Boat

289 - 351 cid Small Block Performance
Comechero65
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:37 pm
Location: Santa Clara, Ca

Re: Boat

Post by Comechero65 »

Ford changed the firing order to reduce the load on the front rod journal.
Ron
Image

popscomet
Posts: 9685
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:19 pm
Location: Jacksonville, Arkansas

Re: Boat

Post by popscomet »

Comechero65 wrote:Ford changed the firing order to reduce the load on the front rod journal.
Ron
.........10-4............ :D
Image
pop/glenda

User avatar
poboyjo65
Moderator
Posts: 7025
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:40 pm
Location: Camden, Tenn.

Re: Boat

Post by poboyjo65 »

popscomet wrote:
poboyjo65 wrote:
Lip Ripper wrote:Firing order depends on the cam. A lot of performance cam's for 289/302's use the 351W firing order.
The thumper cam from comp that I'm using has a 351w firing order.
do you know why??
it fits a 351w but can be used in a 302 also. Is that what you meant Pop?
Image
Johno

popscomet
Posts: 9685
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:19 pm
Location: Jacksonville, Arkansas

Re: Boat

Post by popscomet »

yes and no.......it was mainly to lighten the load on the crank,,,,,,
Image
pop/glenda

popscomet
Posts: 9685
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:19 pm
Location: Jacksonville, Arkansas

Re: Boat

Post by popscomet »

popscomet wrote:yes and no.......it was mainly to lighten the load on the crank,,,,,,
let me resay that ,,the W CAM CAN BE PUT IN A 302 OR A 289
Image
pop/glenda

User avatar
poboyjo65
Moderator
Posts: 7025
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:40 pm
Location: Camden, Tenn.

Re: Boat

Post by poboyjo65 »

I've heard all that about the crank flex but what I'm saying is in my case it was so that comp cam could save money by selling same cam for both engines. :wink:
Image
Johno

popscomet
Posts: 9685
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:19 pm
Location: Jacksonville, Arkansas

Re: Boat

Post by popscomet »

poboyjo65 wrote:I've heard all that about the crank flex but what I'm saying is in my case it was so that comp cam could save money by selling same cam for both engines. :wink:
THE WAY I SEE IT ,IF it wasn't for lighten the load on the throw,the CAM MAKERS could have left them alone...besides I read many yrs ago why ford did it.......it might be a money thing but I really don't know......think of the load when 1 and 5 fire almost together
Image
pop/glenda

Comechero65
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:37 pm
Location: Santa Clara, Ca

Re: Boat

Post by Comechero65 »

What I read was cyl 1 & 5 were firing so close together it was speeding up failures on that journal or accelerated wear was why they changed it. That's all I know.
Ron
Image

CALIFORNIA CALIENTE
Posts: 5933
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:57 am
Location: Camarillo,California

Re: Boat

Post by CALIFORNIA CALIENTE »

I have been racing SBFs for way too long,NEVER had a crank or bearing failure with 15426378 FO!! When I built my first 351W,used a COMPCAMS cam that was ground to the early FO,365,000 miles later,never had a crank or bearing issue.My 418" Windsor has a Crane Cam ground with the early FO,NO issues!! I heard FoMoCo did it for smog reasons,NO proof though!!I do have cams in the wagon and the Cougar that are ground with late FO,they all seem to run fine!!! JMO , ROY.
Real Racecars have 3 pedals
Image

popscomet
Posts: 9685
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 11:19 pm
Location: Jacksonville, Arkansas

Re: Boat

Post by popscomet »

THAT ALSO GOES FOR POP,all my stuff runs plenty good always have ,,fo has never been in play,,it is what it is ...of course POP don't have extra high hp ,but they all run good and mostly have for several yrs
Image
pop/glenda

Post Reply