94 cobra 351 swap

Discussion in '94-95 5.0 - Specific' started by chris5091, May 8, 2006.

  1. chris5091

    chris5091 New Member

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    whats needed to do this i will not need anymore emission test in my state so entertaining these thoughts i have an 80's non-roller 351 whats needed to swap in to the cobra what can be reused anyone done it? any info would be great.
     
  2. Lightning Struck

    Lightning Struck Legend

    Messages:
    23,204
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Headers, oil pan, intake, a/c power steering bracket, new hood for clearance I think there is a couple other things but I cant think of them right now but this gives you a idea of what you need. Its a simple swap, a straight forward install you should not have any trouble with it.
     
  3. Steve-Oh

    Steve-Oh Legend

    Messages:
    5,873
    Likes Received:
    248
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Location:
    39°57′9"N 75°9'48"W
    i would think one of your main concerns is the computer.
     
  4. Lightning Struck

    Lightning Struck Legend

    Messages:
    23,204
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    yea you will need some work on that, but that goes with any mods to the car :hammer:. It would be good to get one of the fox computer conversions for the Windsor in a 94-95, it will give you much better performance that the stock computer.
     
  5. wytstang

    wytstang Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,233
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Um no it won't the 94/95 computer is a much better processor then the fox pcm. Ours is just a bit more sensative to mods mainly cams not superior to the older computers.
     
  6. Lightning Struck

    Lightning Struck Legend

    Messages:
    23,204
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    the complications with aftermarket cams is exactly why I said to swap for the fox computer because they do NOT pose the problems that the 94-95 computers do with radical cam changes even with a small E303 cam chances are the stock 94-95 comp is going to act crazy.
     
  7. chickendreamer

    chickendreamer Active Member

    Messages:
    266
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Sigh, not this again. Let me quote what I said in another thread.

    The biggest problem with after market cams is that most of them are ground to have a lobe seperation less than 112 degrees which gives the surging/bucking/etc problems with the 94-95 mustangs. If you install a cam with a 114-116 degree lobe seperation, you shouldn't have much idle issues. This is why the ford motorsport E-303 cam has so many problems in the 94-95 mustangs. If you do pick a cam, get one with a 114-116 lobe seperation and you'll have a good idle. Probably not as good as stock, but much better than an E-303 Cam for example. Yet so many people continue to recommend the E-Cam when it's quite frankly a piece of shit.

    It's not having a "bigger cam" thats the problems. For example I installed a Comp Cams nitrous cam (grind number NX274HR) which has a duration of 224/236, a lift of .555/.570 but the lobe seperation was 114 degrees. This cam has a rough idle but i have ZERO surging or bucking, where when I had the ford motorsport E-303 camshaft the car often surged, bucked and died before I got a custom tune. The specs on the E-303 camshaft are 220/220 duration, 0.498/0.498 lift and a 110 degree lobe seperation. As you can see the E-303 camshaft is much smaller in both lift and duration but has the 110 degree lobe seperation.


    Also, if you want some information about 351 swaps HERE is a bit for you. Not my post but some good information nun the less.
     
  8. Lightning Struck

    Lightning Struck Legend

    Messages:
    23,204
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    I'm not getting into an E argument but if the E-303 cam is "a piece of shit" why is is SO POPULAR, and FOUND ON MOST OF THE NORMAL BOLT ON STREET CARS? Like I said I'm not getting into an argument with you, everyone has their own thoughts and you stated yours...........I don't agree however, I ran the E-303 in my 91 with a stock shortblock, Edelbrock heads and intake and with a race weight of 3375lbs ran consistent 7.70's all day long, it worked pretty damn well for me and the reason I used it is because it is VERY common with the street 302's here in southeastern NC at Coastal Plains Raceway in Jacksonville. It makes good power and tq, is streetable and doesn't require notching the pistons for clearance...........but hell that's just my opinion :D
     
  9. chickendreamer

    chickendreamer Active Member

    Messages:
    266
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    The reason why the E cam is so popular is that so many people recommend it to other people because other people recommended it to those people... basically people just think it's really good. Sure the cam makes power, has a good idle, etc. But the reality of it is that the cam is a poor design for 94/95 cars because of the reasons listed above. I did just a cam swap (as mentioned above) and i gained peak 20rwhp and 30rwtq also i increased 5mph in the 1/4 from more area under the curve.
     
  10. Lightning Struck

    Lightning Struck Legend

    Messages:
    23,204
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    I would rather have had a custom grind cam for my 91 because I KNOW it would have made gobs more power, but time and money restraints made the E cam be the one that was used and like I said it is what everyone else was running (also keep in mind this was 6 years ago) so thats what we used. It did the job and I was happy with the performance I got out of it, for anyone just wanting a boost in power to go along with a set of out of the box heads I would recomend the E cam and day of the week and twice on Sunday............but if you are after something more radical and agressive....you better look for something other than the tried and ture E-303



    I rest my case :hammer:
     
  11. S351R13

    S351R13 New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    Use the stock computer unless you plan on making more than 600 rwhp. Yes, you will need a tune to get the mosty out of it but, you won't need a tune to drive it around safely. The cam issue I never had and I installed an e-cam in my 94. I installed it just because it was cheap. A good custom grind is anywhere from 50-100 bucks more. You can run more cam in a roller 351 than in a 302 without notching the pistons. You can run the stock headers but, you won't be able to use the stcok H-pipe. Even if you stretch it out you will have exhaust leaks. You can reuse somethings. If you want a more detailed list send me an e-mail.
     
  12. 94GTcobra

    94GTcobra Member

    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Just use the Steeday #19 and no problems
     
  13. Kemble

    Kemble New Member

    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Why on earth do people still think the 94-95 computers suck is beyond me. Simply stated build any combo you want to and then have it tuned by a reputable tuner. Is that so hard to understand. Yes the fox computer isn't as picky I agree, but there the same, Dyno tune a fox and you will find hidden HP.

    It just baffles me that people modify these cars, only to leave alot on the shelf by never tuning.

    For the record I have a 107 LSA camshaft and it idles great, drives great, and causes no problems what so ever. Not one hint of bucking surging or anything. Its all in the tune. And furthermore if your tuner advises you to switch to a fox Computer, find another tuner.

    Ok i'll step off my soapbox.
     
  14. Paul

    Paul Legend

    Messages:
    9,894
    Likes Received:
    238
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    You have a 107 LSA cam in an EFI car? ??? Goddamn, that's tight.


    +1 on the e-cam sucking, but I don't care to get into it.


    Anyway, here's my thoughts from a guy with a Windsor in a 94:

    1. It's all in the tune, buy a cam that's right for your combo and get it dyno tuned by someone who knows what they're doing.
    2. If you want ultimate flexibility, buy a standalone. I did, and I'll never go back.
    3. The comment about the 114 LSA is true, but in more of a broad sense. ANY cam with a wider LSA will idle better than one with a narrower one.
    4. Don't put a cam that's barely adequate in a 302 into a 351. You'll just be disappointed when you make 302 power.
    5. According to my twEECer super-guru friend, 94-95 ECUs are actually superior in terms of the functions they perform, but they are certainly more sensitive to modifications.

    Paul.
     
  15. Kemble

    Kemble New Member

    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    I agree 107 LSA is kinda on the tight side. Its the junk Lunati cam that comes with the Systemax kit. But that just re-interates the point at hand. It can be done with ease, as long as tuning is performed.

    And on a side note, Alphabet cams are pretty outdated. There are much better cams out there.
     
  16. Addermk2

    Addermk2 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    I'm not going to add into the camshaft vs Sn computer argument... but whoever said that you need to swap the brackets for the 351w swap, is a moron.

    the SN-95 bracketing all bolts to the heads. it's only on the foxes, that you would have to swap the brackets
     
  17. Jasperstang308

    Jasperstang308 Member

    Messages:
    212
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    guys here are a few articles i found that i saved on my computer when i was doing 351w swap research

    347 vs. 351 If you’re considering extra cubes, then chances are you’re wrestling with a fairly common dilemma: Do you build a 347 out of your 5.0 or step all the way up to a 351? Perhaps the following info will help you decide.

    351W: Advantages
    •Strength: The 351W block is stronger than the production 5.0 by a long shot. Thicker walls and 3-inch main, and 2.311-inch rod journals (versus 2.248/2.123 for the 5.0) are contributing factors.
    • Taller Deck: The 351W features a deck height of 9.503 inches versus the 5.0’s 8.206 inches. This means a longer rod can be used for even more cubesâ€â€up to 435 with a production two-bolt block, and 454 cubes with a four-bolt FRPP block, according to George Klass at Coast High Performance.
    • Rod-to-Stroke Ratio: In stock configuration, the 351 has a better rod-to-stroke ratio than a 347 (1.70:1 for the 351W versus 1.58:1 for the 347) by virtue of its longer rods (5.956 versus 5.400 for the typical 347 rod). The 347 also features ½-inch head bolts instead of the 302 block’s 7/16-inch bolts.
    351W: Disadvantages
    • Size: The 351W is 2.250 inches wider than a 302, necessitating a number of changes (at additional cost) to make the swap possible. Hood clearance can become an issue, and there will be less room to service the plugs.
    • Heavy Weight: As discussed in the Keep the Muscle, Lose the Fat sidebar, the 351W is beefier and is typically more than 100 pounds heavier than a 302-based engine.
    347: Advantages
    • 302-based: The 347 is created when a 302 block is bored 0.030 and fitted with a 3.400 stroke crank and custom rods/pistons. This means a 347 has the extra cubes you desire, yet it can still use the same headers, manifolds, brackets, and so on as a stock 302.
    • Light Weight: The 302-based engine is more than 100 pounds lighter than the 351 in stock form, and it can be made downright feathery with a few aluminum components.
    347: Disadvantages (and perceived disadvantages)
    • Limited Growth: While 347 ci is certainly a respectable number, it’s the practical displacement limit for a two-bolt-main production block.
    • Limited Strength: A two-bolt-main production block is typically capable of withstanding up to 600 hp, and that’s with a girdle, studded mains, and so on. Even a mildly built 347 with a supercharger can bust that figure. An R302 block will solve the problem, but there goes your budget.
    • Poor Rod-to-Stroke Ratio (perceived): There has been a lot of talk about the 347’s rod-to-stroke (R/S) ratio. Simply stated, the R/S ratio is the length of the connecting rod (center-to-center) versus stroke of the engine. A higher ratio means the piston stays at top dead center longer, promoting better combustion and, theoretically, more power. Compared to the 351W’s 1.70:1 R/S ratio, the typical 347’s R/S ratio of 1.58:1 doesn’t look good, but it’s actually better than a lot of other noted performance engines, including the 454 big-block Chevy (1.53:1) and 400 small-block Chevy (1.48:1). Even the legendary 428 CJ was only marginally better than a 347 at 1.63:1. Unless you’re building an engine to compete with Billy Glidden, R/S ratio really doesn’t add up to much in an otherwise well-built engine.

    Cost Factor The next thing you’d probably like to know is, which would be cheaper, a 347 or a 351W? As discussed, the 351W requires numerous extra parts to accomplish the swap, while the 347 doesn’t. However, depending on what 347 kit you purchase, the initial short-block may be more expensive than a 351W. Since we can’t know what combo you have planned, the best idea is to add up the cost of a 351W, factor in the extra parts, and then compare that to the cost of the 347, keeping in mind both engines can use the same heads. Our guess is that the 347 will probably be less, but depending on how serious you plan to get, a 351W swap could be equal to, or less than, the cost of a truly serious 347.

    i found it on the 50mustang and super fords website i believe