Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts!

Go Back   Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts! > >
Forgot Password? Join Us!

Welcome to Ford Ranger Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread

  #1  
Old 02-23-2011, 06:24 PM
mazdaman222 mazdaman222 is offline
Liking the Ford Ranger Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19
Cool 302 vs 351/400m

hello i was wondering if some one could tell me some pros and cons on a 302 vs a 351/400m im not sure what one i want to use any info will be appreciated thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-23-2011, 06:36 PM
brinker88 brinker88 is offline
TTB man
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,920
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

302 is the power you want with the gas mileage you need. Now, if you want balls to the walls power, throw a 351C or Windsor or 460 even. Check out this thread in another forum I found about 351Ms and 400 differences. I think you'll be surprised
__________________
1993 Ford Ranger Ext. Cab | stepside | 4x4 | 4.0L | Lifted | 35" BFG KM2s | MT Classic IIs | Dana 35/Disc 8.8 with 4.56's | Duals | Etc

RIP JASON
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-23-2011, 06:38 PM
ben10 ben10 is offline
slut life
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,014
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

yeah it depends on what your application is. i mean in a ranger if you throw a 351 or bigger in your really gonna have problems replacing parts on it without building it up quite a bit...
__________________
99 extended cab, 4.0, auto, 33s, 4x4 lifted with some stuff done

98 2wd 2.5, 5 speed, dropped with some stuff done
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-23-2011, 06:44 PM
brinker88 brinker88 is offline
TTB man
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,920
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

Quote:
Originally Posted by ben10 View Post
yeah it depends on what your application is. i mean in a ranger if you throw a 351 or bigger in your really gonna have problems replacing parts on it without building it up quite a bit...
If I was gonna have that much hp and 4x4, I'd want it straight axles with front d44 and narrowed 9 inch rear to support that hp.
__________________
1993 Ford Ranger Ext. Cab | stepside | 4x4 | 4.0L | Lifted | 35" BFG KM2s | MT Classic IIs | Dana 35/Disc 8.8 with 4.56's | Duals | Etc

RIP JASON
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-23-2011, 06:57 PM
ben10 ben10 is offline
slut life
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,014
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

i wouldnt even want half ton running gear, it would still cause problems...
__________________
99 extended cab, 4.0, auto, 33s, 4x4 lifted with some stuff done

98 2wd 2.5, 5 speed, dropped with some stuff done
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-23-2011, 07:07 PM
mazdaman222 mazdaman222 is offline
Liking the Ford Ranger Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

"I found about 351Ms and 400 differences"
the only difference between them is the stroke. it is the same block.

and i would be putting it in a 2wd not a 4x4 lol
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-23-2011, 07:12 PM
More_Cowbell More_Cowbell is offline
Chrome Dont Get You Home
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

351M/400 is a pig of a motor made for towing thats what the old f-100s and f-250s used them if you want a street vehicle get you a 302 or a 351W or 351C you will be much happier with those
__________________
1990 Ranger Extended Cab
2.9L V6 5 Speed Transmission
Planning to put a 347 and a T-5 in it eventually

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger View Post
It looks like someone attacked the front of the truck with a bedazzler.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-23-2011, 07:13 PM
ben10 ben10 is offline
slut life
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,014
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

well it really all boils down to what you wanna do with it, how much power your looking to get from it, and how much you wanna spend. plus there is a lot more info on the 302 swap. im assuming gas isnt an issue, so why dont you throw some more direct questions out there. plus and minus- both are big fast loud and drink a lot of gas.
__________________
99 extended cab, 4.0, auto, 33s, 4x4 lifted with some stuff done

98 2wd 2.5, 5 speed, dropped with some stuff done
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-23-2011, 07:27 PM
More_Cowbell More_Cowbell is offline
Chrome Dont Get You Home
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

if you wanna haul ass and suck gas in a straight line then throw a 460 in there if you want to stil be able to drive it and not have the most front heavy vehicle ever go with a 302 you can make 500hp easily with a 302 stroked out to a 347 with a good set of heads on it
__________________
1990 Ranger Extended Cab
2.9L V6 5 Speed Transmission
Planning to put a 347 and a T-5 in it eventually

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger View Post
It looks like someone attacked the front of the truck with a bedazzler.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-23-2011, 07:43 PM
pooleo pooleo is offline
Ban Survivor. (x2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,764
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

302 FTW, I think performance parts and parts in general are more abundant and cheaper.
__________________
1999 | Ext. Cab | 4.0 | 4x4 | 4.10's
Quote:
A Gladiator does not fear death. He embraces it. Caresses it. Fucks it. Each time he enters the arena, he slips his c0ck in the mouth of the beast, and prays to thrust home before the jaws snap shut. - Oenomaus
Ball Joints/Upper A-Arms How To
Replace Door pin/bushing
Repair broken dome light tabs
VIDEO OHC Install
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-24-2011, 10:57 AM
mazdaman222 mazdaman222 is offline
Liking the Ford Ranger Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

the 460 is out man i can get like 2 351m for like 200-300 each off kijiji
or my uncle and grand father has quite a few 302s i was just wondering what one would be easeyer to install and what you guys thaught was the better engine.oh and i want to build it as a summer driver there is wayyy to much ice salt and snow in the winters here in nova scotia lol.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-24-2011, 11:04 AM
brett20 brett20 is offline
BEASTTTT MODEEEE
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,215
Send a message via Yahoo to brett20
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

drop a 4.6 marauder engine in there and supercharge it
__________________
2013 f150 fx4 ecoboost. Couple mods
SOLD 2002 silver frost 3.slow xlt.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-24-2011, 01:18 PM
mazdaman222 mazdaman222 is offline
Liking the Ford Ranger Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

the 302 or the 351/400m is just about i can afford/locate i have no money for a supercharger lol. but i was planning on saveing the cash for a twin turbo setup (down the road of course)
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-24-2011, 01:28 PM
ben10 ben10 is offline
slut life
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,014
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

302 more info and easier swap. Plenty of power upgrade.
__________________
99 extended cab, 4.0, auto, 33s, 4x4 lifted with some stuff done

98 2wd 2.5, 5 speed, dropped with some stuff done
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-24-2011, 04:14 PM
mazdaman222 mazdaman222 is offline
Liking the Ford Ranger Forum
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19
Default Re: 302 vs 351/400m

sweet thanks. but what about carbureted over fuel injected what one is easer to hook up?
on both engines
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Want a 302 southbama man 8-Cylinder Tech 12 10-17-2010 10:22 AM
302. Sam French 8-Cylinder Tech 11 09-12-2010 07:12 PM
For Sale: 351 v8 DEBO Engine & Drivetrain Parts 0 02-28-2010 06:57 PM
351 w help irishtown14 8-Cylinder Tech 1 11-26-2009 01:17 AM
351 FireFighter27 8-Cylinder Tech 1 09-10-2009 06:31 AM