Talk:Ford 335 engine

351 Cleveland in Australia
if memory serves, the 351 cleveland was released in the Australian Ford Falcon GTHO in 1969. In its 4V form used in the 1970 GTHO Phase 3, the output was found to be around 385 hp, althrough Ford Australia significantly underrated it.

351M and 400 connecting rods
FYI: Both 351M and 400 engines use the same conn rods. Pistons are taller (compresion height) in the 351M to make up the diff in stroke.

? The article says the block's deck height was raised to allow a longer stroke to get 400 cid,     then says '400 uses same rods as 351 to keep same rod-stroke ratio' ...but rod ratio is obviously changed by the 400's longer stroke! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.1.212.177 (talk) 12:58, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Australian Cleveland
The Phase 2 ho 1970 (xw model) used the cleveland rated 290 hp, phase 3 (xy model) was rated 300 hp as was the GT, but most locals best remember around 380 hp. Also the cleveland was used from 1970 - 1982 in Australia with some variations, 2v in Australia was equpipped with 2 or 4 barrel carburettor depending on model and options.


 * I don't have sources handy but I remember that when the USA stopped 351C production they sent the tooling to Australia where it was used up to 1982. The 351C received various modifications in Australia over the years and came in various forms. The top versions featured much stronger blocks (due to internal ribbing changes and changed wall thickness) and where often individually exported back to the US for racing (but not for production). Stepho-wrs (talk) 07:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

oiling system
"The oiling system has been widely criticized but has not proven any less reliable than the Windsor line." I remember reading (I think in a pantera tech article) that the oil system problems really stem from badly placed pickup tubes for cars cornering at high G's. Nothing to do with the engine itself. Maybe I'm generalizing a specific case... Tafinucane (talk) 07:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

-criticism relates to non-main oiling priority, whereas in the proper context of other engine designs, having the main & rod bearings fed oil first is a design strength found in other engines such as the Chevy small block, Rambler V8, but a weakness found in non-main priority engines such as '63-up Buick V8, '66-up AMC V8... valvetrain failure is less catastrophic than crank and rod failure! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.1.212.177 (talk) 13:09, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

M-code compression, 1971
The American V-8 Engine Data Book, Standard Catalog of V-8 Engines, Mustang Red Book, et c.--not to mention Ford's 1970 advertising--list compression as 9.5:1 in the 2V and 11.0:1 in the 4V.

No such thing as 400M
A lot of people believe there was an engine from Ford (FOMOCO) that was designated the 400M, but there is no such engine. The 351'M' series (worthy of note) was built FROM the 400 engine, and there is no part number or nomenclature specifically designating a "400M" engine or series in any of the original Ford parts listings. Although the block itself is considered an M series casting, the 400 was a stand alone engine and there was no accepted M (or "MODIFIED") version of it ever made or sanctioned at the factory. I have that directly from an individual who was a Ford Parts Manager for thirty years - and he was emphatic on that point... Thus the two engines (351M and 400) should never be confused, despite considerable references to the contrary. The term "400M" is a misnomer.

No such thing as 400M
Compelling as the previous argument may be, facts can not be disputed. I own a 1978 Ford Thunderbird, and on the valve cover the engine ID/emissions tags the engine type is listed "400M". The "M" in the casting does not stand for Modified, Midland, or anything else only just"M". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.253.135.116 (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC) FTE Greywolf (talk) 00:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

No such thing as 400M
I believe that the first comment is 100% correct. There is no such thing as a 400M. There IS a 351M/400, a.k.a the 351M. Not having seen your T-bird, I am willing to entertain the slim possibility that in the valve-cover tag, the block itself had become labeled as a 400M by 1978 as an individual part. No offense, but are you sure you're not misinterpreting the sticker? I just looked at the emissions control sticker on the SIDE of the valve cover on my '78 Lincoln 400 (the front sticker is gone), and it reads, "Engine Family: 351M/400," and, underneath, "Displacement: 6.6 liters/400 c.i." Operative word is "family."

Every good source I have read through the years emphasized that the "M" referred to the fact that the 400 engine had been modified to 351 cubic inches. As far as I can tell, the complete engine itself always was the "400" ... straight; no chaser.

184.187.150.111 (talk) 01:23, 18 June 2013 (UTC) Steve C.

Proposal to merge Ford Boss 351engine
It has been suggested that Ford Boss 351 engine be merged into this article.


 * Agreed. The Boss 351 article is not particularly large, so it will fit into the 335 article quite nicely. of course, the old Boss 351 article should be replaced with a link to Ford 335 engine.  Stepho   (talk) 06:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


 * That was my logic as well. I'll go ahead and merge it. --Sable232 (talk) 21:50, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Cam timing of the de tomaso patera versus other 351s
I really love the sound of the 351 in the pantera but on ford it sounds like it has an other cam timing because the sound is really drag racing like and the 351 from the mach 1 ford mustang is not! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saludacymbals (talk • contribs) 19:08, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I vaguely remember the Australian 351C used in the early 1970s Falcon GTHO had a revised cam that changed the firing order. I have another vague memory of the Pantera using the Australian 351C because Ford America had stopped making them. Also, racing V8 engines often used a flat-plane crank that was noisier and produced more vibration but also produced more power (ie bad for the street, good for racing). or it might simply be that the Pantera used a bigger exhaust with less restrictive mufflers. I don't have any references for this but perhaps it might provide a clue for an editor with better references.  Stepho  talk 23:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not familiar with the Aussie 351C's, but - if I am not mistaken - 1972-1974 Pantera 351C's are Mustang Q-code equivalents. Not sure if the '71s were M-code equivalent. Whatever it is, even a simple muffler swap on stock engines will change how either sounds - sheet metal has little bearing. The Pantera engine swapped into the Mustang with the same headers and mufflers will sound like the Pantera, and the Mustang engine swapped into the Pantera the same. Believe what you want, Saludacymbals, but it sounds as if you're looking for confirmation of bragging rights more than anything else. Cudak888 (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Small Block links
In the first sentence of the article, the term "small-block" links to the "small-block_V8" article, which then re-directs to the "Cylinder block" article. That seems ok.

But in the right-hand column, under the picture, under 'Combustion Chamber', the term "Small-block" links to the "Small-block" article, which then re-directs to the "Chevrolet small-block engine" article. I should think that is not appropriate.

There appears to be no article on "small block engines" (not brand specific), nor is there any clear definition of what a "small block" is (vs a "big block").

Also, I've notice a lack of information on the firing orders of the various engines. That might be a nice edition. Or is that too far down in the details? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.89.130.54 (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ford 335 engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050518000641/http://www.fordclassics.com/enginespecs.html to http://www.fordclassics.com/enginespecs.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ford 335 engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224193845/http://home.comcast.net/~jelerath/mustang/Specs/heads-fr.html to http://home.comcast.net/~jelerath/mustang/Specs/heads-fr.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040416224708/http://home.earthlink.net/~bubbaf250/index.html to http://home.earthlink.net/~bubbaf250/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

335 ?
without reading through all the guff why does this start with 335 and then go straight to the first is a 351 and then after that it's bigger anyways ? geez, continuity Dave Rave (talk) 04:56, 31 December 2020 (UTC)


 * In the 2nd sentence of the first paragraph it says 'The "335" designation reflected Ford management's decision to produce an engine of that size (335 cubic inches) with room for expansion during its development'. But plans changed and they made a 351 cuin instead.  Stepho  talk 06:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

351M "modified"
It was recently added that the M in 351M stands for modified because it says so in the Master Parts Catalog. Can somebody please add a reference for an MPC (including page number) that says this. https://www.garysgaragemahal.com/351m-and-400.html also says this. I don't count this as a reliable source itself (WP:USERGEN) but you might be able to use it to find explicit references from MPC's he mentioned.  Stepho  talk 00:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)