The reason the Cleve was cheaper is cuz it makes less power than that W it was compared to, and it's because of the heads. Another $1,600 for CHI heads and $400 for the manifold and the Cleve would absolutely blow the W outta da wata!!! But, with stock 2V or 4V heads that W would totally blow the Cleve out of the water for only about $450 more. And yeah, canted valve heads do have an advantage in flow(there are companies that make canted valve heads for LS's, and for the W's, ie Trick Flow's Twisted Wedge design, which btw performs on par with the Edelbrock and AFR inline valve heads) but the point was to show that a well developed inline valve head will SUBSTANTIALLY outperform a 35+ year old canted valve head. There's nothing wrong with the general design principle of the Cleveland heads, just that the ports were all wrong, so the stock Cleve heads have NEVER been able to achieve the flow potential they have without substantial, and I mean SUBSTANTIAL head work(welding up dead spots in the port and reshaping it which is a LOT of $$$ in labor). Simply put, with stock Cleve heads there's no way a Cleve will ever achieve the same performance as a W for the same amount of money, and never produce the same HP/cid. The Cleveland heads were the highest flowing heads Ford ever produced on a production vehicle, but that's not saying much. If you build a Cleve then spend the extra $2,000 on CHI heads/manifold, and you'll not only be about 278934650978569831430 times happier in the long run, but even a VERY well built Windsor of the same discplacement will stand no chance of keeping up without juice, boost or a lot more rpm. http://www.chiheads.com/articles_2_engine_masters_challenge.php for all the non-believers
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
The statement that the Windsor flows better than the Cleveland is just wrong. I wrote a disertation on this, but the post failed and I do not have time to retype it in. Take a look at the flow numbers on this link. Port matched Cleveland stock heads that are port matched flow better than CHI and any Windsor head made. Now I like the Windsor, but the Cleveland was built as a race motor with no regard to emissions so it is going to be a air pump machine! I think the CHI system is great and might go that way at some point, but I really like my Cleveland 4v heads.
I have done a lot of research on the Cleveland lately due to deciding what to do when my hot rod needs a new heart! PM if you want any info on aftermarket parts and engine buildout ideas.
Dude, that's the same link I've been posting and apperantly you haven't read it. So do this, open 2 internet windows and scroll to the Cleveland 4V on one and something like the AFR 165 on the other. The AFR which is a Windsor head WAY outflows even a 4V Cleve head up to .600" lift, and after .600" lift the Cleve has a slight flow advantage over the AFR 165 on the intake, but the AFR outflows the Cleve 4V by just as much on the exhaust side. A STOCK 2V or 4V Cleve head will outflow any other STOCK Windsor head, yeah. But a good small aftermarket W head will blow even a 4V Cleve out of the water for flow, and have much higher port velocity. And as far as stock port matched Cleve heads outflowing CHI heads, you apperantly can't read. 1, port matching has nothing to do with flow volume, all it does is smooth out the transition between the manifold and head port to reduce turbulence, and 2, LOOK AT THE CHART FROM THE SITE YOU POSTED! A 185cc 3V CHI head outflows a 4V Cleve head a little bit on the intake, and absolutely THRASHES the 4V for flow on the exhaust side, which is why the CHI head makes far more power, it has better balance between the intake/exhaust flow and provides for MUCH better scavanging, and the CHI head has a 185cc intake port as opposed to the 4V's 245cc intake port, which means WAY higher port velocity for the CHI, which means more effective cylinder filling, which means better volumetric efficiency, which means better power. You need to learn what you're talking about before you start talking about it
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
Dude, that's the same link I've been posting and apperantly you haven't read it. So do this, open 2 internet windows and scroll to the Cleveland 4V on one and something like the AFR 165 on the other. The AFR which is a Windsor head WAY outflows even a 4V Cleve head up to .600" lift, and after .600" lift the Cleve has a slight flow advantage over the AFR 165 on the intake, but the AFR outflows the Cleve 4V by just as much on the exhaust side. A STOCK 2V or 4V Cleve head will outflow any other STOCK Windsor head, yeah. But a good small aftermarket W head will blow even a 4V Cleve out of the water for flow, and have much higher port velocity. And as far as stock port matched Cleve heads outflowing CHI heads, you apperantly can't read. 1, port matching has nothing to do with flow volume, all it does is smooth out the transition between the manifold and head port to reduce turbulence, and 2, LOOK AT THE CHART FROM THE SITE YOU POSTED! A 185cc 3V CHI head outflows a 4V Cleve head a little bit on the intake, and absolutely THRASHES the 4V for flow on the exhaust side, which is why the CHI head makes far more power, it has better balance between the intake/exhaust flow and provides for MUCH better scavanging, and the CHI head has a 185cc intake port as opposed to the 4V's 245cc intake port, which means WAY higher port velocity for the CHI, which means more effective cylinder filling, which means better volumetric efficiency, which means better power.
67mustang wouldnt the 185 cc intake prot possibly restrick the in flow more then the 245cc intake port... im not arguing or anything im just not as knowledgable as you guys
When you think of restriction, think of overall flow and velocity, not size. Like I said, size of the port by itself means nothing, case in point being that 185cc head(CHI 3V 185) as opposed to the 245cc head(stock 71 4V) the 185cc port is smaller, but the head flows about 10cfm more on the intake side at high lift(and though the data isn't available, I will garuntee that it flows even more at lower lift numbers where the power is made, because the port is smaller it keeps the velocity up, which means it keeps the air moving rapidly into the cylinder and hence, flows more, especially at lower lift and part throttle where velocity is being reduced) but that CHI head flows about 70cfm more at peak on the exhaust side so it has a better intake/exhaust ratio and produces more power. The extra exhaust flow from a smaller port is also a reason for such good breathing out of a smaller intake port, the much higher velocity of the exhaust gas increases the vacuum effect generated in the combustion chamber during scavanging and helps draw air into the cylinder. On that head the 185cc port is actually LESS restrictive than the 245cc port of the stock head, again, because the size is meaningless, what matters is the ability of the air to get through the port rapidly. CHI heads are a good example of a much better port design, it can flow more, and make much more power, with a much smaller port. And on the street the higher the intake port velocity the better the part throttle power and throttle response. The problem with the port design on a stock C is there are "dead spots" of open port area when air doesn't flow(this has to do with fluid dynamics and the nature of how air moves) but the open spots in the port increase the overall volume of the runner and serve to do nothing but DECREASE the flow velocity(Bernoulli's principle at work, as the area a fluid is flowing through increases the fluid's pressure increases and velocity decreases such that the total energy remains constant), and with lower velocity less air gets into the cylinder(ie, less flow in cfm) and less power is made. Higher velocity also means lower pressure which helps to create a larger pressure differential and draw air into the port. You need velocity in order to generate the energy required to flow a given volume over time(cfm). Think of it this way. Imagine you have a cylinder head and the velocity is 0, no air is moving, therefore the cfm is also 0, the engine is off. Same is true when it's on, you need velocity to move air, the higher the velocity through a given port the more it can flow, which is why port DESIGN is what's important, not port size(though there will be a point at which too small a port will be a restriction, but the head manufacturers are good, and this is only seen in production heads, ala stock 302 heads). To give you an idea of the tremendous importance of velocity, Formula 1 is obviously the most advanced race series in the world, and billions are spent by the teams each year in order to compete(yes, billions, Ferrari and Mercedes and BMW were several years ago spending northwards of $500 million each per season for 2 cars) and the design of those engines is so extreme, that in the last year or so they reached a point where the velocity in the intake port exceeded the speed of sound at sea level(nearly 800mph). Obviously they understand the importance of port velocity, as the engines are 2.5L V8's and make close to 900hp naturally aspirated. So that was the long answer, but the short answer is that no, a smaller port is not necessarily more restrictive. If velocity is the same across varrying ports then a smaller port is more restrictive, but if a smaller port has a high enough velocity(such as the case of CHI's heads and others) then the larger port will actually be the more restrictive one
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
lol, it does look like Edelbrock might br trying to make a head like CHI's, but the CHI heads flow better(for now). Give it some time though and Edelbrock will have an awsome Cleve head I'm sure. They already make some of the best heads, and their out of the box Victor race heads are some of the best out there.
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
My ***. All the BS about Clevelands has returned. it is NOT more difficult to make power with a Cleveland. They are not big blocks. They dont need aftermarket heads whereas a Windsor does. 2V and 4V will make good power and the years doesnt matter unless you want to run pump gas. The 72-74 4V heads are low compression but that is okay, because you cant run 11:1 with 91-93 octane and iron heads.
If you have a Cleveland you are way ahead of someone with a Windsor. They arent that expensive to build because even 2V heads outflow nearly every head for the Windsor that isnt canted valve. 350-400hp is relatively easy with a STOCK head.
If you dont own a Cleveland and have never built one, DONT GIVE ADVICE ON THEM! If you have never built an engine DONT give advice on what to build. If you think a Cleveland is still a big block, then lie down before you hurt yourself or someone near you.
Why is it people seem to think that they are experts and knowledgeable about engines they have never run, and may have only seen in a magazine? I got my first one in March of 1986, built the latest one a few months back. Its a 2V with a decent cam, intake, and headers, its fully rebuilt, balanced, forged pistons, completely new valvetrain and I have less than $2000 in it.
The 4V that used to be in my 72 Mustang slaughtered every Windosr it came across, and all it had was a 270H from Comp Cams and a set of headers, it was even running the stock carb and intake.
So before you spout off about something you know nothing about, you might want to think about how stupid you would look if someone decided to take issue with your incorrect information. It gets very tiring trying to correct poor and incorrect information with someone who will argue about it when they have no basis behind the argument they present. In other words, if you dont know what the hell you are talking about by expereince rather than what you may have read somewhere, then shut the hell up.
_____________________________
Pit of Despair Club: President Current P.O.D. 71 Fastback 351C 2V
define streetable.. based on rpm range??? or mpg?? or???
steetable as in depending on what your running internally, the 4v may be too big to run within normal RPM ranges. the 4v loves higher rpms. i kinda wish i had a 2v heads instead of 4, but hey, what can i do, right?
_____________________________
FOR SALE: 1969 Mustang Black Bucket seats PM for details
My ***. All the BS about Clevelands has returned. it is NOT more difficult to make power with a Cleveland. They are not big blocks. They dont need aftermarket heads whereas a Windsor does. 2V and 4V will make good power and the years doesnt matter unless you want to run pump gas. The 72-74 4V heads are low compression but that is okay, because you cant run 11:1 with 91-93 octane and iron heads.
If you have a Cleveland you are way ahead of someone with a Windsor. They arent that expensive to build because even 2V heads outflow nearly every head for the Windsor that isnt canted valve. 350-400hp is relatively easy with a STOCK head.
If you dont own a Cleveland and have never built one, DONT GIVE ADVICE ON THEM! If you have never built an engine DONT give advice on what to build. If you think a Cleveland is still a big block, then lie down before you hurt yourself or someone near you.
Why is it people seem to think that they are experts and knowledgeable about engines they have never run, and may have only seen in a magazine? I got my first one in March of 1986, built the latest one a few months back. Its a 2V with a decent cam, intake, and headers, its fully rebuilt, balanced, forged pistons, completely new valvetrain and I have less than $2000 in it.
The 4V that used to be in my 72 Mustang slaughtered every Windosr it came across, and all it had was a 270H from Comp Cams and a set of headers, it was even running the stock carb and intake.
So before you spout off about something you know nothing about, you might want to think about how stupid you would look if someone decided to take issue with your incorrect information. It gets very tiring trying to correct poor and incorrect information with someone who will argue about it when they have no basis behind the argument they present. In other words, if you dont know what the hell you are talking about by expereince rather than what you may have read somewhere, then shut the hell up.
First of all I have built engines. And I build engines at work, for race cars. And we have yet to see ANYONE with a Cleve running stock heads that can match performance with a comparably built Windsor. Second, if you look at this http://users.erols.com/srweiss/tablehdc.htm you'll see that most modest aftermarket Windsor heads(inline, not canted valve like the TFS head) outflows any stock Cleve head, and look at flow at ALL lifts, not just peak, since the vast majority of airflow occurs between .200 lift to .100-.200 before peak lift. Also look at the port sizes and flows, and take into account the velocity of the air moving through the port. The same flow rate with a higher velocity will result in higher volumetric efficiency since the increased momentum of the induction charge can more effectively fill the cylinder. Third, as far as your 4V thrashing Windsors, the Windsor of today is a RADICALLY different beast than it was barely 10 years ago. Today the parts are available to make a Windsor both powerful and streetable. And 4th, why don't you post some 1/4 times, or tell us about some known vehicle you've raced to see what the performance actually is? Peak power numbers are nice, but that doesn't tell you how the car performs and how it drives on the street. Stock Cleve heads will make ok power and drive ok on the street, but that's all they are, is ok. They are nothing spectacular any more and are not the powerhouses they once were. Stock Cleveland heads have been eclipsed.
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
honestly guys i really appreciate all the advise and everything but i really didnt want to start any kind of wars or arguments.... IMO everyone is entitled to their own opinion, right or worng , credible or not.. thats what makes this forum so awesome.. 3 or 4 of you guys say dont waist your time on this and then 3 to 4 ppl say dude it would be awesome... diversity.... its great... and that diversity has helped me out in so many ways ........... ( NOW EVERYONE JOIN IN FOR A GROUP HUGE) hahaha...ha
on the other hand what thumpin said is true.. you should have some general knowledge about what your giving advise on. cuz that would be pritty fu**** up to give someone the wrong advise and have them ruin their engine or die cuz they got into a car reck cuz someone gave them wrong info on there brake system and it failed on them... true that would be extream case.... either way i like the different opinions im getting its really opening my eyes to the posibilities... and i thank you guys for that..
Clevelands have a definate uniqueness factor, but ultimately with any engine whether it comes to a Windsor a Cleveland or a 1.8L Honda for that matter, it's all in the build, that's what can make the power/get the drivability etc. It just depends on how much power you want and how much $$$ you wanna spend. If you build a Cleve and want performance, my advice is honestly put some CHI heads on it. It'll drive better, get better mileage and make so much power that not many cars on the street will be able to touch you
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
Posts: 6974
Joined: 12/19/2006 From: Citrus County, FL Status: offline
quote:
i kinda wish i had a 2v heads instead of 4, but hey, what can i do, right?
i'll gladly send you a set of 2v heads with a fresh valve job in exchange for your 4v heads
quote:
I build engines at work, for race cars. And we have yet to see ANYONE with a Cleve running stock heads that can match performance with a comparably built Windsor.
BS flag raised. our shop was building small block chevys for the local race track that were dominating the competition - we built a stroker 302 with 351C crank ground down to fit into the block and a huge overbore, and Cleve 4v heads that we had to have custom seats made to actually shrink the valve size (and have ferrea make us new valves) so that we would be legal in class (had to stick with stock crank/head/block castings too). anyways we took that thing to the track and it was running lower times than anyone had run out there in years........ and then it blew up. BUT, it was faster than everyone else by a long shot - so i cant see how you can said what i qouted above
Well, maybe you guys built a faster Cleve(even though it didn't stay together), but at least around here it hasn't been done, especially with the drag cars. And if you start modifying a Cleve head for differnt sized valves, port work etc it's no longer stock, is it? Having cutom valves and seats made so you can get the head to work is hardly what one can call stock. Also if you're in class restricted racing where you have to run a stock head casting then a Cleve is a good choice, as bad as it's characteristics are in some areas, it's still the best flowing stock head Ford produced for small blocks, but it's a far cry from a good aftermarket head(which wouldn't be allowed in stock classes obviously).You'll note I said that we haven't seen anyone running STOCK Cleve heads that can compete. I also stated earlier, that Cleve heads take a fair bit of work to make them run well, ie custom valves like you guys did, welding up dead spots in ports and recutting the ports etc. A cleve can be made to run well, but for how much money and effort? There are times when a stock Cleveland head may be a good choice, but certainly not in a street car that's trying to achieve a very high level of performance and still be drivable. As I said before, stock C heads will run nice on the street and make ok power, but that's all, just ok, nothing spectacular.
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
Printable Version
RE: 351 cleveland rebuild?? - 
