Видео

4v Cleveland any good books there's alot of conflicting information on this engine.

yep ! they don't drain the heads quick enough and they can pump the whole sump into the heads at constant high rpm

Hey mate I think they only do it on the bottom of Exaust side to get the gases away faster

take that he said.

Good video i just cleaned casting dags and bumps on my VN heads in the ports, Got neway cutters, what do you recommend the 45deg seat in/ex width to be on a street engine? Thanks

I would be more interested in the port velocity than the CFM #.

25 min of dribble could have been condensed to 5 or 6 min. With a workshop like looking like that it doesn't look very professional. Then there is the forgotten fact that oil is draining back through the drain backs all the time. Big sumps are a must, but port matching the oil return holes in the head, gasket and block are equally important.

Great video, save me a lot of time. After removing the left valve cover, I noticed a pool of oil at the back of the head. I was about ready to pull the head off. Thinking the oil return was plug up. Yours was the only video that address this issue that I could fine, and it help me out immensely. Thanks

So a black top with the black top pistons and the silver top conrods Wil work nice

Hi wat fly wheel is lighter? And can I make my conrods lighter at a enjineering shop and the bottem must be balanced rite?

I had a friend back in the day who had a Ranchero with a 351C 4 barrel carb and even though it was a kickass great running engine it always had oiling problems even in great shape at 56,000 miles, cams wearing out, high oil temps etc etc. no one ever figured it out in his case.

My closed chamber epoxied 4Vs flowed IN at 0600" lift 321 CFM EX 219 CFM

63 yr old die hard Ford guy and Master ASE that always ran an extra qt of oil in the pan. It's only to much when it's off but as soon as the engine starts bingo bongo.

Hi Buddy, i thought this may be interesting and it was just a little bit. I didnt watch it all sorry. i dont have 20 mins to spend on something like this. Im a bit oposed to ARP drive shafts as i beleive they are too stiff and shockload the distributor drive gear. The 5/16 OE type shaft is, for just about all appications, a prolem free oil pump drive solution. If it does fail then its not becuse it wasnt strong enough or good enough in any way, it was something else that caused its demise. You have not convinced me to use ARP shafts.

The 351C was the most handicapped engine in PS racing for a reason. Bob Glidden dominated the field with his Cleveland powered 78 Fairmont and never lost a round, race, or event. The 500 in³ rule was a result of the most badass pushrod smaller in³ engine at that time. Current NASCAR Ford heads still retain Cleveland DNA to this day.

Tip i have found over the past 45 years of spinning wrenches on cars. With all carbs. There is an low speed circuit. That supplies fuel from idle to around 1800 rpm all by itself. Limited by the idle feed restriction. Using a wide band air fuel ratio gauge look at no load on the engine 1,700 rpm. Are you at 14.7 A/F ratio. Continue up between 3,800 and 4,000 rpm how far off 14.7 are you.. At 1700 change the idle feed restrictions. Retest. At 3800 to 4000 change the primary main jets. After getting those both to 14.7 From idle. Open the primary throttle fast. If you get a backfire in the intake. Go to a larger pump discharge nozzle. Try again. Many holley performance carbs come with 0.031" idle feed restrictions that are just right for 330 cube engine. 347 to 360s need a 0.032 idle feed restriction. To tune the secondary mains must be done after the primary jetting is corrected. Do the secondary test close to wot but keeping the vacuum below the opening point of the power valve. Change the secondary main jets to get them dialed in. Then do a full WOT run to see if you need to increase the power valve restrictions.

They should have just put an oil pump in each head and used the valve covers as the sump and the bottom pump just puts it back into the heads like a dry sump system 😅

that area is a trashed out mess

why mess with these engines?They are not used by anyone in the US. Most dont even know what they are...

The big C didn't fail Bob Glidden.

Always errors?? Maybe you should have proven your theory before you published this video. Me? I’ll back Ford knew exactly what they were doing. The oiling “problem” only occurs on engines that sit at 7,000 plus rpm for long periods of time. I doubt that Ford had that as a design requirement when they designed their road car engine.

Sorry, I didn't realize you were passing on someone's material. I thought these were your ideas. I'll make a few contradictory statements in hopes that you'll search out what's right. Let's begin. Pressure is resistance to flow and they are directly related. The more pressure you have the more resistance to flow. The less pressure the less resistance to flow. So your statement ending at 3:42, "your pressure doesn't change....you just have more flow," is false. The oil clearances in the engine will determine the pressure reading you see. You stated that correctly. However, if flow is increased then pressure is decreased. Pressure being equal to resistance of flow. We'll start there.

Does any of this information transfer to the inverse such as a big block Chrysler head which has very bad flow characteristics?

For the record...Cleveland engines never failed at Motorsport...far from it...they were dominant for years.

Should have a radius entry to the port when testing.... either a radius plate or clay... not the sharp edge... 😉

nice video

Good thought experiment, thanks. I hadn’t thought about the restriction p Area but you may be onto something there. I do believe that the 4v heads were designed with high performance in mind,which is why they are a bit lacklustre at typical street trim and 351ci. They seem to work very well on 400+ inches. A couple of comments. Your CFM calculation overlooks the fact that the intake is only open on every second revolution, so the calculated CFM number is half of what you found. But on the other David Vizard teaches us that on a well built motor at peak torque the so-called 5th cycle actually brings in more air than the rest of the induction stroke. Anyway, I don’t think either f these points changes your conclusion.

I owned a 71 Boss 351. The factory forgot to install a thing called torque.

Some consideration on intake closing point is the quality of the fuel. If the cylinder goes into detonation because you have trapped too much fuel/air charge, and end up with a too high dynamic compression ratio, you cannot utilize the additional charge of a later intake closing. So the closing must be tailored to the fuel available.

Pretty good demonstration to watch. I’d like to see you do an L67 supercharged V6 head.

Hi it 's a nice video .i've got a 71 CLEVELAND with quench 4v heads with the 2.19 intake valves. do you think that the blue ls spring could do the trick replacing the stock spring with the cobra jet cam?

Why did you delete the block squirters? It's something that should be added.

Find all the info that you find is crap. The same info is in the ford performance book, tend to believe the book, sorry

Mate, excellent video for explaining the 4V concept to non-Cleveland people. I could see you struggling to communicate your innate understanding of the subject while on the fly, maybe you'd benefit from doing a script for it, so you have to time to articulate your thoughts? I share a lot of your views on the design principle behind the big port, but I'll add some points that I think are pertinent to the history and racing success of the design, as well as the reasoning why the concept became a dead-end. Now before all the Ford freaks out there start throwing tomatoes at me, I'll let you all know that I'm a Ford guy myself, however to know a marque well is to know its faults and where their ideas may have stemmed from (ie not necessarily from the company itself). In the mid 60s, Ford poached a number of engineers and managers from GM. This coincided with the Cleveland and 429/460 head design sharing some elements from GM engines: namely the Chev big block and Oldsmobile V8 (head design and timing cover/fuel pump respectively). So the ideas came with them. If you ask any BBC expert, they'll acknowledge that there are "good" and "bad" ports, where the equally-spaced, canted valve arrangement was adapted to siamesed runners on the intake manifold, presumably to keep the intake tracts all the same length from carb to valve. This may have achieved the desired objective, but created the aforementioned good and bad port situation. The bad ports shoot the intake charge towards the cylinder wall, the good ports have it pointing towards the spark plug (ie centre of the cylinder). There is a good 20 cfm difference between these ports, stock or ported, which means that this is a flaw that cannot be completely worked around. I would then argue, that due to the Cleveland's cylinder head bolt layout and pushrod location having to match that of the Windsor, that the port direction is actually like those of the "bad" ports in the big block Chev. Again, there is no working around this flaw, as (when viewed in plan view) the port opening starts roughly inline with the cylinder bore, then curves outwards towards the cylinder wall. This is the opposite to how the air really wants to flow, and granted, the canted valve helps turn the mixture back into the cylinder, but that's another turn (and loss of energy) that the mixture encounters. This is present in the 4V port, but more noticeable in the 2V. I think in hindsight, with such constraints put on the design, that Ford would have benefited with an extreme bias toward curving the mixture more gently into the middle of the cylinder, instead of having it heading completely in the wrong direction then trying to correct it right as it turns into the valve. Any thoughts on this?

The stock cleveland head flows near 300cfm. Nothing produced at time flows close in sb world.

Ford spent a lot of money designing the Cleveland engine.

draw-ing?

Just found your channel. I'm not far away from you and got Cleveland heads too . I've got lots of V6 mitsi heads I'd love to get flowed. All the same but different. There's no numbers anywhere comparing them on the same machine.

Ford large port 4v was for racing big rpm not for street use but homologate regultor of NASCAR etc brought them to public ,Ford's engineering knew exactly what they were doing and achieving they had more experience than average joe with a couple of vacuum cleaners ,drag racing ,le mans ,trans am ,canam ,nascar etc the list is longer than a flow bench

So if we close the ivc early does that mean we start it earl? Lengthen the exhaust duration? Tighten the centers? What would you summarize regarding valve events? Thanks for this insightful video

Richard Holdener compared all the muscle car engines of the 1970 era and the 351 Cleveland was at least 30 HP ahead of the competition. He also found the torque levels at low RPM were as good as the competition.. Ford definitely had the edge in horsepower and torque.. Sorry Chevy guys

During the mid to late 70's, we ran Cleveland power and found nothing responded compared to inline engines. Took a while to decide that no matter the camshaft, there was no effect until -- we decided, because what we had been doing came from the Monkey See-Monkey do. Steel billet cams were I think about 200 bucks(?). So a cast iron was 50-75 bucks(?). I talked with the grinder about trying 3 different grinds by spreading the lobe centers. We knew we'd get a couple two-three hits before the cam chipped out. This was something I had done on 4cyl engines to learn how they responded in dyno efforts. -- So, the first stick was the same grind with the lobes moved 2 out and then 2 more and 2 more. We saw the trend right off and each stick not only improved times but speed as well. The grinder got wound up too and suggested we pull duration out in steps, and it responded as well. So with a huge savings and plenty of magnets, we learned more about that engine compared to any other small block. At the end, 113 is where we got good results. It would really reach for the next gear compared to prior engin mods. -- So, we gained significant valve to piston clearance in which we picked up notable compression. It was finally fun seeing it wake up from simple working around camshafts. Erson Cams gave us the success and knew what we needed as we did the work. Don't doubt those boy's. At least during those years, they had our best grinds and cause and effect.

The 4V head was developed for Trans Am and was used on the Boss 302. This type of racing requires a high reving engine so the low end torque can suffer a bit but the top end will pull away from the competition. Bob Gliden stuffed the ports to get some of the low end back for drag racing as this is a different application. He also raised the intake and exhaust ports for a more direct line to the valve. On the exhaust side of the head is the worst restriction due to fitting the engine in between the shock towers of the Mustang. Cam timing and overlap is critical with the Cleveland canted valve design. If you run a cam design for inline valves you can lose some of the intake charge out the exhaust. For normal street use the smaller ports seem to work a bit better due to the increase in low end torque. For high rpm the big ports are the way to go and make sure the cam matches what you are trying to accomplish.

Basically the 335 series was a 385 series downsized with some additional upgrades. Port and chamber designs were similar.

blue for me,,,thanks

good stuff,,, wonder what swirl and tumble numbers they saw back then ? how much diffent did leaded fuel atomize then modern fuel etc

Although a bit of a technicallity, the engine does not draw fuel air mixture into the engine. The air pump (engine) creates a low pressure area in the cylinder and the outside atmospheric pressure "pushes" the mixture into the engine. The ability of the mixture to be pushed into the engine is controlled by the intake tract, (port sizes, shapes, valve opening, ect). This is simply referred to as volumetric efficiency or VE. The mixture is never streched it increases in velocity due to the fact that all the air available is pressed into a smaller orifice called the intake tract. The easier the mixture will flow through the intake tract the better the volumetric efficiency or max VE. This explains why when the throttle blades are closed low pressure reading below the blades is higher because the engine created low pressure area is u able to be filled as easily when the intake tract is closed to outside pressure.

I was born in '69, same year ford released the boss 351 mustang, and can confirm that ,dispite my reluctance to believe it, that was 55 years ago.

The Ford engineers knew exactly what they were doing. The problem is the average person doesn't and they can't understand what the Ford engineers had in mind. There is a epidemic of "Chevy on the brain" in V8 engine circles and that is a fatal error when working with a Cleveland. You must get into the mind of the Ford engineers and ignore what is done with other engines. As far as 4v ports, look up Bernoulli's principles of diverging and converging passages.

NASCAR HEADS.. Wide Open Throttle, made to beat the Hemi. The Aussie 2v's are the ultimate production street head for in the Era.