351 or Lightning

[dmccaig]

Dear Panthers,

My 302 is burning a quart of oil every thousand and fouling the #8 plug every 3000. At 360k I know I'll need a replacement in the next couple years. I would like more oomph getting on the interstate but won't give up much mileage (20-21) for oomph. So far, Thaine's suggestion of a 351, which would fit on the motor mounts seems best but would the lightning fit, what about performance and fuel econ?

Donald

[Mr Bean]

Modular...

[HiFiMerc]

Modular...

He wants to burn less oil, not more.

[Mr Bean]

He wants to burn less oil, not more.

Don't get 91-95 pos, that's all.

[knucklehead0202]

Don't get 91-95 pos, that's all.

They all burn oil, some more than others. My '98 always has, albeit intermittently, which is weird. As to the OP, I'd just do a fresh HO 302/306 with better-than-stock heads, a mild cam and supporting intake stuff. You'll get plenty more oomph and likely not even notice the difference in fuel economy. A 351 would also be an easy no-brainer, but you'd definitely lose some economy unless you go fuel-injected and really have it running tits.

[sly]

If you want to go 351... I would find a 94+ roller and drop the lightning top works on it. You may have to swap in a stand-alone cruise control module from an 87 down to keep cruise control and switch to a mass air ECM with a tune to help reduce wiring shenanigans. I'm pretty sure an A9P (or similar) with a tune and the mass air conversion to the current wiring would be able to run that engine very well. Use an economy type cam (something set up for low to mid range power) and you may not even need to do anything to the transmission other than a high rev governor and higher stall torque converter. Anything short of a direct swap rebuilt 302 will require some tune/wiring modifications.

[Mr Bean]

They all burn oil, some more than others. My '98 always has, albeit intermittently, which is weird. As to the OP, I'd just do a fresh HO 302/306 with better-than-stock heads, a mild cam and supporting intake stuff. You'll get plenty more oomph and likely not even notice the difference in fuel economy. A 351 would also be an easy no-brainer, but you'd definitely lose some economy unless you go fuel-injected and really have it running tits.

None of my Modulars ever burned oil except my dad's 92' which has leaky valve seals. As soon as those were replaced that eliminated the issue. For better mileage and out of the box oomph a Modular is a no brainer. 01+ PI motor with 4R70W are dime a dozen and can be had for cheap. With 3.55s they are low-mid 15 second cars. MPGs are in the mid 20s as well.

[Brown_Muscle]

If you are looking for fuel economy I would not go with a 351. I would suggest modifying a 302, you can get plenty of power out of it, and decent fuel milage. my 2 cents.

[gadget73]

A 351 can be made to do decent fuel economy, though most of them in stock trim aren't worth a crap in that department. Considering they basically put the heads that couldn't feed a 302 effectively onto an even bigger engine, its no surprise that they tend to drink more fuel and not make all that much more power. Make one breathe effectively and its a different story.

http://www.lincolnsonline.com/tech/00144.html

the last sentence:

For now I’ve got gobs more torque and throttle response and am still getting 21.5 mpg at 2500 rpm / 78 mph. Life is GOOD!

Thats stock fuel economy numbers for a Mark VII with a 5.0 HO. I believe the last I heard an update on this, he'd changed some things and was actually doing a little better in the fuel economy department and making considerably more power than the HO ever did.

I think its well established that I am very much not a modular guy. They do tend to be better on fuel, but they are enough of a mechanical and electrical mess that I just want no parts of them. For all the work of making a modular fit into the wagon, I expect a 351 swap could happen and get reasonable results without it being completely unserviceable by any but those who install it. You also won't be into customized plumbing for AC and power steering lines, or be stuck dealing with having to replace the transmission as well.

[pantera77]

None of my Modulars ever burned oil except my dad's 92' which has leaky valve seals. As soon as those were replaced that eliminated the issue. For better mileage and out of the box oomph a Modular is a no brainer. 01+ PI motor with 4R70W are dime a dozen and can be had for cheap. With 3.55s they are low-mid 15 second cars. MPGs are in the mid 20s as well.

My shitty 270k mile lopo in a beater wagon gets 26mpg on the highway with 3.55's and is just as fast as bullet vic.

Keep those modular disasters in roundy cars please.

[Mr Bean]

My shitty 270k mile lopo in a beater wagon gets 26mpg on the highway with 3.55's and is just as fast as bullet vic.

Keep those modular disasters in roundy cars please.

I take it you are no longer swapping that modular disaster into the HPP box?

What does the beater wagon run in a 1/4 mile?

[Bobcat]

Thane is right, 351 is the way to go. You don't want a lightning engine, as Sly said. I can agree with that.

Throw GT40 heads at it and you're good to go.

I mean.. I've got a Lightning upper intake if you're interested.....

[pantera77]

16.3, with it's 150hp, no oil pressure lopo longblock. I'd love to dyno that pos some day.


I keep debating what to put in the sport box. If I could find some nice C heads for cheap I'd drop my teksid block in it, but 4v stuff is ridiculous pricy. Maybe I'll just by a m112 and throw a torktech kit on the 2v I have.
Every time I look at the prices of modular stuff I lose interest.


Also, I have a nice lighting lower kicking around, some day I'll find a nice roller block to use it on.

[Mr Bean]

16.3 is not as fast as Bullitt Vic. It's a a second slower.

[pantera77]

16.3 is not as fast as Bullitt Vic. It's a a second slower.

Well luckily my junkyard special HO swapped tudor is faster.