351W shortblock ?

[Dennis Harrelson]

Does anyone know if there is any significant difference among the various factory applications? IOW, is one block stronger than another? Is there a forged crank in any of the variations? Truck engine stronger? Cop engine better?
TIA

 

[monkeystash]

1969 had a lower deck height, 9.48" IIRC. 1974 and below supposedly had a higher nickel content iron. No forged cranks that I know of. There are some "football" rods that are supposed to be stronger, came in truck engines I think (although aftermarket rods are under $200 these days.) In the 90s, they offered a roller block too.

 

[Dennis Harrelson]

OK, Thanks.

 

[GrabberOrange69]

I'd recommend the '71 and later block with the 9.5 deck height due to piston compression height with the taller block. Almost all of today's performance pistons are predicated on the taller deck - if you stuff them in the shorter block and you've had to deck the block for straightness, you risk putting a piston above deck. Not optimal, plus it could get into quench area problems with the tight piston to head clearance and could lead to detonation problems regardless of compression ratio.

Good luck.

 

[johnpro]

The '94/later blocks are roller ready. '94 was the first year that the 351w came with the bosses for the dog-bone spider and the taller lifter bores required for many of the roller cams.

I used a '94 block in my '69, with an F303 cam.

I agree that that when running bigger cams, the added deck height of the later blocks makes things that much simpler. I didn't have to make any modifications to my Probe pistons, running AFR185 heads and an F303 cam with 1.7 ratio rockers (.054/.054 lift @ .050)