Regular 351 vs Lightning 351? - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 23 Old 08-24-2005, 01:54 AM Thread Starter
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,521
Regular 351 vs Lightning 351?

Just bought a 95 F250 w/ 351.

What gives the lightning the 30 extra hp? Intake? heads?

What would be the best bang for the buck mod for me? Not looking to spend alot, it'll be my DD.

Greenbird is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 23 Old 08-24-2005, 11:14 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Appleton Wisconsin
Posts: 558
Where to start. The lighting has Gt-40 heads gt40 intake, a special cam made by svt. I beleive it has forged internals. Roller rockers. a cheesy ram air type thing in the grill. 4.11 gears. mid length tube headers. In reality the 95 f250 hp rating were rated at the flywheel where the lightings were hp rating were rated at the wheels. So since you loose 18% hp through drivetrain the lighning hp level is quiet a bit higher


1995 Black Mustang GT
behay20 is offline  
post #3 of 23 Old 08-24-2005, 11:52 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (12)
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 342
actually, lightnings didnt have forged pistons, they are hypereutectic. No roller rockers. The headers are shorty's. And the lightnings were rated at the flywheel too, but many say they were under rated.
8 YUR SS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 23 Old 08-24-2005, 04:27 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Appleton Wisconsin
Posts: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8 YUR SS
actually, lightnings didnt have forged pistons, they are hypereutectic. No roller rockers. The headers are shorty's. And the lightnings were rated at the flywheel too, but many say they were under rated.
the 93's were forged. I dont think headers that come down almost to the bottom of the tranny shorties. they are midlength

1995 Black Mustang GT
behay20 is offline  
post #5 of 23 Old 08-24-2005, 05:00 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: douglasville, ga
Posts: 140
shorties and no forged in 93's either

93 lightning
01gt
92blowncoupe is offline  
post #6 of 23 Old 08-24-2005, 06:01 PM
Registered User
 
Mike Gager's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: ToPeKa, KaNsAs
Posts: 1,158
no forged pistons on the lightning. also they were shorty headers
Mike Gager is offline  
post #7 of 23 Old 08-24-2005, 07:08 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Apex, NC
Posts: 94
http://www.thebaskins.com/faq.htm

this website says it all...
my94svtlightning is offline  
post #8 of 23 Old 08-25-2005, 07:14 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (12)
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 342
8 YUR SS is offline  
post #9 of 23 Old 08-25-2005, 10:41 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by behay20
Where to start. The lighting has Gt-40 heads gt40 intake, a special cam made by svt. I beleive it has forged internals. Roller rockers. a cheesy ram air type thing in the grill. 4.11 gears. mid length tube headers. In reality the 95 f250 hp rating were rated at the flywheel where the lightings were hp rating were rated at the wheels. So since you loose 18% hp through drivetrain the lighning hp level is quiet a bit higher

Pretty sure this post wins for most things wrong written at one time.



The most hilarious has to be..." the lightnings were hp rating(sic) were rated at the wheels".....
DOHCMERC is offline  
post #10 of 23 Old 08-26-2005, 03:01 AM Thread Starter
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,521
So what would give more the best gains? Roller rockers (I've read they should be bolt in?) and a cam (GT, e303)?

Or a GT40 intake?

Not looking for alot of gain, and don't want to lose low end torque as I will be hauling/towing.

Greenbird is offline  
post #11 of 23 Old 08-26-2005, 08:34 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 317
Start with a Bassini exhaust and Edelbrock intake.

Here is mien http://fordfuelinjection.com/bronco/engine/
fireguy50 is offline  
post #12 of 23 Old 08-26-2005, 05:34 PM
US Army Active Duty
 
SVTCobra347's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Massena, Iowa
Posts: 2,433
Pick your exhaust. Edelbrock makes a nice Truck intake, supposed to have pretty good mid-upper gains without losing any low end. Kinda pricey, like 580 bucks... I'm gonna try it with slightly milled (60cc chamber) GT-40 irons and 1.72 roller rockers on a stock truck cam at first. I may change cams later.

My exhaust is Hedman Hedders, 1 cat gone, 3" pipe into a flowmaster with 2 2 1/2" pipes coming out the back. It isn't loud at all inside, but I get lots of compliments on how it sounds. SOTP there was a pretty good gain. We'll probably switch to an o/r pipe, with a Catco converter welded in.

Sounds like you're kinda like me right now, can't find too much good info so tryin' to hang out with the lightning guys for some help.

You wanna see some wrong stuff in posts, go to ford-trucks.com. One of the mods there tried to tell some poor guy that an Explorer motor has an E cam in it, then he tried to say truck heads were smaller ports and valves than Mustang heads, then when I pointed all this out, he edited his posts and said he didn't say it... I'm about done with that site.

fireguy 5.0....why did you say you're going with the Bassany Y-pipe next time? Is it a full Y or just a shorty pipe like the Flowmaster?
SVTCobra347 is offline  
post #13 of 23 Old 08-26-2005, 07:10 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 317
The Bassini seems to have the largest pipe (2.5" into 3") with the cleanest bends.
Plus it's cheap, and I'm pretty sure it's stainless. Hard to beat it on a 4X4 truck.
fireguy50 is offline  
post #14 of 23 Old 08-27-2005, 11:58 AM Thread Starter
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTCobra306
Edelbrock makes a nice Truck intake...Kinda pricey, like 580 bucks...
ROTFLMAO, I just finished gathering parts for my modular t-bird. To me $580 for an intake is a steal. The cheapest intake option for the modular is around $900.
Greenbird is offline  
post #15 of 23 Old 08-27-2005, 04:15 PM
US Army Active Duty
 
SVTCobra347's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Massena, Iowa
Posts: 2,433
I'm used to being able to drop 350-400 bucks for a used Edel or Cobra intake...

That Bassani looks like a really nice piece. Looks like that's what I'll go with when I go to the Catco converter. What's the usual price?
SVTCobra347 is offline  
post #16 of 23 Old 08-27-2005, 07:40 PM Thread Starter
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,521
I've heard bad things about catco convertors, but carsound (magnaflow) convertors can be had pretty cheap (like $50 for a 2.5 inch unit)
Greenbird is offline  
post #17 of 23 Old 08-30-2005, 05:30 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Odessa, TX
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by behay20
Where to start. The lighting has Gt-40 heads gt40 intake, a special cam made by svt. I beleive it has forged internals. Roller rockers. a cheesy ram air type thing in the grill. 4.11 gears. mid length tube headers. In reality the 95 f250 hp rating were rated at the flywheel where the lightings were hp rating were rated at the wheels. So since you loose 18% hp through drivetrain the lighning hp level is quiet a bit higher

This may be considered flaming, but as a Lightning owner, I had to interject and point out ALL the inaccuracies in this statement -

1) special cam made by SVT - SVT wasn't responsible for the Lightning's introduction, Ford's truck division was responsible for the design.
2) forged internals - not true
3) special Roller rockers - again, not true (I believe the stock ratio is 1.6:1)
4) Cheesy ram air type thing in the grille - Again, no. If you're referring to that plastic air intake tube that sits just on top of the grille, and goes to the factory airbox, that's stock on pretty much all Ford trucks of that vintage. My first truck, a 1990 F-150, had the same type setup. Nothing special. Now, right behind the plastic grille, there IS a factory oil cooler for the Lightning.
5) 4.11 gears - Uh, no, while there isn't much difference, the stock rear end gear ratio in a Lightning was 4.10:1.
6) mid length tube headers - no, the were factory tubular SHORTIES
7) HP ratings on the L were actually quite a bit higher - Probably true, but not for the reasons you put. At the time of the appearance of the '93 Lightning, Ford had recently adopted a new mathod for rating hp. Because of this new method, many believe our trucks were underrated, but they factory ratings weren't measured at the tires.

2006 Chevrolet Impala SS, 303 hp 5.3L V8
1997 Ford F150
4.2 V6 ready to go kaboom in style
Looking for just about any 5.4 4v parts for the truck.
westtexastiger is offline  
post #18 of 23 Old 08-31-2005, 01:48 AM Thread Starter
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,521
Any idea if my 95 F250 has roller rockers?

I'm considering a GT cam or maybe an E303. It doesn't have a MAF, but I'm confident I could convert it. I'm not worried about losing lowend, as 1st gear is 5.72:1 and it has 4.10 rear gears.
Greenbird is offline  
post #19 of 23 Old 08-31-2005, 03:01 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cookin in the Desert / Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbird
Any idea if my 95 F250 has roller rockers?
Not stock, it could only have em if somebody added them. Somewhat of an odd choice for initial upgrades. Roller rockers certainly free up some power by cutting down on friction. Also, by eliminating the friction you knock some temp out of the oil. They also tend to be more accurate on the ratio than stock rockers.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbird
I'm considering a GT cam or maybe an E303. It doesn't have a MAF, but I'm confident I could convert it. I'm not worried about losing lowend, as 1st gear is 5.72:1 and it has 4.10 rear gears.
Lots of options here cam wise. If staying Speed Density though, you will be limited. I'd do the E'brock intake and some good shortie headers with a good exhaust. Then go from there to a cam and rockers. At that point I'd add a roller cam since your block should be an F4TE which is setup to run a roller cam to begin with. Roller cam profiles = more power. Then, from there the big gains come from getting rid of those heads or having them majorly worked over. Cheaper to just go with something else.

See my sig for an example of some possible mod options. My low end is very strong, and my midrange is absolutely brutal.

I have forced quite a few cars (including V8's) to look at my spare tire carrier that couldn't believe they were not only getting passed, but then couldn't keep up either LOL. My cam and heads are clearly a good combo, and my intake and exhaust aren't strangling this little 357 to badly. I really mess with my buddies, even use the term "truck lengths" LOL to describe how far out on em I was instead of car lengths. They laugh and hate it at the same time. Its quite funny.
357Bronco is offline  
post #20 of 23 Old 09-03-2005, 12:24 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Rincon, Ga
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbird
Any idea if my 95 F250 has roller rockers?

I'm considering a GT cam or maybe an E303. It doesn't have a MAF, but I'm confident I could convert it. I'm not worried about losing lowend, as 1st gear is 5.72:1 and it has 4.10 rear gears.
The mods in my sig would deffinately help! The eddy heads make around 30 more hp than the gt 40's and about 70 more than the E7's.

Using the Desktop Dyno program, I'm pulling 335 hp and 425 tq. Not bad for bolt ons....

95 Lightning-Black #772
Edelbrock Heads / FMS 1.72 RR's
5.0 roller conversion-2* advanced
Bassani headers / x-pipe / side exit catback
MSD 6al / timing control / coil / wires / cap
ASP underdrives & smog pump delete
Modine 2" radiator / Dual efans

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ASAP is online now  
post #21 of 23 Old 09-03-2005, 12:53 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cookin in the Desert / Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 395
Desktop Dyno can be right on the money accurate and has been on some buildups I have plugged into it. Aswell as other peoples. Even when comparing to actual dyno'd buildups. It also unfortunately has the potential to be inacurate.

In my case with my current 357 I don't think its taking into account the intake only being so good, and the shortie headers again only being so good.

However, I do have a little rocketship for a Bronco and just for the sake of conversation the desktop dyno says my fresh little 357 is making 422 hp @ 5500 rpm, with a peak TQ of 464 ft lbs @ 4000 rpm. With 448 ft lbs available at 2000 rpm. Personally, I think there is a lot left in my engine. My heads will support I forget 600 or so. So they will never be the issue. I definetly think my engine is probably down 20 to 40 on the numbers other than my peak torque. This thing will do easy muscle car tire smoking burnouts. I've even taken a 70 SS 454 Chevelle repeatedly that a buddy bought recently (its just real mismatched cam for its gears and would be quicker in stock LS5 trim). All my buddies are confident I've got a 13.90 Bronco lol, which it does feel like.

Again, in my case my heads really like my cam, and vise versa.
357Bronco is offline  
post #22 of 23 Old 09-03-2005, 08:53 AM
US Army Active Duty
 
SVTCobra347's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (34)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Massena, Iowa
Posts: 2,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by 357Bronco
Again, in my case my heads really like my cam, and vise versa.

And that is the big key to making power out of an engine.
SVTCobra347 is offline  
post #23 of 23 Old 09-03-2005, 12:32 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cookin in the Desert / Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 395
One other thought about my combo which should be something to take into account when building an engine or thinking heads and cam, etc.

I was very very concerned about even running the 200 cc heads on a small block in a heavy truck. I had originally bought my heads when my engine budget was enough to support a 408 stroker buildup that I really wanted to do. Some things happened that really killed my budget.

Knowing these heads would be fine on a 357 if it were in a car was one thing, but in a heavy truck where you really really want to not sacrifice low end that much more (unless its a race truck), and in my case a daily driven for a while yet kind of truck. Well I was a touch concerned. I also was concerned about my cam selection big time. I knew I need to keep the duration real tame to maintain the low end and also the ability to work with Speed Density for a while as well as passing emissions. However, I also was concerned again about not having enough cam to support the heads. As it turns out my selection of a cam that has some decent lift numbers for its duration turned out to be the key. I think it is just barely enough in reality. I think its likely that based on what my heads are capable of supporting that any step up cam wise will likely yield very good gains over ofcourse having heads that are more restrictive.

I have some other smaller details as well as some other priorities altogether that will take me away from the engine for a little while, but I am planning / hopeing to do the Mass Air conversion in not to long. Then likely change to the car style intake with possible a switch to something with runners that are a touch bigger, but likely before even that I will tackle the headers and have some long tubes modified for my application. Maybe even Tri-Y's to again focus more on that low and midrange torque that really really is the key with a street driven heavy vehicle. After that, its 418 short block time and switch all the bolt ons over for a little torque monster.

Hope some of my thoughts and insight can be of some help. Its working great for me and many car owners that have been forced to look at my spare tire rack are true believers also.
357Bronco is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome