am gonna have you tune my IR fuel injection system for me. I still think Hillborns are sexy despite them not working for crap.

Thanks DeTom. You know that you are in a very select group of only one?

Doug,

the marque with the prancing donkey and the marque that's full of bull don't install IR FI on their street cars, they install one throttle body per bank of cylinders, 2 in total, not 8 or 12. A runner for each cylinder connects to a plenum serving one bank of cylinders, and there is one throttle body feeding that plenum.

I'm a big proponent for fuel injection conversion, but not of the IR type. I can't argue IR doesn't look good, it does, but it is unneccessarily complicated and expensive, definitely not for everyone. I have my personal doubts that it makes any additional horsepower for a motor with a redline of 6500 rpm.

Here in the Pantera hobby there is a mystique about FI installations that they are only for the knowledgable insiders. But over in the Mustang hobby, or among the various GM groups like the Camaro guys, retro-fitting FI is no big deal, its done everyday, even folks with limited technical ability install them. The folks outside of the Pantera hobby have 4 advantages, there is plenty of information available to assist them, they are retro-fitting injection onto motors that have been fitted with FI by the manufacturer, there is nobody telling them it is too complicated, and they are not installing independent runner systems. One throttle body is enough, keep it simple.

I agree that it would be nice to have a FI manifold available so that an owner doesn't have to roll his own, Trick Flow actually announced the development of one two years ago (for 2V heads) but that project is on the back burner at the company right now.

At this point in time, a Pantera owner wanting to convert to single throttle body FI, but not wanting to modify a 351W intake, is left with installing one of the throttle body injection systems, or the systems employing a modified single plane intake.

George

A single plane intake? I've got one of those!

Not to be cotradictory, who me? Dennis Quella's system is as torky as a production unit and just as dependable.
I had heard, but can't confirm, that it can inexplicably experience hot starting problems.

Not to be argumentative either, who me? I think if I dig a little I could find some dyno on IR vs. single plenum.
I seem to remember that there was a measureable difference around 4,500 rpm. (+15hp)
The difference at 7,000 was a bunch.
Who's got a 6,500rpm engine? Not I sir.

A 2v intake isn't going to help me with my A3's. I luv my heads.
I still don't see how those things give you 400hp. The ports go the wrong way.

Also, I should point out that there is a tremendous difference in the runner size of the A3 Weber manifold vs the 4v.
That has to be a plus in making the system respond.

On the subject of 2V heads, the very best ported "iron" 2V heads can support 500 bhp, 450 is a more reasonable expectation for the average porting job. Even with porting & 4V size valves the iron 2V heads hit a brick wall in the intake flow curve at 0.550" intake valve lift.

But its a new world now Doug. The alloy 2V heads made by CHI & AFD will support right around 600 bhp. The intake ports flow well past 0.600" lift, they are a good match for the lift characteristics of hydraulic roller cams. They are plenty for any reasonable street application.

cowboy from hell

quote:

the marque with the prancing donkey and the marque that's full of bull don't install IR FI on their street cars, they install one throttle body per bank of cylinders, 2 in total, not 8 or 12. A runner for each cylinder connects to a plenum serving one bank of cylinders, and there is one throttle body feeding that plenum.

Heh-heh. Prancing Donkey and Full of Bull? -Funny stuff. But, their engines are configured for this type of induction.

quote:

I'm a big proponent for fuel injection conversion, but not of the IR type. I can't argue IR doesn't look good, it does, but it is unnecessarily complicated and expensive, definitely not for everyone.

It’s true that there’s a lot of hardware in multi-cylinder IR induction systems. More throttle bodies and linkage means more cost. It also means the linkage must be well thought through in order to be reliable and maintain tune. Unnecessarily complicated? Compared to what? The old Hillborn mechanical injection systems were IR, simple, and effective, though not optimal. As far as the ECU, the sensors/instrumentation are really no more or less complicated for IR or anything else.

If you are not an engine tuner, and want a bolt-on-and-go system, go buy a mass flow EFI system. But don’t expect to be able to obtain states of tune that are achievable with other approaches. As far as that goes, a good engine tuner with a 4 barrel has shamed many a deep pocketed, would be, EFI "expert". But give a real engine tuner a free hand with engine configuration and EFI….....and he will produce better all around results. And IMO, a better balance can be struck between street behavior and race performance with the combination of EFI & IR. Like everything else, it requires a purpose built engine for IR, and unfortunately >$. For all of the aforementioned reasons, you are absolutely correct, IR is not for everyone.

quote:

I have my personal doubts that it makes any additional horsepower for a motor with a redline of 6500 rpm.

With all due respect, I don’t think 6500 rpm is the driver. The objective of IR is rarely to achieve better peak HP figures, but generally, more avearge torque over a broader the rpm range. If you make higher average torque over a given rpm range, you will accelerate harder even though you may have lower peak HP. This tends to make better drivers out of lesser ones on challenging tracks and shall we say "spirited street driving". Cammed properly, IR has the potential to do so. Just ask the sprint car guys and the likes of Kinsler, Hillborn etc. They’re not delusional. They’re just allowed to run IR. Historically, in carbureted engines, IR produced much stronger signal to the booster, thus throttle response and torque. -Not a factor with EFI. Isolating the runner also allows different LSA and cam profiles. Run similar profiles in an open plenum four barrel and get impressive peak HP but often in fairly narrow rpm ranges, thus peaky engines. So you cam and design the induction system accordingly. If you can’t keep the engine in the sweet spot boys, that peak HP figure will not get you down the road faster.

quote:

Here in the Pantera hobby there is a mystique about FI installations that they are only for the knowledgable insiders. But over in the Mustang hobby, or among the various GM groups like the Camaro guys, retro-fitting FI is no big deal, its done everyday, even folks with limited technical ability install them. The folks outside of the Pantera hobby have 4 advantages, there is plenty of information available to assist them, they are retro-fitting injection onto motors that have been fitted with FI by the manufacturer, there is nobody telling them it is too complicated, and they are not installing independent runner systems. One throttle body is enough, keep it simple.

If you slap a factory ECU and instruments from a Camero, Vette, or 5.0 Mustang on a like sbc or sbf engine, expect like performance. It will definitely be much more economical due to the factory production volumes. In my opinion, deciphering all the factory sensor input, and altering source code for a factory ECU, is more challenging than tuning with an aftermarket ECU. But, there’s lots of people doing it, selling PROMs etc., and you definitely can get good bang for your buck in the early steps up from stock . Getting into the higher states of tune costs increasingly more……and boys, it’s never enough!!!!!

Always a healthy discussion George. –Best wishes to you and your family for a very happy New Year.

Kelly

Yeah I heard you can run more overlap on the cam with IR because since the cylinders can't communicate, you don't get that back pulse of exaust going into a cylinder on it's intake.

If you look at cam listing from anyone, I defy you to find one that is labeled for IR EFI.
Some might be thought to apply themselves better then others but, no no specific cams for this application.
Pay your money and take your chances! Your pick is as good as anyones.

quote:

Originally posted by Panterror:
...Always a healthy discussion George. –Best wishes to you and your family for a very happy New Year...

Kelly, without a doubt, carbureted IR systems are far superior to common plenum carbureted systems in terms of powerband width and throttle response, just the sort of thing a road course race car, or a sports car, can take advantage of.

My personal question, is a fuel injected IR system an advantage compared to a fuel injected long runner "factory" system that employs a single throttle body, at what we would call streetable rpm levels. Is the powerband achievable measurably wider, or the throttle response measurably crisper? Do the complexity & expense involved in the IR system provide a worthwhile return with fuel injection, like it did with carburetion?

I don't have the personal experience to answer that question, but apparently the prancing donkey engineers & the engineers full of bull don't think there's any advantage, or they'd be doing it, wouldn't they?

I agree with your sentiment, always a healthy a discussion. My heartfelt wishes for a healthy and prosperous new year for you and your family as well, my friend.

George

quote:

...but apparently the prancing donkey engineers & the engineers full of bull don't think there's any advantage, or they'd be doing it, wouldn't they?

Well, I wouldn't conclude such.

Everything's a compromise in engineering especially when it comes to engines. One certainly can not assume that Ferrari's or Lambos don't compromise performance for other things important to passenger cars or public perceptions of "refinement" and quality. Production cars have an even more complicated set of conditions and trade-offs. The original manufacturer and badging on the car doesn't exempt them from US government regs or the need to make trades. This certainly is not limited to the induction systems. Examples?

Are their exhaust systems designed for optimal performance? No, they have catalytic converters and meet noise and emissions standards. Doesn't mean I would select it for my car. More tractors than police on the roads I drive.
Tires? -A street/performance compromise.
Suspension? same.
Cammed for performance considerations only? Nope.
Weight? Yup, you guessed it...compromise; radios, air conditioners, sound supression, crash impact tolerance, etc.

And on and on. Having said all that, I see a lot of Ferrari and Lambo bashing. I don't agree. They are fine cars. The fit and finish are of a high standard, and even in street trim the over square 12 cylinder engines have great range, are very predictable, and that makes them easy to drive. "Refined" if you will. Wind'em up tight and they'll go. But I routinely see modestly modified Vettes exceed many Ferrari's in club racing.

Cheers,
Kelly

With the Electromotive TEC3r, it is relatively straight forward to set up a single plane manifold with the air fed from a throttle body for easy linkage and then have the FI nozzles at the end of the individual runners aimed right at the valves. It can even be set up with 8 coils sitting right at each spark plug.

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
If you look at cam listing from anyone, I defy you to find one that is labeled for IR EFI.
Some might be thought to apply themselves better then others but, no no specific cams for this application.
Pay your money and take your chances! Your pick is as good as anyones.

Doug the only cam I ever bought was back in 1973. It was a solid roller for a chebby 454. It didn't exist yet and it took two years for the bastards to deliver. By that time I lost my money and had to sell my engine project just to pay off the builder. So I do know if you are buying a cam, buy something that exists or the wait becomes too long.
I guess now a days you just get on the phone to a reputible cam company and they asks you a million questions. What does the car weigh, how is it geared, how are your gonna drive it, what is your zodiac. After you answer all the questions they send you a cam. So yeah, you get a cam just for your car. I guess. That's what I heard anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by Panterror:
... I see a lot of Ferrari and Lambo bashing...

Large equipment and a bionic prostate. -Too funny. OK, I give. You have superior e-weapons!

Have a good one George.

Kelly

Since every runner has it's own injector, I would think that a common plenum is an economy measure eliminating all those individual throttle bodies and linkage that needs to be synchronized. Although they are Italian and have different rational.
I'm wonder if anyone (hi ya Kelly) has tested the twin injector per throat throttle bodies?
I know that the RX-7 Mazda racers are using them.
I know that the Haltec computer (don't know which model) can handle all 16 injectors.
I'm wondering if it is a waste of time to stage injectors on a 351? Anyone know? (Kelly?)

Doug the hot new thing is direct injection. They inject right into the cylinder with the valves closed.They have been able to pull it off because of super high injection pressure. Like 10,000 PSI.
I am betting we could make a Cleveland with direct injection by replacing the spark plug with one of those super high pressure injectors. But we will need to run 15:1 compresion and a turbo running 30 pounds of boost. Uhm we may want to also use desiel fuel insted of gasoline while we are at it. Probably need to figure out how to make the block stronger too. But we can just play it by ear and see how it goes.

quote:

I'm wondering if it is a waste of time to stage injectors on a 351?

If we’re talking V-8s and Panteras, staged injection really isn’t necessary in most normally aspirated street applications. For a single injector per cylinder, when horsepower demands get high and drive the flow rate of your injectors up, larger injectors don’t have much resolution for fine tuning at low rpms. -You can’t get them turned on and off fast enough for idle and low speed trim. So when the injector pulse widths get very small and start approaching the injector recovery time (time to effectively shut down and ready to pulse again) it can pose a problem at low speeds. Conversely, small injectors won't be able to deliver high flow and power. Staged injection can allow the use of a smaller injector to handle the low rpm duties and as the rpm, power, and fuel flow demands exceed the small injectors ability to deliver at a reasonable duty cycle, the additional set of injectors also kick in so you get the best of both worlds…..good low speed resolution and plenty of fuel delivery capability. Full sequential can also help smooth out idle and low rpm operation since full sequential fires only once per engine cycle instead of once per revolution as in phased sequential.

On eight cylinder street engines of reasonable displacement (say 400 CI or so, more the better), you should be able accommodate 600 HP at sub 7krpm with a single 45 lb/hr injector per cylinder. If you will only briefly see the peak power and fuel demand (street banging) then you can get by with the high duty cycle and you may get more. If you’re living at high power levels (racing) you need a bigger and properly sized injector. Guys that are running boosted engines on the street and putting down big numbers also often run staged injectors for this reason.

One exception to my remarks above is rotary engines. Because you only have a couple rotors that have quite a bit of displacement, they’ll need staged injectors even at modest power levels and this is common practice for rotaries.

Interestingly enough, a pair of smaller injectors can be significantly less expensive than one large one; big production quantities for small injectors typical in passenger cars provides economy I guess. If your ECU can drive multiple injectors it may be one of the rare instances where more costs less. It only applies to the injectors boys, you pay dearly everywhere else.

Very high rpm racing engines will also use staged/multiple injectors per cylinder since they can have a very small amount of time available to deliver the fuel due to the high engine frequency. Varying the injector placement in the induction stack can potentially take advantage of higher harmonics. Some racers even have an injector placed (out of) above the stack to optimize performance. -All this is way out of my league.

Hope that helped. Happy New Year gents.

Kelly

Ok to make a long story short ... if I was to put IR EFI on my 351W ..... Kelly ??? where would I start educating myself .. because god knows when you ask some one a quesion on this subject they start ....foaming at the mouth and mumbling ... stuff like wide band sensors .. narrow band ..oxygen sensors.... lap tops .. LOL

Dont get me wrong I can figure out anything on my own ... but a couple guy I consulted with made my head spin ... LOL

Ron

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
Ok to make a long story short ... if I was to put IR EFI on my 351W ..... Kelly ??? where would I start educating myself .. because god knows when you ask some one a quesion on this subject they start ....foaming at the mouth and mumbling ... stuff like wide band sensors .. narrow band ..oxygen sensors.... lap tops .. LOL

Dont get me wrong I can figure out anything on my own ... but a couple guy I consulted with made my head spin ... LOL

Ron

Sure change the subject! We're talking about FI on 351c's not 351w's. Comon' now!

quote:

At this point in time, a Pantera owner wanting to convert to single throttle body FI, but not wanting to modify a 351W intake, is left with installing one of the throttle body injection systems, or the systems employing a modified single plane intake.

When PCNC Member Jim Murch did his EFI conversion, the tech folks at TrickFlow were very interested in how he converted their 351W manifold for use on the 351C. My understanding is that he sold TrickFlow on the merits and market for such a manifold and that they may soon offer such a manifold for the 351C.

I'll ask Jim for more info when I see him at this month's PCNC meeting at the end of the month.

Cheers!

The last word I received is that the project is on a back burner. I spoke with Jim last May. But if you have other news that would be great. If Trick Flow were to release that manifold, it would alter my engine building plans.

thanks Garth

LOL .... we are talking a 351W w/ C302B CLEVELAND heads ... with Kelly's intake .... technically which is it ??? LOL

I have to say ... the 5.0L factory intake ...has me thinking ... on how hard would it be to make a intake ... by cutting apart a C intake and a 5.0L intake ... and CLOANING the 2 together ??? Dreaming again ..

Ron

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
LOL .... we are talking a 351W w/ C302B CLEVELAND heads ... with Kelly's intake .... technically which is it ???

this topic has been hijacked to the point, I don't know who you are writing to Ron, you should have used the quotes. The Trick Flow intake Garth refers to would be a 351C 2V intake. Jim Murch modified a 351W intake to fit his 351C 4V.

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
I have to say ... the 5.0L factory intake ...has me thinking ... on how hard would it be to make a intake ... by cutting apart a C intake and a 5.0L intake ... and CLOANING the 2 together ??? Dreaming again ...

some welding, some machining, some drilling and some spacer plates, a 351W EFI intake (factory long runner style) could be made to fit your Clevor with C302 heads.

You would be amazed at how close in size the C302 ports & the Windsor intake runners are. They are even in the same location horizontally. The C302 ports are vertically higher. The intake bolt holes would require re-drilling.

I've already forgotten again if your block is 9.2" deck or 9.5" deck. The short deck may not need spacers.

below is a picture of some of the work required

cowboy from hell

PD said " Sure change the subject! We're talking about FI on 351c's not 351w's. Comon' now! "

I said " we are talking a 351W w/ C302B CLEVELAND heads ... with Kelly's intake."

Then I said " the 5.0L factory intake how hard would it be to make a intake ... by cutting apart a C intake and a 5.0L intake ... and CLOANING the 2 together.

George said " some welding, some machining, some drilling and some spacer plates, a 351W EFI intake (factory long runner style) could be made to fit your Clevor with C302 heads.

I said " Oh yes I forgot the 351W truck EFI .... that intake may need minor alteration ?? LOL thats why you get the big bucks George !! LOL

George said " You would be amazed at how close in size the C302 ports & the Windsor intake runners are. They are even in the same location horizontally. The C302 ports are vertically higher. The intake bolt holes would require re-drilling.

I said " I think you hit it on the head my c302B's are about 2.25 high and 1.5 wide .. which bolts would be redrilled ???

George said " I've already forgotten again if your block is 9.2" deck or 9.5" deck. The short deck may not need spacers.

I said" 9.2 deck ... but the factory Windsor blocks are 9.5 so it may need milling to get a 351W efi inatke to fit my block.

below is a picture of some of the work required ..... real nice.....

I said " so back to the old thread ... EFI. Good bad or not proven yet ???

Ron

I'm going to post some gasket overlay pictures in a little while.
After looking at the mismatch I don't see where this is a feasable modification.

In looking at the picture of the manifold, I presume that is cut for a 9.5 block?
If it is, there is no way there is .375" left to mill off of each flange. Even if there is, forget about the bolt holes.
You are going to have to weld them up and redrill them.

The best thing is to convince TrickFlow to build a manifold that will fit a 9.2 Cleveland block with real heads, not the 2v production heads.

The more I look at it, the more I like the EFI setup.

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
...I said " I think you hit it on the head my c302B's are about 2.25 high and 1.5 wide .. which bolts would be redrilled ???

The bolt holes in the intake manifold ALL need re-drilling, my guess is 3/4" lower. I don't know if there's enough room, if there would be interference problems with the runners, etc. I'd like to mock one up and see how it looks. Gotta pick up a 351W EFI manifold off ebay. I may be way out in left field here.

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
I said" 9.2 deck ... but the factory Windsor blocks are 9.5 so it may need milling to get a 351W efi inatke to fit my block...

The wide (9.5" deck) intake on the low deck block will cause the intake to sit higher in the "vee" and may align the intake runners with the raised ports of the C302 heads.

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
...I said " so back to the old thread ... EFI. Good bad or not proven yet ???

EFI.....GOOD.......

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
...In looking at the picture of the manifold, I presume that is cut for a 9.5 block?
If it is, there is no way there is .375" left to mill off of each flange. Even if there is, forget about the bolt holes.
You are going to have to weld them up and redrill them..

I've already shown you a picture of a 351W FI intake mounted on a 351C motor. It is possible. The bolt holes may be a problem with C302 heads as they will require significant lowering, but not an issue with 2V or 4V heads.

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
...The best thing is to convince TrickFlow to build a manifold that will fit a 9.2 Cleveland block with real heads...

this will never happen, maybe we can coerce Kelly C! Kelly?

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
... not the 2v production heads...

CHI & AFD alloy 2V heads will support 600 bhp

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
...The more I look at it, the more I like the EFI setup...

I think you mean Independent Runner EFI

quote:

...The best thing is to convince TrickFlow to build a manifold that will fit a 9.2 Cleveland block with real heads... this will never happen, maybe we can coerce Kelly C! Kelly?

So many opportunties so little time......Sighhhhhhh....

-Kelly

http://pantera.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2250045562/m/1990087434

Here is a 351w with stock Ford EFI computer.

When Edelbrock makes the same manifold for the 351C it would be easy to do on a C.

" The more I look at it, the more I like the EFI setup."

Doug my thoughts exactly

quote:

Gotta pick up a 351W EFI manifold off ebay. I may be way out in left field here.

George .. I just Junked an 88 E350 van with one on it .. I knew I'd be kicking myself in the butt...

Ron

I think I'm going to see if I can pick one up and report back ... would the holes be redrilled in the C302B head or would the holes be redrilled in the Manifold >???

George so you think the ports are too high ... maybe on the 9.2 deck block the ports would bring the intake higher since its for a 9.5 and the front and rear would need metal added like the picc.....ah I see your pic shows that ... ok taking me some time ...but I got it ..

Thanks Ron

I suppose thatat the moment the only choice of an EFI manifold is to modify a 351w unit.

This is a picture of three intake gaskets overlaid upon each other.

The white one is for my A3 heads the smaller port with the rounded corners is the 351c 2v (iron head) and the third is a 69 351w gasket.

It is similar in size to the C302 port but you are looking at the same thing as I. Tell me that this is doable.

I don't mean to be a doubter but it looks like re-inventing the wheel to me.
Forget about the bolt holes lining up. Plan on welding them shut and starting over.

As a matter of fact it may be easier to redrill the manifold bolt holes in the heads.

A sheetmetal intake might be cheaper.

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
...I think I'm going to see if I can pick one up and report back ...

Ron you don't want to use a Ford Truck EFI, you want to use the Trick Flow piece for the 351W. The Trick Flow version flows better and mates up with the better flowing Trick Flow uppers. You don't want to put that truck piece on your race motor with C302 heads, doesn't make sense. I'm going to look for a manifold too, so lets be sure to not bid against one another.

quote:

Originally posted by accobra:
...would the holes be redrilled in the C302B head or would the holes be redrilled in the Manifold ...

The holes are normallly redrilled in the manifold, but redrilling the head is perfectly possible and perfectly acceptable. If you redrill the head, you'll wind up using 351W or 351C 2V intake gaskets, instead of C302 gaskets. The intake bolt holes in a 351W are all oriented vertically. Not so with 351C/SVO heads & intakes. The middle bolts are vertical, just like the Windsor, but the outer bolts are perpendicular to the head. In this application, redrilling the heads for 351W bolt orientation would give the best chances of success. Some folks would get squeamish when it comes time to starting drilling holes in their $1500/each heads. Much less stressful to drill holes in a $300 manifold. The last consideration will be closing up the gap between the intake and the lifter valley rails of the block. You would end up with a C302 head Clevor, with a long runner FI manifold. Very unique. The large selection of intake & fuel system parts developed for fuel injected 5.0 Mustangs could then be used on your motor.

cowboy from hell