66 BOSS 408 project

latamud · May 20, 2007

test fit of mock up

short block

351C vs World Windsor Sr heads

shave shock towers

notch pistons for valve clearance

Viper T56, not from a kit, straight out of a 2004

modified oil pan

tranny mated to bellhousing

T5 bearing retainer

adjustable strut rods

camber kit

bump steer kit

towers notched complete

trans tunnel clearance

Engine and tranny mated

Engine and tranny installed

20 gallon fuel cell

Magnaflow 3" stainless kit

prepping for supercharger

Opentracker shock tower caps (raises about 1/2")

Viper seats (thanks again CobraDan)

MSD 6-BTM

Autometer gauges, not new but I am replacing the fuel and Speedo and will be adding the boost gauge and maybe an A/F meter.

180 Out · May 20, 2007

So you got all that done before 4:00 today? Good work!

Seriously, that is quite a build. A blown 408 Clevor, you must be in the 800 hp neighborhood, seein as how all those NA Engine Masters 434 Clevors were hitting 700 with a 6500 rpm cutoff.

I guess I probably missed prior threads, so I apologize for asking questions that have probably been answered, but what heads are you running? And what intake?

I've always wondered if a 9.5" Clevor would fit in a First Gen. I take it that the answer is no, not without the notched shock towers. Is that your conclusion?

latamud · May 21, 2007

180 Out said:
So you got all that done before 4:00 today? Good work!

Seriously, that is quite a build. A blown 408 Clevor, you must be in the 800 hp neighborhood, seein as how all those NA Engine Masters 434 Clevors were hitting 700 with a 6500 rpm cutoff.

I guess I probably missed prior threads, so I apologize for asking questions that have probably been answered, but what heads are you running? And what intake?

I've always wondered if a 9.5" Clevor would fit in a First Gen. I take it that the answer is no, not without the notched shock towers. Is that your conclusion?

Actually, I've been working on the project since last August and haven't posted anything on Stangnet. My original plan was to run the supercharger but time is running out prepping for the Hot Rod Power Tour so I probably won't run with it for now. I built my engine with my basic engine knowledge, and a "How to build Small block Ford" book. My first ground up engine. The heads are 2v open chamber and the intake is a B&A TRACK BOSS 351W. I wanted a streetable 15# boost so decided for a low compression engine. The 408w stroker kit I had was already low but I wanted it lower. The heads have 76.2cc combustion chambers.
As to the fitment, I think it would have fit without notching the shock towers had I used stock unmodified heads. I had a 351w in the car and it fit great. In the first pic you can see the heads have these aluminum blocks that raise the exhaust ports. They raise the outer edge of the head as well, seen in the third pic. I found out they are from Price Motor Sports. That is what was the clearance issue. I wasn't able to get a clean shot to the spark plugs where on a stock head I would have. I bought the heads at a swap meet last year and they came that way. I wanted them because they already have screw in studs, and had the BOSS mods done to it for the coolant outlets. John has a 351C in his car and I've seen it many times. I would have to see both cars side by side to tell which one fit better.

180 Out · May 21, 2007

I do see those port plates now that you mention it.

The thing about a 351 Cleveland in a '65-'66 vs. a 351 Windsor with Cleveland heads is the deck height on the Cleveland block is 9.2" while it's 9.5" on the Windsor. That extra 0.3" could make all the difference. My '70 Cougar with the 1" extra width between shock towers and with a 351C is a pain in the bazoo to change the middle plugs on each side. That's why I've wondered, after you subtract the extra 1" between the shock towers by going with a '65-'66, then add the extra 0.3" in deck height by going with the tall deck Windsor block, whether a 408 or 427 Clevor would fit in a '65-'66. The Cleveland head is quite a bit chunkier on the exhaust side than the Windsor, as your side-by-side pic demonstrates. The Windsor head puts those spark plugs out in the open, but the Cleveland hides them.

latamud · May 21, 2007

I lowered my engine 1/2" but I don't think that makes a difference. The deck heights between the blocks may be different but can you be sure that the mounting height is the same as well. Deck isn't relative to the relation of the mounting height. What I'm saying wit the exhaust is the angle the headers exit the Clevor might be a better fit on a stock 351C headed Clevor, with it 1" lower than my port plates. This did have some reason for me to lower the engine.

chromedog · May 21, 2007

my 65 had a 4bbl cleveland in it some time ago, and the owner at the time thought about using a holesaw to gain access for the middle two plugs. he opted instead on a 302

latamud · May 21, 2007

chromedog said:
my 65 had a 4bbl cleveland in it some time ago, and the owner at the time thought about using a holesaw to gain access for the middle two plugs. he opted instead on a 302

Yeah, the next engine will be a 302 with Cleveland heads. Much easier to do in my opinion.

old_blue · Nov 3, 2007

wow bart,
that car has come a very long way since Hawaii. I know the last post was in may but I havent been following the progress since last we talked. INterior looks fantastic too. good job.

Decurion · Nov 3, 2007

Ive never understood the Cleveland thing, but I think I said that when you posted pictures of this engine over on tffn. Hey, horsepowers horsepower, and youve got plenty of it, so I cant complain about that! Whats the deal on the raised shock tower caps? I dont believe Ive ever seen those before, or heard what the advantage would be.

old_blue · Nov 5, 2007

I think he is indisposed at this time. i blv one advantage is because is car is lowered quite a bit which compacts the shock and hence easier to bottom out. this allows the shock to be extended even more allowing more movement of the shock and the suspension. if there is more i am sure he or someone else will chime in.

bnickel · Nov 6, 2007

actually they are to keep the shock in the middle of it's travel on a lowered car, your explanation was pretty close though. when you lower a car you change where the shock sits in it's travel at rest so when the shock moves it doesn't dampen the suspension as effectively as it should so it's really not working as designed. by raising the upper mounting point of the shock you put the shock back in the middle of it's travel so it can again work as it designed. shelby did this to the 65 GT-350's only they used spacers between the shock and the mount, same effect just not as astetically pleasing as you could grind down all the welds on this shock mount and it will look perfectly stock.

latamud · Dec 31, 2008

bnickel said:
....you could grind down all the welds on this shock mount and it will look perfectly stock.

I know thisis an old post but I was looking for something and noticed the comments. Opentracker Racing Products - Shock Tower Caps I actually made mine at John's shop about 4 years ago. He likes to grind the welds down. I left it "industrial" to show them off.