Track Boss manifold for 302 w/351-C 2-V heads

[Doug S.]

I have always thought Ford's Boss 302 motor was a great idea, and I think that one would be very usable in a GT40 replica. Unfortunately, they are few and far between and very expen$ive. However, there was a company (it was called B&A Ford) that manufactured a special intake manifold that would allow one to adapt small port 351 Cleveland 2-V cyllinder heads to a standard Ford 302 block. According to this thread on a different forum http://www.darkhorseracing.net/clevor_head_mod.htm B&A Ford is no longer in business, but Bush Performance is suggested as a source for this manifold. As Murphy's law would have it, the number listed in the thread seems to be a fax number /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif

Does anyone know of a source for this manifold? The darkhorseracing thread is about adapting the Cleveland heads to a 351 W, but I know that there was a manifold to adapt to a 302 also.

Just think--a Dart alloy block with 4 bolt mains and some Edelbrock aluminum Cleveland heads with one of these manifolds--an all aluminum Boss 302! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Thanks for any help you might be able to provide. My block (no, not the Dart, darnit) is line bored and ready for decisions re: rotating assembly, so I must decide between a Windsor head and these Cleveland heads (small ports, larger canted valves) before I order pistons. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif

YD,E/PNB

 

[Ron Earp]

Just get some aftermakret Windsor heads and call it a day. They'll flow better, need no monkey business to fit, and you'll be very happy.

I personally like AFR heads, but Edelbrock Victor Jrs are very nice too, as well as some other brands.

R

 

[Sandy]

Unless you really want the cleavand style heads their are some many really good aftermarket heads that work really good and don't require all the odd parts like manifolds, etc. AFR's, Edelbrock, Canfield, Brodix heads are much better choice and usually can retain stock intakes and exhausts. I think Jon Kaase had some articles a while back on some of the problems with the huge ports on some of the ford heads that just didn't work, which is a common story for many of the cleavland heads. Polk around on the web and you will find loads of stuff on the 351C style head and how much work people have to do to fix them up. They do look cool however. I think also Kaase has some canted valve heads that he sells via Jegs for the windsor SBF, very interesting stuff.

You could also just bit the bullet and go the Yates route, they have more available intakes but are really expensive. Unless you get a good used set. A few folks out here have them on things (injected and carb).

Sandy

 

[John Fitzpatrick]

Another thing to consider is that the 351C was designed around a hydraulic cam, thus no valve adjustability. To use a solid lifter cam you have to do some serious milling and drilling on the heads, so I'd go with Ron's suggestion of 351W heads. If you do, be sure you use the Windsor manifold gaskets or you'll have a water leak.
John

 

[Doug S.]

John, you have a PM.

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

Well, now, I sure do come up with some wierd ones, don't I--first a supercharger and now this! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

I have checked out the AFR 185's and like them, but for some reason this method of creating a "small Cleveland" has always intrigued me. It seemed like a way to get a Cleveland type motor into one of the GT40 kits and still have room to see out the back window. The Edelbrock RPM 351 C heads with a Track Boss manifold seemed like a great way go get the best of both worlds--the small port size of the 351 C 2-V ports on the Edelbrocks would give good port velocity to help fill those smallish cylinders at high RPM's and the canted, larger valves would increase exhaust flow (not to mention that the Cleveland has a unique sound to it, and I'd love to hear what that would sound like through a 180* BOS exhaust system). Don't I wish I had bought an intake from B&A Ford when they were in business!

I've been a Cleveland fan ever since I had one in a 1972 full size Ford, and once that Ford rusted away I shoehorned that Cleveland into the engine bay of an early Maverick (with understandably twitchy handling but incredible straight line accelleration). I still have that Cleveland in my garage waiting for an appropriate project.

All along I have been assuming that the Cleveland is too large to fit well into the engine bay of one of our GT40's, but you know what they say about "assuming". Maybe I just made one of myself? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif I did a forum search for 351-C (haven't tried "Cleveland" yet--DUH!) and came up with nothing but this thread. Does anyone know of an attempt to use the Cleveland in one of these cars? I guess if a 351 W will fit, a 351 C should, but......

Still, this combination continues to intrigue me. I may end up going with the AFR's, but if anyone knows of a source for this manifold, or has any experience with this combination, I would appreciate some info/input.

Thanks, guys. Keep the suggestions and comments coming, OK? I'm locked into nothing yet and the input from this forum has already helped me avoid one mistake--maybe I'll be convinced this is yet another!

YD,E./PNB

 

[Mike Dozier]

The Windsor will make as much power for less money
and far less headache. Use the money you saved on a
set of Webers or stack injection. That's cooler still !

MikeD

 

[Jac Mac]

Hi Doug,
I had better start this with IMHO. First let me say that Ron & Sandy are correct with regard to staying with an all windsor configuration. The multiple options available in the market today make this a no brainer. Add the fact that the headers will be much easier to fabricate and fit is just more icing on the cake.
However if you must put yourself thru this torture of creating a small port Boss 302 here are some options you may not be aware of. (If you are scared of sending your hard earned US$ down under dont read any further) Check this out, www.chiheads.com these folk have everything you need. If you are a real purist and require an all cast iron small port Boss use the Australian Cleveland 302 closed chamber cyl heads(out of production-avail S/H) 61cc chamber- 2v port configuration-will require rocker boss machining or bolt on rockers(5/16 stud- Yella Terra).

Cheers Jack

 

[Dan Haynes]

KEEP THE FAITH!!!

I think this combo would kick arse and take names. The BOSS 302 or 351C 4V heads are awesome. The 2V's aren't bad, but the Aussie version is better. The 4V heads flow amazing numbers, and will give the aftermarket heads a run for their money. I have the flow numbers around here somewhere. But, off the top of my head I seem to recall 267 on the intake and 187 on the exhaust. Bone stock. No porting or anything. Think out side the box. This could be fun! I know several old school Boss head experts. They can do crazy things with the heads. Ford even shows you how to get over 350 CFM on the intakes.

My boss 302 made 440 HP on the dyno with a solid flat tappet, Holley carb, and BONE STOCK un-ported cast iron Ford heads.

Yes, the engine really comes alive at higher RPM. And those who are timid and don't want to run above 5500 RPM will be disapointed. Try this.... One of the lads I run with ran a 347 stroker with 10:1 compression. The engine was awesome. A 347 with 351C heads and a stock Boss 302 intake or the Street or Track Boss intake will really run. This same guy's brother has an Aussie 2V headed motor with the track boss intake. It is a beast. My 351C with stone stock heads made 500HP by the way. So close to 500 would be possible with the 347, as my 302 makes the same HP/cubic inch. (secret cam, don't tell)

But there are other very cool intakes as well. Not cheap, but what worth doing is? I have a Mini-Plenum, and a Holman-Moody 4V as well as a twin dominator intake. They made Webbers, fuel injection, several versions of twin 4V intakes, as well as a low profile roush single plane. Check out my website for pics of some.

I have the number for the B&A guy in Ft Smith. I'll have to go find it.

Boss = Good

It sounds to me like you want to be a little different.

Dan

 

[Dave Wharran]

Here ya go Doug. An ERA with a 351C.
Aluminum heads weren't available when I did my engine but are now on my 'to do' list.
The engine is tight but fits. The bottom of the oil pan can be no lower than 7" below the crank centerline. A 157 tooth flywheel must be used. Keep the intake and throttle bodies as low as possible. I use a -2 ZF set up in the GT40 configuration with the crank CL below the axle CL.

The Cleveland is probably a bit harder to fit, and is harder to find performance goodies for, but I got it for nothing...
I'm quite happy with it for the way I use the car.
Without the air cleaner, the throttle bodies are well below the rear window view.

Dave

 

[Sandy]

The problem with the cleveland (I'll eventually learn how to spell it!) heads is not that they don't flow, is that they have bad port velocity and that kills them in many areas. They are pretty old design, the total flow is one aspect, I think that is what Kaase was saying in some of his articles that the port velocity in some of the ford big port heads were a problem. (Don't know about the ausie heads) Also really depends on what your hp target is, for example a 302 with big heads will not have any bottom end. Years ago my cousin had a 1969 Stock Boss 302 and it was a really crappy driving car went OK, but nothing seemed like it really did anything to wow me. He now has a 65' GT350 with the stock hipo 289 and aside from the obvious weight difference the 289 works much better.

Don't let me sour your ideas, I do like odd combinations on a couple of projects one I have a 66' VSE cobra with an aluminum 454 chevy, on another I have a Boss 351C that we trying to dump into my cousins 75' Bronco for the cool factor but it got to be a big hassle (pan, headers, etc) and I finally gave him a 302 with 351W heads from an old car that I had. The main thing is to have parts to do what you want, and likely if the place is out of business, will be a problem to gather unless you go the Aussie route.

Lot's of fun stuff to do once you get going on your project (and that is the main thing!). To me nothing sounds better then a SBF with bundle of snakes... well I do take that back, 917's did but not much IMO .

Lot's of interesting power plants in folks cars here. Polk around with search and in the engine forum you will see some interesting things in case you do want to try some odd combinations you will find someone with it

Have a good one!

Sandy

 

[Jim S.]

Doug,

Run the Jon Kaase head if your sold on the cleveland! It's a canted valve head, which gives you all those benefits: valve opens away from the cylinder walls, ability to have better port configuration because of this, so on and so forth.
Jeg's sell this with Kaase. The best part is it retains stock windsor head exhaust port gasket location and intake port gasket location. That said, I think this head is best suited for at least 331 to 351 cubes. Here's a link to a good article on these heads. Worth while reading. http://www.jegs.com/photos/jegskaase.html

Good luck! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Newbie from Oz here fellas so I better start with IMHO.

The site posted by jack is right on the ticket. Chi make a 3V head which is one very nice head which combines the best of both worlds....port velocity (for low torque) together with a top end approaching that of a 4v head. They also have some very nice manifolds.

They claim "Our world renowned 3V heads have set the benchmark by which all other Cleveland heads are judged. Combining the very best attributes of the 4V head, and with the air speed of the its smaller counterpart the 2V head, they have no equal in performance when combined with our matching Engine Masters Series manifolds."

How about 515 Hp & 470 Ft/lbs on pump gas from a 351 windsor block at 6500rpm with a relatively mild cam...see here: http://www.chiheads.com/our_results.php

My cobra is being rebuild and will feature a 392W with AFR 185's. My concern with this is that I'll have so much low down torque that most it will just melt the tyres. Ok, thats controlled with my right foot but the point I make is that there is ample torque with the small blocks in light cobras or GT40's.

Note that 515hp and 470 ft/lbs is approx what the 392w will give me. If I had my time over again I'd go a dart sportman 8.2 block bored 4.185, 3.25 stroke, 5.4 rods giving me 358ci with these 3v heads....thats 500+ hp with tyre melting torque but with a top end that would blow the 392 to the weeds.

Not meant to offend any-one or seem like a smarty but I've seen these things in action and they really are genuine in their claims...They are simply amazing heads.

Cheers and thanks for the opportunity.

( i've been dreaming of a RF40 for the past two years....now, I've gotta look alsewhere)

 

[Doug S.]

Thanks to all who responded.

Dave, it is nice to know that the 351 C will fit into at least one of the GT40 replicas. I have a fondness for the Cleveland. If you are planning on changing heads, you might want to check out the issue of port size. If you are using one of the 351 Boss or HO Clevelands with the 4-V size ports, the Edelbrock heads might not be a good choice--the literature suggests they match well with the 2-V heads. I've never seen a Weber setup for the 2-V heads, so if you want to change to aluminum heads and keep your Webers (and who wouldn't want to keep those beautiful objects de' arte?) check out the chiheads link in the post by Jack (two above yours). Apparently the Aussies are still very fond of the Cleveland design and as I read the chiheads info they make a 4V port aluminum head. As far as I know, the supply of aluminum 4-V Cleveland heads made here in the USA is pretty slim, if any at all. BTW--that is one beautiful build job you have there!!!

Jim--the Kase canted valve heads really interest me--locally available, canted valves, good compatability with standard headers and manifolds--that might just be the answer to this concept--the benefits of the canted valve Cleveland heads with no parts match problems. The valves in the Cleveland 2-V heads are a bit bigger, but all in all the information I read leads me to believe these heads can make more power than I want--this will be my first build and I want to put together a car I can drive safely--everyone says 300 to 400 horsepower is a good target for a first time builder/driver. The only thing I dislike about the Jegs/Kaase heads is the unique valve covers--maybe somebody will offer a different option someday.

And to Les and Jack, those animals from Down Under--those chiheads look awesome! At first I thought the 3V designation meant they had found a way to get 3 valves into the combustion chamber, but of course that was folly! At some point I think the Cleveland is in for a build, but for the GT40 I'm going to stick with a 302, and by all reports it takes a stroker 302 to really use the capacity of the chiheads. I want to retain the stock stroke so I can get a high rev limit. Your chiheads would be choice #1 for the Cleveland build, that's for sure--a 351 should have enough CID to make good use of those incredible flow numbers! Check out the information on the jegs link that Jim provided if you are interested in how we are trying to overcome the Windsor's limitations on this side of the pond.

Thank goodness for this forum (and a huge thanks to all who responded, too)! At least I know I can put together something out of the ordinary (Dan was right--I've been a little different all my life and as I approach retirement I see little benefit to changing now).

Gotta go now--I'm burning daylight and I have decisions to make. Once I get a good start on the project I'll post a builder's thread. 'Till then, if there are any more who would like to add their /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/twocents.gif worth, please feel free to do so. One thing, though--if the old saying "A penny for your thoughts" is appropriate here, where does the other 1 cent go??? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/lol.gif

YD,E./PNB

 

[Neal]

As an aside there was a fellow that use to post on the board that had a Safir chassis with a Cleveland and a cross boss intake, autolite carb. Vintage stuff. Stay with it!

 

[StuartB]

Dave, every time a see any of that set of pictures of your Cleveland ERA I've a good idea of how I want mine to turn out in the end, that's a beaut' mate.
I've also got a 351C sitting here (as well as the 302) and it's still a tricky one to call, the head says 302 and the heart says Cleveland.
The manifold I have is an old Hilborn Boss 302 mechanical injection that's been converted to EFI, this had previously been split and has an extra plate to allow it to fit a Cleveland, the cutting down the middle of these Hilborn 302 Boss manifolds was so popular at one point it was even a service offered by Hilborn themselves.
My thinking was that this Hilborn manifold combined with a fully sequential injection system should overcome the old problems associated with big ports/low revs.
It should even allow a cam that's biased toward the higher rev range and still retain a good degree of low speed drive and keep it useable as a street car.
The Hilborn ports are full Boss/4V size so the CHI heads look to be the ones to go with, but then the sensible head keeps saying put the 302 in and stop being so bloody greedy for the extra power!
I'll just have to make sure the chassis will take either engine and see how it goes.....

 

[Dave Wharran]

Thanks Stuart.
I am actually using 2V heads on the engine..open chambered at that. Domed pistons give somewhere around 10.2:1 compression.
I hadn't planned on the engine having to go much beyond 6K rpm for street driving, so stock crank, stock rods with ARP waveguide bolts, a mild Crane hydraulic roller cam, and the EFI give about 410 HP and 412 lb-ft...over 300 lb-ft at 3K rpm.
It's street manners are flawless. It will idle, litterly, thru towns in 5th gear doing 35mph.
All that torque makes for a fun street car, maybe not the best for track, but track use isn't why I built it.

I use an alumimum flywheel and the thing is on the rev limiter in fist and second gear before you can shift it.
ZF parts are EXPENSIVE, so the transaxle doesn't get abused.

The 351C dwarfs a 302 (physical size) when setting next to it.
We reached the conclusion that 1/8" clearance between the Cleveland engine and anything that comes close to it, is wonderful.
Many custom parts to make it fit in the ERA chassis.

Would I use a Cleveland again? Probably. I like something a little different and challenging.
I would like to put aluminum heads on it. Probably a 75* HP increase and a 50# weight reduction.

One of these days, maybe. It would be really hard to justify though based on the street use the car gets.
400+ HP is plenty enough to go fast with and get in trouble with.

Dave

 

[Jac Mac]

Hi Guys,
I see a lot of folk wanting to use the Cleveland production block here and am at a loss to understand why. The production block has two major weakness's when trying to extract more power: the main oil gallery system and the tendency to crack cyl walls. If you must have a cleveland at least use the Ford Sportsman 9.2" deck block with the windsor style oiling and cyl casting design. This way all your cleveland manifolds, heads, will still work ( You will have to block the water holes at each end of the heads on the deck face-- I just take the water out of the heads on the front face on each bank into a swirl pot ) You will also need a windsor style sump and timing cover.
If the clever boys at Ford in the late 60's could have got together and built the 351W in BOSS302 format( steel crank/4 bolt main/ 2.750" main dia) chev wouldnt have seem them for dust. Instead we got years of guys screwing set screws into blocks & head's to stop flex in cyl walls etc, completely redesigned oil systems, bleed lines out of cyl heads to prevent air locks, and GKWE to "fix" problems inherent in the basic engine design.
The message is simple: use a Windsor (or aftermarket version ) as the basis for your short block assy, fit your favorite head / crank /rod / piston combo in it and you will be a much happier ford owner.
Cheers Jack. (ps I was Grumpy when I started typing this ,I feel better now ).

 

[Doug S.]

Well, now, Dave---you definitely have my attention! What brand of EFI is that? Where, pray tell, did you source that? In my ignorance I thought those were Webers, but now that you mention EFI I'm all ears!

Is it made specifically to fit the port size of the 2-V heads? I realize it's not related to the topic I originally posted /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/offtopic.gif but I sure would like to know more about the system!

I admire your tenacity in getting that Cleveland into the ERA. I'll still be going with the 302 block, mainly b/c I don't want to have to fab custom pieces to make my first build fit, but any of us who love the smooth, torquish nature of the Cleveland will only drool about the way EFI will make it even better!

More, please............ /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/flehan.gif

Yd,E./PNB

 

[Dan Haynes]

Doug...

If you would eloborate on your intended use of the car, I would offer some more insight. The Cleveland engine does indeed have issues, and I would NOT use it for a track car. I built many 351C's for the track and almost always had problems. mainly with the oil system. But, I did crack a few cylinder walls.

I have some definite opinions, born out of 10+ years with racing a Cleveland. I now run the Boss 302 with a Motorsports R-302 block.

The original question was asking if the Cleveland style head is any good. To that I stand firm with resounding yes. Your intake idea sounds promising.

Dan