Ford 302 vs 351 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep CJ Forum > Ford 302 vs 351

ROCKRIDGE4WD Introduces a NEW Jeep Wrangler JK *led* tail ROCK BOTTOM prices on LIFT KITS at Rockridge4wd!! WANT TO NEW JK WRANGLER GRAB BARS NOW at ROCKRIDGE4WD

Reply
Unread 08-31-2011, 08:52 AM   #1
ctappan94
Registered User
1983 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Nantucket, Utah
Posts: 299
Ford 302 vs 351

I have an 83 CJ7 and I was wondering what motor would better suit it. I want a lopey idle.. like the top fuel dragsters.. and want adequate torque to wheel... but then again..jeeps have to be pretty light, as I've seen that 6.0l powerstroke jeep on the dunes and it didnt fair so well.. I want reliability as well, yet not SO much power that I crack the frame... because Im told its not nearly as strong as the Yj's and well lets face it, its almost 30 years old!

ctappan94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 09:13 AM   #2
BioTex
Registered User
2006 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Alpine, Tx.
Posts: 3,173
It's easier to de-tune a 351, than it is to hot rod a 302. I'd build a 351 and never look back.

Back in the day, the Cleveland was the better motor, but today I'm hearing that the windsor engines are what's going in most of the Cobras. Maybe it is just because it is too hard/expensive to get a cleveland IDK.
__________________
'85 CJ7, BDS 4" lift, 1" Body lift, 33x12.5, Shrockworks Sliders, 304 V8 with RV cam., T-176, D300, Dana 30, AMC 20.
1986 CJ10-A SD-33 Diesel/727/np208
1971 800B with 345/T-19
06' TJ Rubicon, 4" R.C. springs, BFG/AT 35s M.C. 6" fenders, rockers and surrounds, Currie front & rear adj. tracbars, tattons DC rear shaft, adj. upper - lower CA's. Bilstein 5100's
YJ Buggy Build Current project. Stroker/FI ?
1990 MJ Comanche 4.0L AX15/np231
BioTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 09:24 AM   #3
Cutlass327
Web Wheeler
 
Cutlass327's Avatar
1978 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Massillon, Ohio
Posts: 5,056
You won't want that lopey idle when trying to maneuver over an obstacle. Those cams are that way because they are designed for high RPM power. They have nothing to offer in the lower RPM ranges, where your Jeep would be spending most of it's time on trails.

As for 351w or 302, the 351 has more cubes, so it will have more output from the start. If you want to build something with power, go the 351w. Just remember that the bottom half externally is the same as a 302, but the top is wider, so clearance is gonna be a little tighter for the steering shaft to headers and such. The advantage is that 302 motor mounts and such should fit it in there. You will also have to find a oil pan that fits, I think the one from the cars are needed, and there weren't many 351w cars, so an aftermarket pan for a mustang swap or something may be required.
__________________
Rick

1978 CJ5 258/T177/D300, '86 D30/D44 WT axles, 'glass tub windshield frame, and fenders, 31x10.5 BFG A/T, TDK galv'd frame - DD and weekend toy

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f8/ri...8-cj5-1223197/
Cutlass327 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 09:36 AM   #4
colojeepguy
Registered User
1970 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Colorado Springs CO
Posts: 1,064
Ford cars used a front sump oil pan. 4x4 trucks used a rear sump oil pan. You also need the pick up tube that goes with the pan.
colojeepguy is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 09:55 AM   #5
ideal_trucks
Registered User
1978 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 220
I think the 351W is only about an inch wider up top. Not much at all. From looking you really can't even tell the two engines apart.
ideal_trucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 11:27 AM   #6
foggybottombob
Registered User
1984 CJ7 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Monument Colorado
Posts: 5,821
My neighbor has a 302 in a highly modified Bronco. The engine is pitiful. If you have to have a Ford engine go with the 351.
foggybottombob is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 11:55 AM   #7
Coiz
Registered User
1979 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northern, IL
Posts: 4,158
Curious as to what makes it pitiful?

My friend had a hopped up 289 in his Bronco that just plain ripped. He swapped that out for a FI 302 and it still gets around pretty good. Mine doesn't seem anemic to me either. Sure if I had 38's with 2.73's but that is hardly the engines fault. The year of the engine and the compression ratio will also make a difference.
__________________
Mike
My build thread
1979 CJ7, FI 5.0L Ford, NP435, D300, Full floated D44 Detroit, D30 Detroit EZ Locker.
Coiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 12:07 PM   #8
ideal_trucks
Registered User
1978 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 220
A 302 can be made to be pretty beastly. It really depends on what is done to it. A stock 302 from late 80's early 90's is pretty pitiful though. A 351 isn't much better, but is not bad. Cousin has a 351 bronco with 33's and T18. 3.73 gears. My 258 jeep with t18 and 3.55 will run with it.
Put a little head work and you could have a strong engine. Or get an older, pre '70 351w and you've really got something there.
ideal_trucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 12:21 PM   #9
Jim1611
Web Wheeler
 
Jim1611's Avatar
1985 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,425
Allot depends on what you plan to use your Jeep for as to which engine would be better. If you want a dependable daily driver that isn't going to break you on fule then the 302 can't be beat. It's also ligther than the 258 you now have and the 351 too. If you rub the 302 you need to make a decision, now. The 302 is well noted for being a quick revving engine. The ones Ford used in the later Mustangs that are fuel injected are easily modified to make 300 hp. A stock 302 has less than desirable heads. That can easily be changed.

The 351, in my opinion, is somewhat of a neglected engine. It's longer stroke makes better torque than the 302, which is good for slow speed crawling. It is heavier than the 302 though. Also as noted a bit bigger.

Either engine would make a good swap for you but you're going to have to decide what you want to use it for and build accordingly. As Cutlass327 said the rough idle cam won't be much good.
__________________
www.crabtreetool.com (Crabtree Shackle Hangers)

My build thread
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f8/ji...build-1093702/
Jim1611 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 12:40 PM   #10
1ATony
Vendor
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: mass
Posts: 4,467
The heads that came on the Mustangs were choked. If you do a 302 get a set of aftermarket heads and you'll uncork tons of power.
__________________

Click Here^^ For a Great Selection Of Auto Repair Parts
1ATony is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 12:52 PM   #11
ideal_trucks
Registered User
1978 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 220
You can put 351w heads on a 302 also and get alot more power, or the gt40 heads off the explorers.
ideal_trucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 01:28 PM   #12
CSP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 11,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ATony View Post
The heads that came on the Mustangs were choked.
That depends highly on what Mustang you're talking about. I had a '93 Cobra which had the GT40 heads, which are far from restrictive.
CSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 01:34 PM   #13
PeeWeeHerman
Registered User
2005 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Orlando
Posts: 62
if you can find a 5.0l explorer motor its a great cheap motor get a nice low end torque cam, valve springs and some rockers and you have a 260/315 hp/tq engine. If you ever want more power/break there are a ton of cheap parts for the 302 compared to the 351. Intakes are abundant for the 302.

as for a hopped up 302 in the one post being pitiful, im curious as to the specs.
__________________
Don't do business with Tuff Designs, worst retailer ever.
PeeWeeHerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 01:47 PM   #14
1ATony
Vendor
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: mass
Posts: 4,467
I put the Holley Systemmax intake on my Mustang and that really woke it up. That's for a fuelie set up though. If you search Craigslist. Look for Mustang parts if you decide to go with a 302. You could probably find a set of heads and a intake or carb for a reasonable price.
__________________

Click Here^^ For a Great Selection Of Auto Repair Parts
1ATony is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-31-2011, 01:58 PM   #15
Jim1611
Web Wheeler
 
Jim1611's Avatar
1985 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,425
If money wasn't an object I'd say a stroked 5.0 would be the best of both worlds.
__________________
www.crabtreetool.com (Crabtree Shackle Hangers)

My build thread
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f8/ji...build-1093702/
Jim1611 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.