Classic Mustangs List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rick Lindsay)

Hello Gang,
At the risk of igniting yet another flame war, I ask
this question: What is the easiest/best/definitive way
of telling a 302 engine from a 351w engine with the
engine in the car and without disassembly?
I ask this question because my son's friend, the one
who bought the '69 Mach I, is now not really sure
what engine IS in the car. The seller says that it is
a 351w with a 302 cam so the firing order is that
of a 302. There is a lot of smell in the air and I think
someone is stirring up the poo.
So please, do tell: Is there an easy way that can we
know for sure what the block is and what the heads
are -- without disassembly?

Rick

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) ((email redacted))

Hey Rick-
Easy 302/351 give-aways:
Intake manifold is about 9" across for 302 and almost 11" for a 351.
'69 to '74 351's had 16 intake-to-head bolts and all others had only 12=
(including later 351's).
Early engine firing order: 302 is 15426378 and 351 is 13726548.
Heads USUALLY have 289, 302 or 351 cast somewhere between the valves under=
the valve covers.
Other casting marks are usually under the head exhaust ports :-(

That should be enough to get you identified. If you need more - let us=
know.

FWIW,
David M.

********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 11/26/02 at 10:29 AM Rick Lindsay wrote:

>Hello Gang,
> At the risk of igniting yet another flame war, I ask
>this question: What is the easiest/best/definitive way
>of telling a 302 engine from a 351w engine with the
>engine in the car and without disassembly?
> I ask this question because my son's friend, the one
>who bought the '69 Mach I, is now not really sure
>what engine IS in the car. The seller says that it is
>a 351w with a 302 cam so the firing order is that
>of a 302. There is a lot of smell in the air and I think
>someone is stirring up the poo.
> So please, do tell: Is there an easy way that can we
>know for sure what the block is and what the heads
>are -- without disassembly?
>
>Rick
>
>_______________________________________________
>Classic-mustangs mailing list
>(email redacted)
>mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs

*************END OF SECTION**************

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Linc)

Yes, the intake is wider on a 351. When you see
the two side by side it is very obvious.

Linc

-----Original Message-----
From: (email redacted)
[mailtoemail redacted)]On Behalf Of Rick
Lindsay
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 11:30 AM
To: (email redacted)
Subject: [CM] 302 versus 351w, no not a contest


Hello Gang,
At the risk of igniting yet another flame war, I ask
this question: What is the easiest/best/definitive way
of telling a 302 engine from a 351w engine with the
engine in the car and without disassembly?
I ask this question because my son's friend, the one
who bought the '69 Mach I, is now not really sure
what engine IS in the car. The seller says that it is
a 351w with a 302 cam so the firing order is that
of a 302. There is a lot of smell in the air and I think
someone is stirring up the poo.
So please, do tell: Is there an easy way that can we
know for sure what the block is and what the heads
are -- without disassembly?

Rick

_______________________________________________
Classic-mustangs mailing list
(email redacted)
mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Randy Siwik)

My '69 351W has a 302 cam,
you see it once and a while on 351s.

As you know from the previous poster
the firing order of these two are different.
The reason some folks use the 302 cam is
supposedly to do w/ the stress on the #1
rod due to the firing of the first two pistons
side by side, after midnight,,, on a full
moon,,,,, or something like that.

Also Rick, I never did ask but what ever came
of the fact that this was was a fake Mach 1?
Did your son and friend know this before
purchase or did you find out through decoding
the VIN?

Good Luck,
Randy Siwik '70 Mach 1
Central Ohio



Rick Lindsay wrote:

> Hello Gang, [snip],,,,
> What is the easiest/best/definitive way
> of telling a 302 engine from a 351w [snip],,,,,,,,

> The seller says that it is
> a 351w with a 302 cam so the firing order is that
> of a 302.
>
> Rick

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rick Lindsay)

Hi Randy,
The guys are still discussing that. Right now, they don't
even know if the engine is what it is described to be, let
alone what it is supposed to be! All the information you
and the other contributors have put forth will set this
question to right. I'll let you know what we learn after the
holidays.

Rick


>
> My '69 351W has a 302 cam,
> you see it once and a while on 351s.
>
> As you know from the previous poster
> the firing order of these two are different.
> The reason some folks use the 302 cam is
> supposedly to do w/ the stress on the #1
> rod due to the firing of the first two pistons
> side by side, after midnight,,, on a full
> moon,,,,, or something like that.
>
> Also Rick, I never did ask but what ever came
> of the fact that this was was a fake Mach 1?
> Did your son and friend know this before
> purchase or did you find out through decoding
> the VIN?
>
> Good Luck,
> Randy Siwik '70 Mach 1
> Central Ohio
>
>
>
> Rick Lindsay wrote:
>
> > Hello Gang, [snip],,,,
> > What is the easiest/best/definitive way
> > of telling a 302 engine from a 351w [snip],,,,,,,,
>
> > The seller says that it is
> > a 351w with a 302 cam so the firing order is that
> > of a 302.
> >
> > Rick
>
> _______________________________________________
> Classic-mustangs mailing list
> (email redacted)
> mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rich Silva)

I think I have a way to check whether or not its a 302 or a 351, assuming
you have a known 302 or 351 around...

The idea is to based on the assumption that no matter what compression
ratio the engine has, a 351 cylinder will displace significantly more
volume than a 302...

Pull out a spark plug, locate TDC using your favorite method... Once at
TDC........
Dang, it wont work... I was going to have you measure the volume pulled
into the cylinder, but the intake valve is going to open... so that wont
work...

If there is a reliable method to locate Bottom Dead Center... You can
measure the displacement of a single cylinder with most vacuum gauges... Or
if you can find something of the same thread, put a balloon over it... A
351 will puff the balloon up more than a 302... compare that to your
"control" (the engine you know the displacement of...)

Whatdya think?

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rick Lindsay)

Hello again Randy, et al.,
Thanks for the note and thanks to you and the List for
all the good information!

> My '69 351W has a 302 cam,
> you see it once and a while on 351s.

Okay. As you know, I am new to American iron.
(I build German and Italian engines.) I did not know
that it was possible but as the 351w is the same breed
as the 302, it seemed possible. The car in question
certainly has a 302 firing order. The seller told the
boys that it had a 302 cam.

> As you know from the previous poster
> the firing order of these two are different.
> The reason some folks use the 302 cam is
> supposedly to do w/ the stress on the #1
> rod due to the firing of the first two pistons
> side by side, after midnight,,, on a full
> moon,,,,, or something like that.

My kind of stuff. Fixed physics, variable technology

> Also Rick, I never did ask but what ever came
> of the fact that this was was a fake Mach 1?

Nothing, as of yet. The VIN says that the car IS a
Mach I but it also says that it is/was a 302. Confusing
but the research continues. I have met the seller and
he is just a bubba. I can't imagine that he added the
Mach I bits. In fact, they look the same vintage as the
rest of the car. Same patina, etc.. My bet is that bubba
either bought it like that and/or it is the engine -- or even
the VIN plate -- that may be wrong/bogus. The guy
didn't do much more than paint the car and change the
carpet. I don't think he could have done much more.

> Did your son and friend know this before
> purchase or did you find out through decoding
> the VIN?

They decoded the VIN before purchasing but the
seller told them that the numbers didn't match. The
game isn't over, we've just stopped for a huddle.

> Good Luck,
> Randy Siwik '70 Mach 1
> Central Ohio

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rick Lindsay)

Hi Rich,

> I think I have a way to check whether or not its a 302 or a 351,
assuming
> you have a known 302 or 351 around...
...snip...
> Whatdya think?

I think you think like I think! :-) Uhhhh, I meant that as
a complement. :-] I think... :-]

We will probably default to measuring the width of the intake
manifold, as a starter. As the manifold bolts are all vertical, it is
most probably a 351. We also don't know which heads are
used. Thoughts?
I'm sorry to be so ignorant of the breed. I just am inexperienced
with American engines.

rick

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rob)

An Easy one,

Look at the front of block, just where the head gaskets are. You will
see on either side of the block at this point, a round casting in the
block. If this round casting (where the ali timing case water channels
go into the block galleries) is just below the head to block mating
surface, then it's a 302 or less, BUT if there is about an inch of block
above this round casting, below the head/block mating surface, then its
351. I had the same dilemma when I bought my 69 Mach 1 here in the UK.

If your still unsure I'll email some pictures, I've just checked the
above under the bonnet, sorry! HOOD, of my car. Just to make sure what
I'm stating isn't incorrect.

Regards,

Rob


-----Original Message-----
From: (email redacted)
[mailtoemail redacted)] On Behalf Of Rick
Lindsay
Sent: 26 November 2002 16:30
To: (email redacted)
Subject: [CM] 302 versus 351w, no not a contest

Hello Gang,
At the risk of igniting yet another flame war, I ask
this question: What is the easiest/best/definitive way
of telling a 302 engine from a 351w engine with the
engine in the car and without disassembly?
I ask this question because my son's friend, the one
who bought the '69 Mach I, is now not really sure
what engine IS in the car. The seller says that it is
a 351w with a 302 cam so the firing order is that
of a 302. There is a lot of smell in the air and I think
someone is stirring up the poo.
So please, do tell: Is there an easy way that can we
know for sure what the block is and what the heads
are -- without disassembly?

Rick

_______________________________________________
Classic-mustangs mailing list
(email redacted)
mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rick Lindsay)

> If your still unsure I'll email some pictures,

I fyou already have them that wouldbe GREAT! I am
reached directly at (email redacted) .

> I've just checked the above under the bonnet, sorry!
> HOOD, of my car. Just to make sure what I'm stating
> isn't incorrect.

Thanks Rob,
It's a bonnet to me too. And fenders are on the front and
sometimes attached to the wings, the head is, well, over your
head and bumpers are, well, who knows what bumpers really
are?!
BTW, I am in the market for an Aston Martin V8 Coupe'
(not a Vantage, can't afford one). Now that's like a Mustang
Mach I in a tuxedo!

Rick
PS: I really don't know why I posted this. Just to toss a 'spanner'
in the works, I guess. :-)

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rob)

Hi Rick,

Found this site, says it all.

members.tripod.com/~COSA4U/id.html

Rob

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Rick Lindsay)

Brilliant!

rick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob" <(email redacted)>
To: <(email redacted)>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 2:57 PM
Subject: RE: [CM] 302 versus 351w, no not a contest


> Hi Rick,
>
> Found this site, says it all.
>
> members.tripod.com/~COSA4U/id.html
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Classic-mustangs mailing list
> (email redacted)
> mix.twistedpair.ca/mailman/listinfo/classic-mustangs
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) ((email redacted))

In a message dated 11/26/2002 3:03:43 PM, (email redacted) writes:

<< We also don't know which heads are

used. Thoughts? >>

i think someone mentioned this before....but if you pull off a valve cover
there will be a 289 , 302 or 351 cast on the surface of the head between the
valve springs and the push rods.

Jason
'66 coupe
New Albany , IN