351 modified

[spaz1879]

hey im new to this dropping in a v8 i was offered a 351 modified from a 77 ltd and it doesnt have a transmission and was wondering what would be the best manual trans i could put behind it that was work with a transfercase? thanks for the help.

 

[RangerFabWorks]

world class t-5

 

[AllanD]

hey im new to this dropping in a v8 i was offered a 351 modified from a 77 ltd and it doesnt have a transmission and was wondering what would be the best manual trans i could put behind it that was work with a transfercase? thanks for the help.

an M5HD from an '88-94 F250/350/450 with a 7.5liter(460EFI) engine.

The 351M uses the "big block" bellhousing pattern and only 460 transmission need apply.

Personally I'd rather have a 460 than an M even allowing for the
greater weight because atleast then you'd get some BALLZ with
your crummy mileage.

world class t-5

Are you on Crack? Meth? or LSD?

AD

 

[Will]

The 351M isn't a good engine. The Modified part isn't a good thing. It's a Ford 400 modified into a 351 by use of a 351W crank, 400 rods and and some stupid tall pistons to reach up and finish the job of getting up to near the top of the bore--instead of forging different rods. The pistons rock around in the bore--very audibly in cold weather. There's nothing wrong with any particular part of the engine--decent heads and such, but it needs longer rods or better yet, unmodified by putting the 400 crank back in it--which is a bolt-on 50 cubes and a pretty good engine in the end.

 

[Mac]

Thank you AllanD

Are you on Crack? Meth? or LSD?
AD

Why does everyone think a WC T-5 is strong? Just different internals. Even the "Z" spec is only rated to 320-330 lb-ft. No way to bolt up a T-5 to a x-fer case anyway.
Dave

 

[mikepotts]

No way to bolt up a T-5 to a x-fer case anyway.
Dave

at least not anymore... AA used to have an adapter, they modified a stock jeep t-5 adapter, but since jeep has discontinued the adapter, they cant get them anymore... thus no more adapters.

i would say use a NP 435 and 205... i like mine!

 

[rusty ol ranger]

T18.

The 351M isnt that bad of an engine. Ive had two of them in old F150's and they are gas sucking pigs for the power they produce, but they seem to be reliable.

Are you sure its a 351M? If it was a LTD II its more likely to be a windsor, and the big LTD's got the 400 in some cases. The only way to be for sure its a 351M and not a 400 is by looking at the bore. A 400 will have a 4in (or somewhere thereabouts) bore. Even the emissions labels are the same between the two engines, saying "351M/400 engine family".

later,
Dustin

 

[Will]

We had a '77 LTDII with a 351M when I was a kid. It was in northern Iowa and it knocked like a maraca any time it was below zero in the morning. I remember the only time I got to drive it by myself after I got my license. I tried to bury the 85mph speed and I did it but it took forever. Almost ran out of state. My own car at the time was a 400-4V Pontiac Bonneville and that thing would super-cruise at 120mph like the F22. And it didn't rattle in the morning.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Are you sure its a 351M? If it was a LTD II its more likely to be a windsor, and the big LTD's got the 400 in some cases. The only way to be for sure its a 351M and not a 400 is by looking at the bore. A 400 will have a 4in (or somewhere thereabouts) bore. Even the emissions labels are the same between the two engines, saying "351M/400 engine family".

That threw us at first too, but if you look hard it will actually say the displacement, both of the ones we have say "6.6L" somewhere on the tag on the valvecover.

400's are 4" bore by 4" stroke, 351W/M's are 4" bore by 3.5" stroke

I wouldn't swap a 351M into my Ranger if I had a choice, a 400 would be fun to drive but getting it (and its transmission) to fit would be tough but supposedly possible.

 

[spaz1879]

thanks for all the replies. from what stated above the engine isnt as good as it seemed so i might as well go with a 460 if im going to get shitty gas milage as it is? will the 460 get better HP and torque? If so what vehicles came with the 460 i was doing some research and found that the some older cars and trucks maybe have it? Thanks again this information was very informative

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

thanks for all the replies. from what stated above the engine isnt as good as it seemed so i might as well go with a 460 if im going to get shitty gas milage as it is? will the 460 get better HP and torque? If so what vehicles came with the 460 i was doing some research and found that the some older cars and trucks maybe have it? Thanks again this information was very informative

460's DO NOT fit well in the older Rangers. A healthy 302 or 351 will fit nicely and do more than you should really do in a Ranger.

 

[spaz1879]

460's DO NOT fit well in the older Rangers. A healthy 302 or 351 will fit nicely and do more than you should really do in a Ranger.

oh so the 460 wont fit unless MAJOR modifications are made?
so a 302 or 351 is the best canidate

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

oh so the 460 wont fit unless MAJOR modifications are made?
so a 302 or 351 is the best canidate

Yeah, 460's are just plain too big. A 302 or 351W is a nice fit and are common to find stuff for.

 

[Psychopete]

400's are 4" bore by 4" stroke, 351W/M's are 4" bore by 3.5" stroke

+1, I think I ended up having the get the # off the crank shaft to determine whether mine was a 351M or 400M. Most of the #s matched those of either/or, I think it was a '75+ truck block. I recall there being something funny about the thrust bearing being upgraded for a manual transmission, but I can't remember specifically.

MAJOR

FWIW, a 351/400M next to a 302 makes it look like a little baby. I had a 351M and C6 I was going to try to swap in, realized I wouldn't have been happy with the end result after research, would have taken a really long time, and I opted to trade both for a running untouched '87 roller 5.0L. +1, if you're going to go through the trouble of a 351M, might as well go whole hog with a 460ci.

Pete

 

[spaz1879]

FWIW, a 351/400M next to a 302 makes it look like a little baby. I had a 351M and C6 I was going to try to swap in, realized I wouldn't have been happy with the end result after research, would have taken a really long time, and I opted to trade both for a running untouched '87 roller 5.0L. +1, if you're going to go through the trouble of a 351M, might as well go whole hog with a 460ci.

Pete

Yeah, 460's are just plain too big. A 302 or 351W is a nice fit and are common to find stuff for.

alright well both of these statments have me a little confused one sayin one thing now im getting different info so can the 460 bet couxed into the engine bay? i dont really care how long it could take i just want to know will the massice 460 ci motor fit it the bay i have seen a 302 in a ranger and it did look that big dont get me wrong im sure they are good engines for this application but if im gonna swap in a v8 i wanna get the biggest badest fastest motha fcuka out there that will actualy fit