351R vs. 351 lightning motor?

[n2fords2003]

What was the logic behind using the boat motor over the lightning 351 roller motor?

They have the same heads and intake. Is the flat tapped cam more in some category? I dont see why they didnt use a motor they already had.

 

[GJMCAR98]

That's a good question and I hope someone can Awnser it. Could of had something to do with emissions. Maybe they didn't think they could get the truck motor passed the EPA to install in a street car ( I don't even know if the standards between a truck and a car were different back then it's just a guess ). Or maybe the add guys didn't want to promote a racecar with a truck motor in it. I'm sure there are a few people on here that can get to the bottom of it.Be good to know....

 

[birdman941]

Lightning block was roller capable but had a hydraulic flat tappet cam.
Probably a cost and emissions decision

 

[n2fords2003]

Lightning block was roller capable but had a hydraulic flat tappet cam.
Probably a cost and emissions decision

REALLY? I thought the 93 cobra, 93 R, and Lightning all had roller motors

 

[tomshep]

As far as the emissions, there was some sort of a loophole that allowed Ford to submit the 5.8 as a larger 5.0. Same motor, same design, same architecture, just more displacement. This saved Ford a ton of $$$ in getting it certified and also sped up the process.

The rumor has always been the marine block was of better metal. I have one sitting in my shop and it was purchased from Roush on a crate a few years ago. It is a full marine motor, brand new, never ran. It has GT heads, full shortblock with oil, no rockers but valvetrain is complete and cast iron GT40 lower intake. I have not taken the intake off to confirm if there is a cam or lifters in it.

Tom

 

[wheelhopper]

REALLY? I thought the 93 cobra, 93 R, and Lightning all had roller motors

Even if the lightning motor was a roller, and I am not sure it was, it has nothing to do with the '93 Cobra or '93 Cobra R motor. Those are both the same basic block that came in the standard GT and 5.0LX.

 

[birdman941]

Even if the lightning motor was a roller, and I am not sure it was, it has nothing to do with the '93 Cobra or '93 Cobra R motor. Those are both the same basic block that came in the standard GT and 5.0LX.

I am 100% certain the Lightning 5.8 block was roller capable with a flat tappet hydraulic cam.

 

[Svt Fox]

The lightning engine block was cast and machined as a roller block.

End Thread.

 

[n2fords2003]

The lightning engine block was cast and machined as a roller block.

End Thread.

Not the end.. so it ended up flat or roller?
Why two different yet the same motors? see thread title?

 

[Svt Fox]

I am posting on my phone. I am not going to write a dissertation on why they were built that way. Go to a library and read about it.

Bottom line is, all lightning 351 blocks were cast and machined as roller blocks.

 

[n2fords2003]

I am posting on my phone. I am not going to write a dissertation on why they were built that way. Go to a library and read about it.

Bottom line is, all lightning 351 blocks were cast and machined as roller blocks.

And a cross dresser named Jerry did the machine work.. so what?

 

[Svt Fox]

And a cross dresser named Jerry did the machine work.. so what?

That made no sense whatsoever.

 

[rwboring]

That made no sense whatsoever.

he is saying just because they were cast and machined as roller blocks doesn't specifically answer if they were a roller motor, was it a roller cam or was the block just set up for one?

 

[Svt Fox]

he is saying just because they were cast and machined as roller blocks doesn't specifically answer if they were a roller motor, was it a roller cam or was the block just set up for one?

I am going to assume that when you say set up for one, that they came with a roller cam.

The only 5.8 that I know for sure came with a roller cam is the 95 Cobra R.

Either way it doesn't really matter because if you have a roller block, you can out a roller cam in with easy without having to use the link bar style lifters.

 

[Ruslow]

Wrong!!! the 94-5 lightning blocks were cast and machined for roller cams but the dist gear is not steel it is still cast and the 93 blocks are not roller blocks.To have a roller cast block need to be F4TE for roller and all 351 were truck designation.As for diff between the lightning and R it is camshaft only the cam in the lightning was merc marine design since the trucks at that time were not under the same emission standards but the rest of the long block is the same MAYBE pistons were diff in comp but rods,crank,heads,timng chain,oil pump same stuff.Even the dist and dist cap were the same and many of the plug wires were to.Stan

 

[Svt Fox]

Wrong!!! the 94-5 lightning blocks were cast and machined for roller cams but the dist gear is not steel it is still cast and the 93 blocks are not roller blocks.To have a roller cast block need to be F4TE for roller and all 351 were truck designation.As for diff between the lightning and R it is camshaft only the cam in the lightning was merc marine design since the trucks at that time were not under the same emission standards but the rest of the long block is the same MAYBE pistons were diff in comp but rods,crank,heads,timng chain,oil pump same stuff.Even the dist and dist cap were the same and many of the plug wires were to.Stan

WRONG!!! Apparently there are several 93 lightning blocks that were roller. I am not regurgitating something I have read. I am going by what I have seen. I have seen 4 different 93 lightnings over the last 19 years that were roller blocks. Two were rebuilds, the other two were H/C/I swaps that's why I thought all were however some of the "early" 93's were not.

 

[Svt Fox]

Reading material...


http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/1st-generation-21/680347-i-am-stumped-351w-roller.html

http://www.nloc.net/vbforum/gen-1-lightnings/123236-block-question.html

 

[GJMCAR98]

I THOUGHT any 351W Block that came with fuel injection, even a work truck, we're roller cam motors. GJ

 

[n2fords2003]

I am going to assume that when you say set up for one, that they came with a roller cam.

The only 5.8 that I know for sure came with a roller cam is the 95 Cobra R.

Either way it doesn't really matter because if you have a roller block, you can out a roller cam in with easy without having to use the link bar style lifters.

WOW... have you not read anything above your first post. This thread isnt about how blocks where setup or IF they could be changed to a roller. Your too far off subject and wrong at that..

Either way it doesn't really matter because if you have a roller block, you can out a roller cam in with easy without having to use the link bar style lifters.

Are you talking about not having to use the dog bones that connect two lifters to each other? No on second thought I dont want to know.. Not going to straighten you out on that either..

 

[Ruslow]

I to have owned a few lightning 2 being low mile 20k and 40k trucks and neither were roller blocks.For the 351 block to be a roller it HAD to be F4 which makes it a casting in 94 if there were any 93s with that block it had to be a replacement or a VERY late production.Stan