Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*351C\s+installation\s+\&\s+compare\s+with\s+347\s+Stroker\s+302\s+\-Reply\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. Re: 351C installation & compare with 347 Stroker 302 -Reply (score: 1)
Author: Daniel Jones <djones2@mdc.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:00:29 -0600
You're headers sound nice. Most 4V headers are 1 7/8" and still have a little taper to fit the huge port. If you look at the port, much of it is wasted space. The 2V port, despite being smaller, mov
/html/tigers/1999-03/msg00440.html (9,088 bytes)

2. Re: 351C installation & compare with 347 Stroker 302 -Reply (score: 1)
Author: James Barrett <jamesbrt@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 18:26:26 -0500
I have the Edelbrock for the 4 barrel Cleveland heads. Their ports are considerably smaller than the intake ports. ( They claim this gives more low end tork). The original cast iron intake had runner
/html/tigers/1999-03/msg00442.html (9,748 bytes)

3. Re: 351C installation & compare with 347 Stroker 302 -Reply (score: 1)
Author: Daniel Jones <djones2@mdc.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 14:09:06 -0600
That grind's low on lift for the duration. The 4V heads really like more lift. The 2V''s have less ultimate flow but get the flow at lower lifts. My books show a 6.5" power valve. As light as the Ti
/html/tigers/1999-03/msg00503.html (9,923 bytes)

4. Re: 351C installation & compare with 347 Stroker 302 -Reply (score: 1)
Author: Daniel Jones <djones2@mdc.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 16:03:50 -0600
I'll have to check. The Aussie heads are a different casting with some minor differences but I never paid much that much attention. I'll check and see what I find. Dan Jones
/html/tigers/1999-03/msg00504.html (8,612 bytes)

5. Re: 351C installation & compare with 347 Stroker 302 -Reply (score: 1)
Author: James Barrett <jamesbrt@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 23:07:18 -0500
The reason for the Crane lifters is to decrease the lift at low RPM and provide more torque ( or so they advertize). Maby so. I get 15 inches or better at idle. For a long time I had a vacuum gauge m
/html/tigers/1999-03/msg00508.html (11,262 bytes)

6. Re: 351C installation & compare with 347 Stroker 302 -Reply (score: 1)
Author: Daniel Jones <djones2@mdc.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:30:12 -0600
Yup, your power valve is never opening and your main jetting is probably rich to compensate. With flat tops, closed chamber 4V's and KB pistons (and probably TRW), you should get around 10.5:1. They
/html/tigers/1999-03/msg00510.html (10,450 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu