I'm looking for a new/used truck and after hearing about all the wonderful 5.4 oil leak problems I'm thinking good old 351. Did they ever offer the 351 in the new body style F150? I'd love to get a 351 and a 5spd in a supercab 2x4 or 4x4, did they make such a beast? How about the 5.4 w/ a 5spd, was that ever an option?

 

The last year of the 351 was the old body style in 1996. I don't think the 5.4 was ever offered in the F150 with a 5 speed. I am not sure about the F250 LD or the Superduties.

------------------

97 F150 Lariat 4X4 Ext. Cab. 5.4, AT, Tow Pkg, bedliner, white/grey 2tone w/ grey leather, Fact. CD changer, Gibson Side Swept, K&N, Bosch Platinum +4's,Michelin LTX 265/70 16, S/D Triton V8 emblems, Both doors cracked, Piston slap quieted by Mobile One & Slick 50 Synthetic.

 

Correct, You can get a 5.4L/5-speed in a Superduty, 4x4 or 4x2, but not in the F-150. Sucks too! Also, you couldn't get a 351 with a manual in the older F-150's. Just a auto.

------------------
toydestroyer1@yahoo.com

"Sleeper"


1993 F-150 302/e4od/355 Limited slip. dual exhuast w/o mufflers, 2 1/4" pipes, Echo Tips, Summit Racing headers, accel plugs/wires(8.6mm)/rotor/cap, hypertech powermodule, 4 degree advance,Blaster Coil,MSd 6A Ignition, TPS Mod,hopefully roller rockers in the future,possible 4:10 gear swap 5% dark tint, Ford Bed mat, Bundy Chrome Drop bumper, Wrap-around bug deflector, 2-tone tan/brown. Alpine cd player and Pioneer speakers, with tweeters No room for anything else.

1989 F-150 XLT 4x4 Future 300hp engine build!

2000 Superduty CrewCab v-10, auto,2wd.



[This message has been edited by Pastmaster (edited 02-15-2000).]

 

Why would you want a 351 (5.8L) engine? You'll be hard pressed to find an engine that sucks down more gas per horsepower than the 5.8L.

Unless you plan on doing heavy duty towing and have lots of gas money, the 5.0L (302) was a much better engine for everyday driving.

The F-150 with the 4.6L engine was better than the old one with the 5.8L. The 4.6L is faster and cheaper running. The 5.4L is a great engine. Sure, it's got some problems, but if you buy new, Ford will fix them.



[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited 02-15-2000).]

 

After seing FRPP's 351 crate engine for trucks I thought for sure they had offered these in 97' based on what they wrote. Apparently they were put into the old body styles in 96' and were left over in 97'. Reason I want it is a) I can work on it, b) leftover Mustang parts = cheap hp (aluminum heads) and c) Torque! Why would you say a 4.6 is a better engine than the 5.7? Dont quite understand that.. Yes it would be used for towing my Mustang + trailer (5100lbs). I currently do use a 88' F150 w/ a 302 (227K miles on the original engine!) but its obviously very tired.

 

JerryK - Don't listen to these morons. The 351 is a excellent idea!

------------------
HotRodSix
'98 STX Flairside 4.2L
Best 1/4: 16.26 sec. @ 84.4 mph
Dyno: 180 rwhp / 228 ft-lb

 

Ford may have offered the 351 in '97. The F250 didn't switch to the new body style until '98. So, it's possible that a '97 F250 could have a 351. I think someone on the board here has one with a 460??

 

The 351W was offered in the Heavy Duty F250 and 350 in '97 and a lot of them are out there. The Heavy Duty series was replaced by the Super Duty Series. There were no '97 F150s with a 351W.

BTW, these engines are rated at about 13MPG in town and 17 on the highway. 302s get about 2-3 MPG better on the highway. If you want a 351, get it. Its a good engine.

------------------
2000 Expedition XLT, 5.4, 3.31 Rear axle, 4R100, no other mods

 

Hey, don't get me wrong. I've had two 5.8L engines in the past and they're good engines, BUT they're gas hogs!

When towing, mpg drops to 8 mpg or less!!! If you go with the 5.8L, make sure you have two gas tanks in that truck. It needs them both. Oh yeah, the other thing is the 5.8L just hated 87 octane.

The 5.4L in the '99 I have now is a far superior engine. It's cheaper running, has more power, quieter, smoother, and seems just as dependable. In the two years I had the 4.6L in a '97, I never had a problem and it towed the same load as the 5.8L did without a problem.


[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited 02-16-2000).]

 

Tenderpaw is right on the bucket! The Heavy-duties were made, by empting the parts buckets at FOMOCO to provide for the Superduties. PS. The superduties did come out in the spring of 98. My dad had 19 302's and about 4 351s (none got over 13 ever, unloaded too), and they are BUILT for towing, and hauling. The 351 only had 5-10 hp more than the 302, but it had about 40-50 ft/lbs more than the 302 in torque. The 351 is a Excellent engine. Just not impressive.

I haven't seen a newer Mustang with a 351. I don't believe I have ever seen one with a Windsor either, just a cleveland (hi-po 351),

I am not doubting this is possible, but a 97 4.6L has 290 ft/lbs where a 351 had 330. There is a 40ft/lbs difference there. I would think, in my own view, it would be noticable! Also, pre-99 5.4L's only had 330 ft/lbs, same as a 351?



[This message has been edited by Pastmaster (edited 02-16-2000).]

 

Now we are getting somewhere.. I like it! I'm not sure it was clear to PastMaster, couldn't tell from your reply if you understand or not but 302 and 351 Windsor heads are the same. I can score a pretty cheap set of Edelbrock Aluminum heads and get a used Edelbrock truck intake upper and have the lower ported, JBA headers and real dual exhaust and I'm done. I know its a gas hog, my 302 gets 11mph, its no big deal. 1 more question: the Heavy Duties ARE the new body style right..

 

I am beginning the process of building a 302 or a 351 for my 89 F-150. It too has a 302, with about 140k miles. Trucks engine deffinantly is not worn out. But I am planning for a lift and larger tires. I am ditching efi, in place of a carb. I can't do anything with the SD efi, and a MA conversion is about 600 bucks, I can switch to a carb for at least 1/2.

NO! Heavy duties were only in 1997 models, F-250 and F-250's. Now they are called Superduties.

Yes, I Windsor heads will work on a 302, also Cleveland heads will work as well. I guess that make sense when they are the same block.

Good idea. MAKE SURE if you do get the older style
(1994-1996) that it is a MA system, otherwise you will not be able to do conversions with the computer. Although, heads probably won't make a difference.

[This message has been edited by Pastmaster (edited 02-16-2000).]

 

PastMaster, I've done the MA conversion before, still have the kit. Email if your interested: its for a 5spd V8 SD to MA conversion. Looks like the 351 in 97' only came in the 96 and earlier style truck.. oh well, so much for that idea. Thanks for all the input!

 

I don't doubt the power specs that was cited. I know the old 5.8L could really pull. Hell, I pulled out a broken down Chevy dually 3500 AND the 5 ton boat/trailer that it was hooked up to up a boat ramp once. The 5.8L didn't even break a sweat.

For some reason, on the other hand, the 5.8L just seemed slow on the highway. I don't remember the weight difference in the old and new body styles, but that may have something to do with my perception of seat-of-the-pants power evaluation.

I know, however, that a properly setup 4.6L is actually mighty impressive for such a small engine. Everybody who ever drove my old '97 thought it had the 5.4L in it. It had the smallest stock wheels a 4x4 came with and that probably had a lot to do with it's towing ability.

I suppose it all boils down to how you set the truck up to do what tasks you have for it.

One thing that I am certain of. The 351W engine was a GAS HOG!!

 

351? Gas hog? Get a Ranger. Ford made the 351W from '69 to '97, looks like if it was a bad engine it would've been discontinued. I've never heard of anyone buying a pickup because they wanted good fuel economy, I always surmised it was for work. Had a '74 Galaxie 500 with a 351W and FMX transmission. I could get 20 miles to a gallon, EASY, worst was 17 mpg and best was 21 mpg and that was with over 200,000 miles. Some gas hog.