The funniest thing about this video is how so many experts say that the 4V Cleveland head is rubbish. Too big, no velocity, no swirl.... but damn, it makes horsepower and torque
Yea, at 7800rpms! Till the block splits! 500hp, yea! The heads are too big for a street motor. Someone was producing closed chamber heads with the standard 2 barrel runners, but I never saw one. We just ran Windsors with 4" stroke and Victor Jr heads.
I'd have to look back to find them! We're talking 20 years ago! But, there are great Windsor heads available! It just so happens that a Victor Jr Windsorvhead happens to have almost the same flow numbers as the 4v Cleveland heads? The 3" mains take alot of oil, but it'll stay together if you make sure they get enough oil! 427 Dart block Windsors were awesome! But the lS motors came along! They were so cheap who cared how long the pos lasted! If I got back into it, I'd build a 427 Windsor using a Dart block! Whatever it did on a 250 shot, or 12 lbs of boost would be fine! Run the bastard 10 passes in one night! He's got 5 of them at the shop, but only one to night!
@@hayden6056 yea, but Victor Jr heads came along! They flow 274 cfm on the intake side! Guess what the 4v closed chamber Cleveland heads flowed! But, the ls motors came along! Finally a Chevy motor that didn't puke its guts out after 3 passes on a 250 shot! I'm still a Ford guy, but the ls motors are everywhere! It's like WW2 over, the numbers produced out numbered the casualties! Doesn't matter how many you can outrun, sooner or later you'll be looking at the guts off that thing! They got 3 motors sitting, and they run on crack cocaine!! That's why I quite drag racing! You can't run 3 times a week working by the hour when they're running buy the gram!! They got 5 motors sitting in the trailer! They don't care,they don't even drive!!
Love these engines, down here in Australia we got them right up to 1985. Tough as nails. We had an oddball de-stroked 302ci displacement Cleveland as well. The heads from those use the standard 2v ports (220cfm stock intake) and a 2.02/1.76 valve arrangement in a small, efficient, quench style chamber of 58cc capacity. Not bad factory heads for street use, they bump a 351C up to about 10.7:1 compression, just right for about 220 to 230@50 duration of cam and a four barrel. I love the Elgin E-907-P in these motors!
I want to see a 400 built. You could stroke a Cleveland, but the 351M/400 block has a taller deck height allowing longer rods that the short deck Cleveland.
The smog restrictions of the 70s were what really handicapped the 335 series engines and gave them the "pig" reputation. If you correct where they were de-tuned and put some decent parts in, it really wakes them up!! I've got a '79 351M that we turned into a 408 fire-breather
My '70 Mach 1 ran in the high 12's all day - the only mods were intake, ignition, exhaust and racing slicks! I carried one tire in the trunk and the other in the back seat - and changed 'em using the factory jack - (I still miss the smell of premium leaded exhaust)
I knew a guy that ran a Ford Anglia around a 1950's model. He had a 351C in it. Everyone thought it was modified a lot more than it was. Small car, small block, mid 70's, equaled a lot of unhappy big block owners. Lol.
It’s way too late now, but I would have loved to have seen this test with a Victor intake just before the tunnel ram. Thanks for the content. Just awesome for us Cleveland guys.
Nice to see all the appreciation for the Cleveland engine family. I like to think that this is what the Mopar 318 polysphere would have become if Chrysler didn't give up on it when they did.
The Chevy small block is the most popular engine for racing, but it's too bad more people don't realize the power of the Cleveland. From a design standpoint, the Cleveland is much better than the SBC. It was the engine that dominated Pro Stock from around 1973 until the NHRA changed the class to 500" inch big block motors. It was also hated by the NHRA because of this, so they made anything with Cleveland power carry the most weight. Been playing with Cleveland's for over 40 years now, and with all things being equal, they will totally destroy a small block Chevy. And with more modern aluminum cylinder heads, it just gets better yet!
There are two reasons the chevy is popular. 1. They made close to a billion of the orange lumps, you could blow one up every weekend and find another in a junkyard. Read that as cheap. 2. The magazines needed to sell ad space, and the sbc needs the aftermarket to make power. With so many engines made that need aftermarket parts the volume for them was immense. The trick was getting people to believe the sbc was a good engine. Compared to every other engine built by GM since 1954, its a pos with crap machining and design, its barely adequate and cheaply made. The reason they kept it in production so long is because it was a few pennies cheaper to produce, because of fewer machining operations and parts, all of which ads up when you're building a million engines every year. If you want to build big power with them, its going to cost you and the sbc is not going to live as long. The bbc is REALLY going to cost you and it needs the aftermarket too, both of them need RPM to make power, but the bbc has the drawback of its heavy valvetrain. Sure they can make power, but getting them to rev enough is $$$. Compared to the Cleveland, the sbc is really bad. I think the magazines started the rumor about Cleveland's not having any torque, because I knew that was false in the 1980s when I was running 4V Clevelands. There was no lack of bottom end with mine, they are the only small blocks to impress me. The fastest cars in my area were 4V powered Mustangs, and a Cuda with a 440 that had 11:1 compression and a tunnel ram with lots of lightening on the Cuda. That Cuda is still around and he drives it sometimes. My 4Vs scared all my chevy friends... the Pontiacs REALLY made them upset.
@@bethanyhaskiell9116 I agree entirely for replacing the sbc with an LS engine. The LS is superior to the sbc in almost every way. The Cleveland isn't that expensive to build, they are on par with Windsors, except you make a lot more power with the Cleveland using stock/reworked factory parts. Not having to buy aftermarket heads saves quite a bit of money. The ones Richard showed in this video were mild builds, there is a lot more potential in the Cleveland than this dynos show. Depending on what you want, the LS might not be the way to go, and certainly not the cheapest. Compared to the sbc its a good upgrade, but if you want torque that makes a bbc look pathetic so you can run a highway gear and an overdrive to get good mileage along with the power, the chevy is not the way to go, in any form. Most people think you need RPM to make power, and they also think drag cars need deep gears and big stall converters, but there are other ways to achieve the same things. Its a lot more fun driving some distance in a ten second car that has 3.08 gears than a ten second car with 4.56s. Its less expensive too. Torque is what moves vehicles, gears, high stalls, and RPM are merely trying to make up for a lack of torque. Its hard for guys who like small engines, or chevys in general, to grasp what I mean. Then you have potential. With an LS on 20psi you get what, 1000hp or so? The engine I am working on today will make roughly 2000hp/tq with 20psi. 7-10 psi will be around 1000, and the torque off idle will be ludicrous. Get it to hook and it will not only be faster, it will also live longer without spinning to 7500+.
@@SweatyFatGuyyou don't need rpm to make power in an LS it depends how you build it the reason you see people using rpm is it does the exact opposite of what you would think. It makes the motors live under boost. Revving high and making the next shift out of peak tq keeps boosted engines alive especially stock bottom end engines. If you shift at low rpm from say 2nd to 3rd in a 4l80 the next gear is more load and your shifting it into peak tq rpm that spike in cylinder pressure is what hurts them more than rpm. Rpm is only hard on rod bolts and valvetrain. The LS gen iv rods doesn't have rod bolt issues up to the mid 7000rpm range so all that leaves is valve train. Good set of dual springs and one piece pushrods help in that area.
Tq does move vehicles especially heavy ones but HP is just tq over a given amount of time (rpm). So in reality you can make 600ft lbs of tq at 5000rpm and 500ft lbs at 6000rpm. While the tq is lower at 6000rpm the engine is making power 3000times vs 2500times at pk tq. For mathematical purposes 2500x600 is 1,250,000. 3000x500 is 1,500,000.
Ford had a real winner with the 335 series engines. Sadly, the 351C, especially the high performance versions, died quickly in the U.S. thanks to rising gasoline prices and increasing regulations on fuel economy and emissions. The taller block 351M and 400 continued on in medium and full size cars and full size pickup trucks until around 1980, if I recall correctly. Unfortunately, Ford designed the 351M and 400 to be emissions friendly, low rpm, low performance engines. They can be built into performance engines, but they never were in stock form.
I do believe another difference between the M code and the Q code is that the block on the Q and BOSS blocks is a 4 bolt main cap. BOSS code was R? Plus if I remember I think the 4 bolt main blocks were cast with a slightly more nickel content. IMHO I think, as do you the 351 BOSS is the best small block of the day. I've built SBC. Nothing wrong with them. But we built them because stuff for them was plentiful and cheap. However, I had '73 Cougar XR7 with a Q code 351CJ and a C6. I went through the engine and did some normal fixes and spec upgrades and that thing ripped!
Did a 400, 410ci recently. TFS heads 313cfm, 10:1, .566 lift roller 224 dur @ .050" and RPM air gap thing makes all of 500hp. So much power left on the table too
Seems like the tunnel ram combo should have made more power with the cam used. I wonder if the heads were still holding it back. Yes, they were ported. However, it would be cool to see what a modern set of aftermarket heads (similar valve sizes, similar combustion chamber volume) would do. Who wants to guess? +40 hp? + 50hp?
@@HOTRODINATOR The 351 Cleveland came with huge intake and exhaust ports along with 2.19 intake valves and 1.71 exhaust valves. This when most small block high performance engines had 2.02 intake and 1.60 exhaust valves. The camshaft was very mild for such a performance engine compared to the small block Chevy which ran a camshaft with something like 240-245 degrees intake at .050 while the Cleveland ran a camshaft with something like 226 degrees of intake duration at . 050 inch camshaft lift. This head flows as much air as big blocks of the era and more than some. It flows nearly exactly what a stock 460 head flows on the intake and more than a 460 on its exhaust side. That's why your dad referred to it as a big block head. The best small block factory head to be developed from the factory. The 4 barrel heads are huge even the 2 barrel carburetor heads had bigger intake valves than the other small block factory heads at 2.05 valves .
Love the Cleveland engine.still have two 302's and a 351GT 4V engine.they were good stock but with a bit of technology they even beter,would not change them for anything
Always great to see Clevelands being represented! Im curious what kind of power can be made with 2bbl heads, which supposedly still have bigger flow than the hot Chevy heads! I know that big open chamber kinda ruins it for them, but surely that can be compensated for…. Maybe theyd be better for a supercharger?
@@B1Springfield Nice! Would be cool to see a test where they build the engine as far as they can with a relatively stock 2v head, maybe with some standard port work, just to see the potential. Those 2.05 intake valves are bigger than the “big” Chevy 2.02 head, and flow significantly better too! On paper, a 2v Cleveland head SHOULD be a pretty hot head!
Yes , I like the Cleveland engine as well . Got one built . I have a 72 Mustang and a 95 Cobra . I wanted to put it in my Cobra but a lot of people say the 72 . What should I do Richard ? The Cobra 's from Arizona and drives like a race car . The 72 is nice but not from Arizona .
I see the heads are closed chambers but what pistons were used to get 10.7:1? Were they dished at the top or flat and in the hole? Did it run on pump gas? I’ve gotten 11:1 on pump gas with flat tops at 0 deck. Want to do a stroker next
Be careful going past .030 on the production block. Especially for performance. Grandma car it’s ok. Really thin walls on the Cleveland blocks. Worse than Windsor’s
@@matthewnosal6893 yeah before I bought it I was doing the research… part of why I posted it here. No point in getting a 4 bolt main Cleveland for grandmas car right ?
I'm curious why some people build a "Clevor" (Cleveland 4V heads on a Windsor block) instead of just using a 351C engine. What are the advantages of going the "Clevor" route and how much cost does it add in modifications and special components (intake) to make it work?
So, is there any performance gain to be had for those of us that are still running the 351C 2V on the street that won't break the bank? 4V heads are hard to find and aluminum heads are expensive. What about just a cam change with the 2V induction? I know it's not the best set up, and the open chamber head engines have dismal compression, but I just use mine just to go to cruise ins with, and would like to gain some street performance. How about show us some numbers, Richard. Thanks!
I hear you. I’ve only had one car with a 351C 2V - 71 Cougar. I didn’t really do much other than dual exhaust with generic turbo mufflers and an open element air cleaner with either a double stacked stock elements or a taller one for a 454 Chevy. I think the motor was stock but high mileage. Still it ran better with just more intake and exhaust flow. I wanted to rebuild it with a better cam, maybe some light head work, 4V and headers but the car was such a rust bucket and I bought a new truck instead. I do remember back in the 80s there aluminum 4V intakes for Cleveland 2V heads, but they were pricy. Anyway, I suspect there were more 4V conversions back then than anyone remembers.
What is with the proliferation of that road apples "Ford engine blue"? I remember no Ford engines that came in that color. The dark blue, black, grey, red and the flathead green.
ANOTHER suggestion for a video: A UNIQUE cam test! Hypothesis 1: for some durations and engine speeds, lift matter little, but duration matters a lot, and vice versa. Hypothesis 2: for a blown motor, with less chance of excessive reversion, lift matters even less. Hypothesis 3: using revs and boost, one can get plenty of power without parts-breaking torque peaks which make the overall car build far more expensive overall than simply slapping on a blower and some mildly stiffer springs with a low-lift, low-stress but long-duration cam setup. Hypothesis 4: long duration with low lift carries off high-RPM power more than short-duration but high lift. Find the effects of overall lift, overall duration, and ramp speed of some relatively-similar cams. The "ramp speed" portion can be done by just swapping in some super-super-low-ratio rockers, normal rockers, and some super-duper-high-ratio rockers. Using three widely-varying cams timings (in duration) vary two parameters in each set of cams of the same duration: A) Cam set 1: super-low-lift B) Cam set 2: medium (kinda normal) lift C) Cam set 3: Super-high-lift that would even make a Pro Stock motor envious Then, do a test to find just how much valve acceleration off of closed affects lift, using super-duper-stiff springs in the Pro Stock region of open and seat pressures for experimental consistency. D) Cam 1: super-slow-opening that could easily be handled by the laziest valve springs E) Cam 2: Normal camshaft profile F) Cam 3: Super-fast opening just short of float with the super-stiff springs. Run all the cam configurations the same RPM from idle to 9000 RPM Graph results. What will be demonstrated is the answer to some questions: A) for a "low-RPM cam," is lift as important as timing? B) For all the cam timings, do either fast valve events or extra lift do the most good? C) Will cam timing enable good results at higher RPM with lower lift, enabling more people to run higher revs than is common now? It's one thing to move a valve 0.300" off the valve seat at 9000 RPM, but it takes MULTIPLES OF the force to start and stop them if they are a 0.900" lift valve event. Instead of a 900 pound seat pressure used for vaulting the valves WAY off the seats a la Pro Stock, one could get away with about 300 pounds of seat pressure, in theory. energy equals mass times velocity squared. D) Can an engine get away with far less lift if the engine is boosted, with a centrifugal supercharger, for example? If super-low-lift but long duration enables John Q. Public to run a 9,000 RPM motor with a blower where normal or high lift would make the valve motion just too crazy to control, then this opens up a world of horsepower for the guy off the street who doesn't have the money for a super-duper-built transmission, heavy-duty driveshaft, and Pro Stock-level valvetrain. John can just get some kinda-stiff but not ridiculous valve springs and maybe just some roller-fulcrum rockers and enjoy the fun. Test run one going through the low-lift set of cams with short, medium, and long duration, and also slow, normal, and super-fast ramp speeds: A) naturally aspirated B) boosted Test run two using normal-lift cams with short, medium, and long duration, also: A) natty B) blown Test run three does the same with super-duper-high-lift cams, also: A) natural B) blown During any of the three test runs, the exaggerated-low-ratio rockers, normal, and exaggerated-high-lift rockers can be tried also. This could provide reference-book-level material for amateur engine builders the world over.
Would smaller carbs have improved the part throttle, street driving qualities of the motor? As strong as that 408 turned out to be I still don't see it needing 1500 cfm to make the power it did.
Oh BTW, I'm not one of those Chevy guys that think Fords stink. 🤔 I do love Pontiacs, have a 1981 turbo Trans Am, 1979 Camato Berlinetta and a 1998 SVT Cobra.
Hey Richard how come the older small block stuff doesn’t respond too cam timing as well as the new stuff? Even with a good really set of heads it seems like they don’t respond nearly as well as the Ls stuff does
Hi Richard, I was wondering if you have tested/ compared an Edelbrock 7104 against a GM CFM aluminum intake?. Also is there a difference between the CFM 18, CFM 44 ect.??
@richardholdener1727 Been looking online for a different intake for the 305 HO engine in my "79 Berlinetta and show a few GM aluminum intakes they all have big letters behind the carb (CFM )
Ford really missed the boat on the ultimate Street fighter and that would be a 351 c with 2v heads and a boss Cam and a 780 Holley double pumper wow what a brute
@@richardholdener1727 the 4V heads may make more power on the dyno but in a 3,000 lb car going down the quarter mile the 2v head Cleveland gets there first and I'm talking from experience. The 2v heads need stiffer valve springs then stock, and they also need to be 1970 casting because of the combustion chamber is a tad bit smaller than all the years that followed
Gee,,Edelbrock worked out that the 4Vs were way too big. And useless! I have a Performer on my 400 Galaxie and the intakes are smaller than the 2V heads. About a Chev race port size!! 400? So what did you use, a 3" main M engine crank with odd rods.Turned down tp 2 650. 400M has an inch taller deck. The Aussie 302C head gives more compression with a better chamber and realistic intake & exhaust runners. 4Vs make good door stops. Or small boat anchors.
Richard i have a 408 stroker 351 Cleveland with trick flow 225 cnc ported runner head 72 cc chamber at 10.9/1 comp ratio. I am trying to source a trick Flow # TFS 516000-111 track heat Intake Manifold. which are currently not in production Can you recommend anybody that might have one.
World Record as in Guiness came out and officially recognized the world record? Or like an official Bonneville land speed record? or just an internet "world record"? That's a lot of power for a 400-inch motor (but I think 400-inch sprint car motors make more), I'm just trying to figure out the World Record thing.
10 years ago I looked at Guinness book and I couldn't find anything on it so I figured at the time no one was building 400m like that but it started out has a 351m and I went from there
One of my friends bought one in 71 when he got out of the Air Force, I have saw 2 more to date. His was silver with black trim . It is still on the road and looks good.
@@elmerfudpucker3204 The next step up in head design available to purchase for the American automobile buyer from the domestic market from that era was the Hemi, was it not?
I have run high 9s with a stock 87-93 5.0 short block with some decent tfs heads a solid flat tapper cam a 175 shot in a 2700 lb fox with my 200lb ass in it you can make anything fast with the effort
Same bore spacing and bolt pattern as a Windsor but much beefier block architecture and race oriented canted valve heads . Word has it that the front timing chain housing cast into the block and the head architecture is courtesy of Oldsmobile and Chev engineers the Ford crew poached for the design.
Make power with a 351 Cleveland by making it something it’s not. When you actually know how to make a 351 sing without all the bullshit, then il actually see if you really know anything and watch for more than 5 seconds.
For this engine being cancelled, i started hating the Ford motor company. My hatred has grown stronger over the years because Ford abandons their products and their customers. Poor business practices.
How did the bigger 460 pass smog? Cylinder heads were within the same patterning? And the 400? And the 351M? I just see Ford changing things just to obsolete stuff. Chrysler and GM did not follow this practice, hence...i still recommend their products. Ford is just a simple: no. Don't buy their products. Ford will obsolete them.
@@gdaytrees4728 The 351 C was released in September 1969. The Emission standard was changed for 1971. There was no point in building a engine aimed at Performance when emission standards limited power to ridiculous low rates. By 1973 power was as low as 200 hp for a 351 engine. To make 200 hp Ford didn't need the Huge ported of the Cleveland. The Chevy and Dodge engines were built early enough they had performance history, Ford had the 351 W engine to use as a low performance engine, this left no place for the Cleveland unless you were an Aozzy!
@@gdaytrees4728 They completely choked the 460 head by adding huge air injection castings in the exhaust. You could not even touch the exhaust valve with your finger. What would be the point of choking the Clevo like that? It's ridiculous to say they changed to screw their customers. Certainly not a reason to make a life long hater!
The best small block America ever made
Ford admitted after 1973 that the 351 Cleveland was a mistake.
And for longer, by Australia 🎉☺
Yes, thanks 'murica for sending all the casting stuff over here to OZ, i enjoyed it very much!
The funniest thing about this video is how so many experts say that the 4V Cleveland head is rubbish. Too big, no velocity, no swirl.... but damn, it makes horsepower and torque
Yea, at 7800rpms! Till the block splits! 500hp, yea! The heads are too big for a street motor. Someone was producing closed chamber heads with the standard 2 barrel runners, but I never saw one. We just ran Windsors with 4" stroke and Victor Jr heads.
I'd have to look back to find them! We're talking 20 years ago! But, there are great Windsor heads available! It just so happens that a Victor Jr Windsorvhead happens to have almost the same flow numbers as the 4v Cleveland heads? The 3" mains take alot of oil, but it'll stay together if you make sure they get enough oil! 427 Dart block Windsors were awesome! But the lS motors came along! They were so cheap who cared how long the pos lasted! If I got back into it, I'd build a 427 Windsor using a Dart block! Whatever it did on a 250 shot, or 12 lbs of boost would be fine! Run the bastard 10 passes in one night! He's got 5 of them at the shop, but only one to night!
Aussie 2v heads with 4v valves and cleaned up casting marks are a great street combo.
@@hayden6056 yea, but Victor Jr heads came along! They flow 274 cfm on the intake side! Guess what the 4v closed chamber Cleveland heads flowed! But, the ls motors came along! Finally a Chevy motor that didn't puke its guts out after 3 passes on a 250 shot! I'm still a Ford guy, but the ls motors are everywhere! It's like WW2 over, the numbers produced out numbered the casualties! Doesn't matter how many you can outrun, sooner or later you'll be looking at the guts off that thing! They got 3 motors sitting, and they run on crack cocaine!! That's why I quite drag racing! You can't run 3 times a week working by the hour when they're running buy the gram!! They got 5 motors sitting in the trailer! They don't care,they don't even drive!!
@@markmccarty9793 fair I live in Australia where the cores are $1-200 lol.
Just had a set done for dads 69 mach 1.
Love these engines, down here in Australia we got them right up to 1985. Tough as nails. We had an oddball de-stroked 302ci displacement Cleveland as well. The heads from those use the standard 2v ports (220cfm stock intake) and a 2.02/1.76 valve arrangement in a small, efficient, quench style chamber of 58cc capacity. Not bad factory heads for street use, they bump a 351C up to about 10.7:1 compression, just right for about 220 to 230@50 duration of cam and a four barrel. I love the Elgin E-907-P in these motors!
Aussies are awesome! I love watching you krazy people on YT! Keep those Cleveland running down under!
🎉🎉🎉
I would love to get my hands on a set of aussie 2V heads to port and polish and try on my 408
220 cfm intake?
I thought they were around 190
Anything 351C, Boss 302, Clevor or even the 400 is appreciated!
I want to see a 400 built. You could stroke a Cleveland, but the 351M/400 block has a taller deck height allowing longer rods that the short deck Cleveland.
@@kennethcohagen3539He did a 400m build awhile back, she was a torque monster
@@kennethcohagen3539yeah Richard did a 400m a while back.
And had over 600hp
The smog restrictions of the 70s were what really handicapped the 335 series engines and gave them the "pig" reputation. If you correct where they were de-tuned and put some decent parts in, it really wakes them up!! I've got a '79 351M that we turned into a 408 fire-breather
My '70 Mach 1 ran in the high 12's all day - the only mods were intake, ignition, exhaust and racing slicks! I carried one tire in the trunk and the other in the back seat - and changed 'em using the factory jack - (I still miss the smell of premium leaded exhaust)
I knew a guy that ran a Ford Anglia around a 1950's model. He had a 351C in it. Everyone thought it was modified a lot more than it was. Small car, small block, mid 70's, equaled a lot of unhappy big block owners. Lol.
Still have two standard bore 351C's in the garage. Been running the 400 10.3" deck more cause they already have a 4" stroke. Cool engine builds.
The 351c is the best stock small block ever made they just didn't have a lot of AM support and was more expensive to build
It’s way too late now, but I would have loved to have seen this test with a Victor intake just before the tunnel ram. Thanks for the content. Just awesome for us Cleveland guys.
Good information.I like it.!😅
The stock Clevelands had emphysema! Drop in a healthy cam and whamo! 🔥
Lots of tricks you can pull with the 351c heads that don’t work with other sbf head castings. You can make 2hp per cube n/a if you put the effort in.
Nice to see all the appreciation for the Cleveland engine family. I like to think that this is what the Mopar 318 polysphere would have become if Chrysler didn't give up on it when they did.
That's so impressive with a ported stock head. Hopefully one day you'll do some all out Cleveland builds with a great aluminum head like CHI.
I HAVE CHI HEAD VIDS UP
Ours made 2.1 hp per cube n/a with a cast single 4 and a stock head. Vids on my channel. 5.70s at 120 weighing 2890
In the 90s my buddy had a 4v Cleveland that pulled like a bb
How about showing some love the 351 2V Cleveland please
It would be nice to see that since the heads are plentiful.
The Chevy small block is the most popular engine for racing, but it's too bad more people don't realize the power of the Cleveland. From a design standpoint, the Cleveland is much better than the SBC. It was the engine that dominated Pro Stock from around 1973 until the NHRA changed the class to 500" inch big block motors. It was also hated by the NHRA because of this, so they made anything with Cleveland power carry the most weight.
Been playing with Cleveland's for over 40 years now, and with all things being equal, they will totally destroy a small block Chevy. And with more modern aluminum cylinder heads, it just gets better yet!
There are two reasons the chevy is popular.
1. They made close to a billion of the orange lumps, you could blow one up every weekend and find another in a junkyard. Read that as cheap.
2. The magazines needed to sell ad space, and the sbc needs the aftermarket to make power.
With so many engines made that need aftermarket parts the volume for them was immense. The trick was getting people to believe the sbc was a good engine. Compared to every other engine built by GM since 1954, its a pos with crap machining and design, its barely adequate and cheaply made. The reason they kept it in production so long is because it was a few pennies cheaper to produce, because of fewer machining operations and parts, all of which ads up when you're building a million engines every year.
If you want to build big power with them, its going to cost you and the sbc is not going to live as long. The bbc is REALLY going to cost you and it needs the aftermarket too, both of them need RPM to make power, but the bbc has the drawback of its heavy valvetrain. Sure they can make power, but getting them to rev enough is $$$.
Compared to the Cleveland, the sbc is really bad. I think the magazines started the rumor about Cleveland's not having any torque, because I knew that was false in the 1980s when I was running 4V Clevelands. There was no lack of bottom end with mine, they are the only small blocks to impress me. The fastest cars in my area were 4V powered Mustangs, and a Cuda with a 440 that had 11:1 compression and a tunnel ram with lots of lightening on the Cuda. That Cuda is still around and he drives it sometimes. My 4Vs scared all my chevy friends... the Pontiacs REALLY made them upset.
Why waste money building a expensive platform when you save money buying and building an LS much cheaper to make more power
@@bethanyhaskiell9116 I agree entirely for replacing the sbc with an LS engine. The LS is superior to the sbc in almost every way.
The Cleveland isn't that expensive to build, they are on par with Windsors, except you make a lot more power with the Cleveland using stock/reworked factory parts. Not having to buy aftermarket heads saves quite a bit of money.
The ones Richard showed in this video were mild builds, there is a lot more potential in the Cleveland than this dynos show.
Depending on what you want, the LS might not be the way to go, and certainly not the cheapest. Compared to the sbc its a good upgrade, but if you want torque that makes a bbc look pathetic so you can run a highway gear and an overdrive to get good mileage along with the power, the chevy is not the way to go, in any form.
Most people think you need RPM to make power, and they also think drag cars need deep gears and big stall converters, but there are other ways to achieve the same things. Its a lot more fun driving some distance in a ten second car that has 3.08 gears than a ten second car with 4.56s. Its less expensive too. Torque is what moves vehicles, gears, high stalls, and RPM are merely trying to make up for a lack of torque.
Its hard for guys who like small engines, or chevys in general, to grasp what I mean.
Then you have potential. With an LS on 20psi you get what, 1000hp or so? The engine I am working on today will make roughly 2000hp/tq with 20psi. 7-10 psi will be around 1000, and the torque off idle will be ludicrous. Get it to hook and it will not only be faster, it will also live longer without spinning to 7500+.
@@SweatyFatGuyyou don't need rpm to make power in an LS it depends how you build it the reason you see people using rpm is it does the exact opposite of what you would think. It makes the motors live under boost. Revving high and making the next shift out of peak tq keeps boosted engines alive especially stock bottom end engines. If you shift at low rpm from say 2nd to 3rd in a 4l80 the next gear is more load and your shifting it into peak tq rpm that spike in cylinder pressure is what hurts them more than rpm. Rpm is only hard on rod bolts and valvetrain. The LS gen iv rods doesn't have rod bolt issues up to the mid 7000rpm range so all that leaves is valve train. Good set of dual springs and one piece pushrods help in that area.
Tq does move vehicles especially heavy ones but HP is just tq over a given amount of time (rpm). So in reality you can make 600ft lbs of tq at 5000rpm and 500ft lbs at 6000rpm. While the tq is lower at 6000rpm the engine is making power 3000times vs 2500times at pk tq. For mathematical purposes 2500x600 is 1,250,000. 3000x500 is 1,500,000.
Anything Ford is awesome 😎
Ford had a real winner with the 335 series engines. Sadly, the 351C, especially the high performance versions, died quickly in the U.S. thanks to rising gasoline prices and increasing regulations on fuel economy and emissions. The taller block 351M and 400 continued on in medium and full size cars and full size pickup trucks until around 1980, if I recall correctly. Unfortunately, Ford designed the 351M and 400 to be emissions friendly, low rpm, low performance engines. They can be built into performance engines, but they never were in stock form.
1982 for the pickup trucks if I'm correct
I do believe another difference between the M code and the Q code is that the block on the Q and BOSS blocks is a 4 bolt main cap. BOSS code was R? Plus if I remember I think the 4 bolt main blocks were cast with a slightly more nickel content. IMHO I think, as do you the 351 BOSS is the best small block of the day. I've built SBC. Nothing wrong with them. But we built them because stuff for them was plentiful and cheap. However, I had '73 Cougar XR7 with a Q code 351CJ and a C6. I went through the engine and did some normal fixes and spec upgrades and that thing ripped!
Even with the open chamber heads ?
Did a 400, 410ci recently. TFS heads 313cfm, 10:1, .566 lift roller 224 dur @ .050" and RPM air gap thing makes all of 500hp. So much power left on the table too
Seems like the tunnel ram combo should have made more power with the cam used. I wonder if the heads were still holding it back. Yes, they were ported. However, it would be cool to see what a modern set of aftermarket heads (similar valve sizes, similar combustion chamber volume) would do. Who wants to guess? +40 hp? + 50hp?
Chi 3v is where it's at , they're inbetween the 2. So smaller runner cc for air speed but they flow crazy.
I might hazard a risky 100 hp for a set of CHI or Higgins heads on this same street-able combo.@@hayden6056
Cooler for me would be a 6 pack on top of that there Cleveland. Great video!
Man! That thing is a monster!
Should compare that engine to a 408 LS and compare performance and cost differences.
More 335 videos!
Great info only ford i own is an 88 Lincoln for many yrs , I loved the video.
Yea about three years ago he did a build on the modified motor it was really cool
Has Brule' ever called a Cleveland a smallblock with a big block head? (You MOPAR guys will get the reference.) 😁
I need an explanation, because my dad has always referred to the Clevelands as having “big block heads”
@@HOTRODINATOR The 351 Cleveland came with huge intake and exhaust ports along with 2.19 intake valves and 1.71 exhaust valves. This when most small block high performance engines had 2.02 intake and 1.60 exhaust valves. The camshaft was very mild for such a performance engine compared to the small block Chevy which ran a camshaft with something like 240-245 degrees intake at .050 while the Cleveland ran a camshaft with something like 226 degrees of intake duration at . 050 inch camshaft lift.
This head flows as much air as big blocks of the era and more than some. It flows nearly exactly what a stock 460 head flows on the intake and more than a 460 on its exhaust side.
That's why your dad referred to it as a big block head. The best small block factory head to be developed from the factory. The 4 barrel heads are huge even the 2 barrel carburetor heads had bigger intake valves than the other small block factory heads at 2.05 valves .
I'm wondering how something like a 408 Windsor with something like AFR 225 heads, similar cam and tunnel ram would perform in comparison.
👍 Awsome job Richard,
Love the Cleveland engine.still have two 302's and a 351GT 4V engine.they were good stock but with a bit of technology they even beter,would not change them for anything
Always great to see Clevelands being represented! Im curious what kind of power can be made with 2bbl heads, which supposedly still have bigger flow than the hot Chevy heads! I know that big open chamber kinda ruins it for them, but surely that can be compensated for…. Maybe theyd be better for a supercharger?
I have a 351c 2v head with the m code cam in my 65. It’s no slouch, but I too would like to see an actual dyno test
@@B1Springfield Nice! Would be cool to see a test where they build the engine as far as they can with a relatively stock 2v head, maybe with some standard port work, just to see the potential. Those 2.05 intake valves are bigger than the “big” Chevy 2.02 head, and flow significantly better too! On paper, a 2v Cleveland head SHOULD be a pretty hot head!
Looking at these numbers the v8 has come along way
Love the Cleveland!
Richard can we see a test with a standard stroke 4v with port plates vs stock ports. hyd roller RPM Air Gap
351c = the Boss of the original muscle car era!!
Yates C3 heads came along after the fastest NASCAR lap in history, btw....212.8 MPH with "Awesome Bill" and his T-Bird...HOW did they do it?
And two t76’s 😂 love thes motors (engines) M
Yes , I like the Cleveland engine as well . Got one built . I have a 72 Mustang and a 95 Cobra . I wanted to put it in my Cobra but a lot of people say the 72 . What should I do Richard ? The Cobra 's from Arizona and drives like a race car . The 72 is nice but not from Arizona .
I see the heads are closed chambers but what pistons were used to get 10.7:1? Were they dished at the top or flat and in the hole? Did it run on pump gas?
I’ve gotten 11:1 on pump gas with flat tops at 0 deck. Want to do a stroker next
Just found a boss 351 block pretty stoked. .030 over though and needs a little more bore as it’s been in a field for a bit.
Be careful going past .030 on the production block. Especially for performance. Grandma car it’s ok. Really thin walls on the Cleveland blocks. Worse than Windsor’s
@@matthewnosal6893 yeah before I bought it I was doing the research… part of why I posted it here. No point in getting a 4 bolt main Cleveland for grandmas car right ?
@@Bill-flatplanefool if it’s a factory 4bolt it may be worth putting the effort in. I’d definitely sonic check it.
I'm running a 60 over 4 bolt. Not a problem.
I'm curious why some people build a "Clevor" (Cleveland 4V heads on a Windsor block) instead of just using a 351C engine. What are the advantages of going the "Clevor" route and how much cost does it add in modifications and special components (intake) to make it work?
Cleveland power for the win!
What was the ported head flow on the 408?
330
The 351M and 400 share a block with the deck height of about 10.7". The 351C had a 9.2" deck height.
I have a 400M video up
I haven’t seen you having livestreams as often as usual. Are you doing okay Richard? Hope the family is well
WAS ON A TRIP TO OHIO
So, is there any performance gain to be had for those of us that are still running the 351C 2V on the street that won't break the bank? 4V heads are hard to find and aluminum heads are expensive. What about just a cam change with the 2V induction? I know it's not the best set up, and the open chamber head engines have dismal compression, but I just use mine just to go to cruise ins with, and would like to gain some street performance. How about show us some numbers, Richard. Thanks!
CAM SWAPS HELP A LOT
Agree, my 2V has always felt winded, a 302 puts it to shame till it gets rolling then it'll finally walk away but by then I'm ready to shut it down.
I hear you. I’ve only had one car with a 351C 2V - 71 Cougar. I didn’t really do much other than dual exhaust with generic turbo mufflers and an open element air cleaner with either a double stacked stock elements or a taller one for a 454 Chevy. I think the motor was stock but high mileage. Still it ran better with just more intake and exhaust flow. I wanted to rebuild it with a better cam, maybe some light head work, 4V and headers but the car was such a rust bucket and I bought a new truck instead. I do remember back in the 80s there aluminum 4V intakes for Cleveland 2V heads, but they were pricy. Anyway, I suspect there were more 4V conversions back then than anyone remembers.
Cam swap or Aussie clevo heads if on the cheap.
@@richardholdener1727 So which cam? Suggestions? Would love to see some numbers!😁
What is with the proliferation of that road apples "Ford engine blue"? I remember no Ford engines that came in that color. The dark blue, black, grey, red and the flathead green.
Pretty sure the 71 Boss had an 11.6 compression forged piston. Could be worth maybe 2% power increase based on typical gains from adding compression.
11.0:1
11:3.1
Nominal compression. Which is close to. That's what the factory repair books said in the 70's for the Boss engine.
I like the Cleveland but I think I love the 427 the best
427 what ?
ANOTHER suggestion for a video: A UNIQUE cam test!
Hypothesis 1: for some durations and engine speeds, lift matter little, but duration matters a lot, and vice versa.
Hypothesis 2: for a blown motor, with less chance of excessive reversion, lift matters even less.
Hypothesis 3: using revs and boost, one can get plenty of power without parts-breaking torque peaks which make the overall car build far more expensive overall than simply slapping on a blower and some mildly stiffer springs with a low-lift, low-stress but long-duration cam setup.
Hypothesis 4: long duration with low lift carries off high-RPM power more than short-duration but high lift.
Find the effects of overall lift, overall duration, and ramp speed of some relatively-similar cams. The "ramp speed" portion can be done by just swapping in some super-super-low-ratio rockers, normal rockers, and some super-duper-high-ratio rockers.
Using three widely-varying cams timings (in duration) vary two parameters in each set of cams of the same duration:
A) Cam set 1: super-low-lift
B) Cam set 2: medium (kinda normal) lift
C) Cam set 3: Super-high-lift that would even make a Pro Stock motor envious
Then, do a test to find just how much valve acceleration off of closed affects lift, using super-duper-stiff springs in the Pro Stock region of open and seat pressures for experimental consistency.
D) Cam 1: super-slow-opening that could easily be handled by the laziest valve springs
E) Cam 2: Normal camshaft profile
F) Cam 3: Super-fast opening just short of float with the super-stiff springs.
Run all the cam configurations the same RPM from idle to 9000 RPM
Graph results.
What will be demonstrated is the answer to some questions:
A) for a "low-RPM cam," is lift as important as timing?
B) For all the cam timings, do either fast valve events or extra lift do the most good?
C) Will cam timing enable good results at higher RPM with lower lift, enabling more people to run higher revs than is common now? It's one thing to move a valve 0.300" off the valve seat at 9000 RPM, but it takes MULTIPLES OF the force to start and stop them if they are a 0.900" lift valve event. Instead of a 900 pound seat pressure used for vaulting the valves WAY off the seats a la Pro Stock, one could get away with about 300 pounds of seat pressure, in theory. energy equals mass times velocity squared.
D) Can an engine get away with far less lift if the engine is boosted, with a centrifugal supercharger, for example?
If super-low-lift but long duration enables John Q. Public to run a 9,000 RPM motor with a blower where normal or high lift would make the valve motion just too crazy to control, then this opens up a world of horsepower for the guy off the street who doesn't have the money for a super-duper-built transmission, heavy-duty driveshaft, and Pro Stock-level valvetrain. John can just get some kinda-stiff but not ridiculous valve springs and maybe just some roller-fulcrum rockers and enjoy the fun.
Test run one going through the low-lift set of cams with short, medium, and long duration, and also slow, normal, and super-fast ramp speeds:
A) naturally aspirated
B) boosted
Test run two using normal-lift cams with short, medium, and long duration, also:
A) natty
B) blown
Test run three does the same with super-duper-high-lift cams, also:
A) natural
B) blown
During any of the three test runs, the exaggerated-low-ratio rockers, normal, and exaggerated-high-lift rockers can be tried also.
This could provide reference-book-level material for amateur engine builders the world over.
SO RUN A 100 OR MORE CAMS FROM IDLE TO 9000 RPM?
Would smaller carbs have improved the part throttle, street driving qualities of the motor? As strong as that 408 turned out to be I still don't see it needing 1500 cfm to make the power it did.
I wonder how much doing a gasket/port match on that RPM intake would help it
Oh BTW, I'm not one of those Chevy guys that think Fords stink. 🤔
I do love Pontiacs, have a 1981 turbo Trans Am, 1979 Camato Berlinetta and a 1998 SVT Cobra.
ALL GOOD
Hey Richard how come the older small block stuff doesn’t respond too cam timing as well as the new stuff? Even with a good really set of heads it seems like they don’t respond nearly as well as the Ls stuff does
THEY DO
Hi Richard, I was wondering if you have tested/ compared an Edelbrock 7104 against a GM CFM aluminum intake?. Also is there a difference between the CFM 18, CFM 44 ect.??
WHAT IS A CFM INTAKE?
@richardholdener1727 Been looking online for a different intake for the 305 HO engine in my "79 Berlinetta and show a few GM aluminum intakes they all have big letters behind the carb (CFM )
Love Clevos
Would be nice if we could get a comparison of the 2v vs 4v heads no opinions or feelings. Just facts.
planned
Thank you 🙏 that would be awesome 😎.
I have a standard bore block with standard dome pistons in it 😎
Sick makes me want to take 351c out my 71 and put it in my foxbody
Oil pan is the problem.
Rich can you explain what is camshaft whine? thank you Brother!
Be still my aging heart!
Will you be testing a 370 destroked 6.0 ls anytime soon?
ALREADY DID A 4.8L CRANK IN AN LS3
Hi rich I have a 2000 GMC k3500 if I went and did a upper end kit on my 454 gen 6 would the 4l80 e and corporate 14 bolt 4:10 hold up ??
When you stroked it did you have to skirt the pistons?
skirt?
Your M code Cleveland has a 351 Cobra Jet camshaft. The M code camshaft is milder.
Ford really missed the boat on the ultimate Street fighter and that would be a 351 c with 2v heads and a boss Cam and a 780 Holley double pumper wow what a brute
it would make less power
@@richardholdener1727 the 4V heads may make more power on the dyno but in a 3,000 lb car going down the quarter mile the 2v head Cleveland gets there first and I'm talking from experience. The 2v heads need stiffer valve springs then stock, and they also need to be 1970 casting because of the combustion chamber is a tad bit smaller than all the years that followed
Gee,,Edelbrock worked out that the 4Vs were way too big. And useless! I have a Performer on my 400 Galaxie and the intakes are smaller than the 2V heads. About a Chev race port size!!
400? So what did you use, a 3" main M engine crank with odd rods.Turned down tp 2 650. 400M has an inch taller deck.
The Aussie 302C head gives more compression with a better chamber and realistic intake & exhaust runners. 4Vs make good door stops. Or small boat anchors.
Wrong. Spoken like someone who has NEVER daily driven a 4V Cleveland let alone raced one.
I'm a 460 fan
I would like to see a Paxton single Carb run on that last Engine at 8 or 10 LBS, instead of the Tunnel ram 2 Carb set-up? or maybe a Turbo set up
I think he did a paxton supercharged 351c video awhile back
You had me a 351 Cleveland
Richard i have a 408 stroker 351 Cleveland with trick flow 225 cnc ported runner head 72 cc chamber at 10.9/1 comp ratio. I am trying to source a trick Flow # TFS 516000-111 track heat
Intake Manifold. which are currently not in production Can you recommend anybody that might have one.
no idea-but other intakes will also work
How much more power can you make with those two-bolt mains?
we have done 1000 hp
It's a well known fact that if NASA didn't have the Cleveland, we would have never made it to the moon 😂
richard can you put a 1271 detroit diesel on a gas motor ls 6
Omg Cleveland time
Guess where the canted valve heads came from,lol not ford. Bbc designed the canted vale heads in 1963
Richard did a ford engine for pride month lol
I had the world record 400m on horsepower 10 years ago and still have that same motor but is tore down because im needing intake and aluminum heads
world record?
@@richardholdener1727 world record horsepower
It was 876 na
World Record as in Guiness came out and officially recognized the world record? Or like an official Bonneville land speed record? or just an internet "world record"? That's a lot of power for a 400-inch motor (but I think 400-inch sprint car motors make more), I'm just trying to figure out the World Record thing.
10 years ago I looked at Guinness book and I couldn't find anything on it so I figured at the time no one was building 400m like that but it started out has a 351m and I went from there
That BOSS 351 is awesome but rare? I have never seen a BOSS 351 and I’m 57.
1971 only
according to Wiki the BOSS 351 was only in the 1971 Mustang with only 1806 units produced
That the problem with alot of the furd shit. Anything they made that was even worth a shit barely existed.
One of my friends bought one in 71 when he got out of the Air Force, I have saw 2 more to date. His was silver with black trim . It is still on the road and looks good.
1971 was the Boss 351. 1972 the same engine was called the 351CobraJet. The only two years of production for them.
The next step up in head design from that era was the Hemi, was it not?
The hemi was out in the early 50s from Chrysler, and was first designed and produced by Fiat in 1905.
@@elmerfudpucker3204 The next step up in head design available to purchase for the American automobile buyer from the domestic market from that era was the Hemi, was it not?
Can I use that tunnel ram on 351/400m motor
only with adapters for the taller deck
@@richardholdener1727 what if the deck was milled
are you going to mill 1 inch off?
I have run high 9s with a stock 87-93 5.0 short block with some decent tfs heads a solid flat tapper cam a 175 shot in a 2700 lb fox with my 200lb ass in it you can make anything fast with the effort
flat tappet?
Guess RH is on vacation
Anybody have any good luck running 4v open chambers.
I miss the music at the beginning of videos
which one had the four bolt mains???
all 351C were equipped to run 4-bolt mains, only some of the applications were actually drilled and machined for the 4-bolt caps.
When's the omni comin back?
Pro Street Omni with a B1 Mopar engine.
Those FPS heads making 630hp like its nothing.
Chevy rockers?
1.7's are cheaper than 1.73's .
But they are heavy
I know ZERO about Clevelands.
Same bore spacing and bolt pattern as a Windsor but much beefier block architecture and race oriented canted valve heads . Word has it that the front timing chain housing cast into the block and the head architecture is courtesy of Oldsmobile and Chev engineers the Ford crew poached for the design.
R.H. ..................a U R 19 edelbrock 25 hp better ............going back in the day
*promo sm*
Make power with a 351 Cleveland by making it something it’s not. When you actually know how to make a 351 sing without all the bullshit, then il actually see if you really know anything and watch for more than 5 seconds.
what did we make it that it wasn't?
Just found one for 300 bucks
For this engine being cancelled, i started hating the Ford motor company. My hatred has grown stronger over the years because Ford abandons their products and their customers. Poor business practices.
THEY WERE NOT SMOG FRIENDLY
How did the bigger 460 pass smog? Cylinder heads were within the same patterning? And the 400? And the 351M? I just see Ford changing things just to obsolete stuff. Chrysler and GM did not follow this practice, hence...i still recommend their products. Ford is just a simple: no. Don't buy their products. Ford will obsolete them.
@@gdaytrees4728 The 351 C was released in September 1969. The Emission standard was changed for 1971. There was no point in building a engine aimed at Performance when emission standards limited power to ridiculous low rates. By 1973 power was as low as 200 hp for a 351 engine. To make 200 hp Ford didn't need the Huge ported of the Cleveland.
The Chevy and Dodge engines were built early enough they had performance history, Ford had the 351 W engine to use as a low performance engine, this left no place for the Cleveland unless you were an Aozzy!
@@gdaytrees4728 They completely choked the 460 head by adding huge air injection castings in the exhaust. You could not even touch the exhaust valve with your finger. What would be the point of choking the Clevo like that? It's ridiculous to say they changed to screw their customers. Certainly not a reason to make a life long hater!
@@gdaytrees4728 Smog pumps, dished pistons, open combustion chambers & retarded cam timing all 'solutions' back in the day
Those stories about the oil going to the top before the mains being bad is true. Ask me how I Know. 🥲
Perfectly adequate for a street stocker engine. And the multi groove valves added more life to the seats.
@@jesse75 I'm willing to go with that. Having ported heads, a 235/285 570 cam etc, plus lots of revs might have had something to do with it.
@@GreenCrim having a motor plate, rear sump, 8 quart pan with restricted push rods and the engine won't blow.