Firing Orders -> Bearing wear.... A Discussion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread though short is an interesting read about the Fords.http://forums.corral.net/forums/5-0-5-8-engine-tech/1197196-best-firing-order-sbf.html

Some claimed the 351W got the revised firing order because it had front main bearing wear issues. Others claimed that the 5.0 HO got the 351W firing order only because they used a Torino cam. Another pointed out that Ford lightened the block after '78 and need the revised firing order. Anyway, any front bearing wear problem is an issue of main bearing web strength and Ford windsor engines, and not extrapolatable to other V8s brands like Chevy
48.gif
. Other V8s can handle the old firing order
48.gif
.
 
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
This thread though short is an interesting read about the Fords.http://forums.corral.net/forums/5-0-5-8-engine-tech/1197196-best-firing-order-sbf.html

Some claimed the 351W got the revised firing order because it had front main bearing wear issues. Others claimed that the 5.0 HO got the 351W firing order only because they used a Torino cam. Another pointed out that Ford lightened the block after '78 and need the revised firing order. Anyway, any front bearing wear problem is an issue of main bearing web strength and Ford windsor engines, and not extrapolatable to other V8s brands like Chevy
48.gif
. Other V8s can handle the old firing order
48.gif
.


[censored]
wink.gif


I'm talking about the rod bearings, not the mains, LOL!

And yes, the blocks (like their GM counterparts) were switched to thin-wall castings. Early blocks are desirable (as I mentioned earlier) due to their added strength and ability to be run to much higher power levels.

The 351W had another problem: HUGE main bearings (3") that had oil starvation issues when the engines were rev'd. I don't think this has anything to do with the firing order issue however.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top