Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > General Topics > The Pub

The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-09-2005, 08:07 PM   #1
aimzes
...fairly odd
 
aimzes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: mcdonalds college of hamburger knowledge
Posts: 901
Default its a 5.8!

a 351 is a 5.8 litre right? its 5765cc or something but rounded up its 5.8. over the years ive seen write ups in mags where they go "the awesome power of the 5.7 in the ford" like for instance an article on a cobra which in the pics had 5.8 badges the writer put it down as a 5.7.

and i let it go for years. it was usually online on some yuppy-a*sed site (carpoint...etc.) so i though wtf would they know so i didnt really give a s**t. but recently i read it in (i think) performance ford mag... either that or street fords mag.

so wtf. do you refer to it as a 5.7 or a 5.8?

__________________
1992 EB Falcon 5.0 V8. mods; dust, dirt, cobwebs, scratches, trolley dents, dented bonnet, gutter scrapes, rattly exhaust, and floor mats.
aimzes is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:10 PM   #2
Dave_au
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Northern Sydney
Posts: 1,908
Default

Excuse my ignorance, but does it err.... matter?
Dave_au is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:10 PM   #3
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

i refer to it as 351....
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:17 PM   #4
HOON69
Banned
 
HOON69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In A House
Posts: 2,467
Default

closer to 5.8 then a 5.7 so its gotta be 5.8 aint it.

i've always regarded them as a 5.8 anyways.
HOON69 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:18 PM   #5
Peuty
Afterburner + skids =
Donating Member1
 
Peuty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Skidsville
Posts: 12,136
Default

Yeah, always a 5.8. But to save confusion, a 351.
__________________
Speed Kills. So buy an AU XR8 and live forever.

Oo\===/oO
Peuty is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:19 PM   #6
aimzes
...fairly odd
 
aimzes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: mcdonalds college of hamburger knowledge
Posts: 901
Default

Quote:
Excuse my ignorance, but does it err.... matter?
no, not really. but it annoys me. and id like to know what others think or refer to it as... so either answer the question or dont reply. i really dont see why it was nessesary for you to ask that. of corse, you are entitled to ask it... i guess.
__________________
1992 EB Falcon 5.0 V8. mods; dust, dirt, cobwebs, scratches, trolley dents, dented bonnet, gutter scrapes, rattly exhaust, and floor mats.
aimzes is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:24 PM   #7
RED_EL_XR8
Banned
 
RED_EL_XR8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Not suffering Fools Gladly!!
Posts: 2,864
Default

Now can we all play nice ladies. we are all entiled to opinions aren't we?
RED_EL_XR8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:28 PM   #8
LUXO_8
windsor user
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Geelong
Posts: 13,123
Default

the other one that i dont like is when the 5.0 in the EB - AU is refered as a 4.9
LUXO_8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:31 PM   #9
aimzes
...fairly odd
 
aimzes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: mcdonalds college of hamburger knowledge
Posts: 901
Default

Quote:
the other one that i dont like is when the 5.0 in the EB - AU is refered as a 4.9
lol. id just call it a 5.0.
__________________
1992 EB Falcon 5.0 V8. mods; dust, dirt, cobwebs, scratches, trolley dents, dented bonnet, gutter scrapes, rattly exhaust, and floor mats.
aimzes is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:31 PM   #10
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MADNC_8
the other one that i dont like is when the 5.0 in the EB - AU is refered as a 4.9
See I call the AU a 5.0 regardless... But hey, 302ci or 308ci... who cares
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:35 PM   #11
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

99% of the time... its rounded up as follows...

5050cc - 5149cc = 5.1 litres

4950cc - 5049cc = 5.0 litres

Ford's 302W is one exception to this rule, being 4942cc, its actually a 4.9litre V8.

Far as I know, the 351 is 5756cc, which makes it a 5.8 litre.
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:37 PM   #12
OzJavelin
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
OzJavelin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,633
Default

I think Fords best was when they frigged around with displacement for 427/428/429s that they were selling concurrently! Chev did a good one with the smogger 402 big-block .. called it a 396 like the good
ole MarkIV!!
OzJavelin is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:50 PM   #13
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffo
99% of the time... its rounded up as follows...

5050cc - 5149cc = 5.1 litres

4950cc - 5049cc = 5.0 litres

Ford's 302W is one exception to this rule, being 4942cc, its actually a 4.9litre V8.

Far as I know, the 351 is 5756cc, which makes it a 5.8 litre.
Thats standard mathematics.... and it shouldn't be as "Far as i know" for a 351ci being 5751.859464cc. cubic measurements means that 1ci = 1" x 1" x 1" = 2.54cm x 2.54cm x 2.54cm. Therefore 1ci = ~16.387cc. Therefore 351ci = 351 x 16.387 = 5751.8ci. Technically speaking, because my smallest number of significant digits is 3 (in the 351) then I can only really say 351 x 16.387 = 5.75l (or 5.75 cubic decimetres), which still rounds up to 5.8L, however as said before we are technically right in calling it 5.75L.
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 08:51 PM   #14
NAK302
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
NAK302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: coowonga
Posts: 1,654
Default

i have only seen 5.8 and 4.9 badges on fords with clevelands, that'll do for me.
NAK302 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 09:37 PM   #15
dogbreath_48
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
dogbreath_48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Croydon, VIC
Posts: 501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parawolf
Thats standard mathematics.... and it shouldn't be as "Far as i know" for a 351ci being 5751.859464cc. cubic measurements means that 1ci = 1" x 1" x 1" = 2.54cm x 2.54cm x 2.54cm. Therefore 1ci = ~16.387cc. Therefore 351ci = 351 x 16.387 = 5751.8ci. Technically speaking, because my smallest number of significant digits is 3 (in the 351) then I can only really say 351 x 16.387 = 5.75l (or 5.75 cubic decimetres), which still rounds up to 5.8L, however as said before we are technically right in calling it 5.75L.
Of course we're presuming these engines displace exactly 351.00/302.00ci (i^3) So some published cm^3 measurments may just have been measures more accurately.

-Stu
dogbreath_48 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 09:41 PM   #16
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogbreath_48
Of course we're presuming these engines displace exactly 351.00/302.00ci (i^3) So some published cm^3 measurments may just have been measures more accurately.

-Stu
Exactly :
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 10:41 PM   #17
xdclevo
The Fun Mobile
 
xdclevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cairns
Posts: 5,219
Default

Cool. I ran a 12.47, so its really a 12.00. And my mate did 11.77, so he also did a 12. We are equal. hahaha :
__________________
408 cube Cleveland
TFC @ AFD 2V, 750 DP
10.7 @ 125 mph
2V powahhhhh
xdclevo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 10:48 PM   #18
gtfpv
GT
 
gtfpv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 9,205
Default

ford has it right . 5.8 - 4.9
NOW WHAT ABOUT 4.1 - 3.9 - 4.0 . ONCE AGAIN THESE ENGINES WERE ALL AS SPECIFIED.
gtfpv is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 04-09-2005, 10:57 PM   #19
Pearly
Lowriding
 
Pearly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cruising
Posts: 3,174
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: For the time spent at most functions taking photos free for us 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parawolf
Thats standard mathematics.... and it shouldn't be as "Far as i know" for a 351ci being 5751.859464cc. cubic measurements means that 1ci = 1" x 1" x 1" = 2.54cm x 2.54cm x 2.54cm. Therefore 1ci = ~16.387cc. Therefore 351ci = 351 x 16.387 = 5751.8ci. Technically speaking, because my smallest number of significant digits is 3 (in the 351) then I can only really say 351 x 16.387 = 5.75l (or 5.75 cubic decimetres), which still rounds up to 5.8L, however as said before we are technically right in calling it 5.75L.
Ah, see, I knew I wasn't ****ing money away when I bought those custom 5.75L badges for my Fairlane.

Pearly is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 05:43 AM   #20
FPV GT
I Like To Shake It
 
FPV GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xdclevo
Cool. I ran a 12.47, so its really a 12.00. And my mate did 11.77, so he also did a 12. We are equal. hahaha :
: :

Thats the funniest post around !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Always has been referrred to a 5.8, only the wannabecleverclogswhocantbe sprout "Well, actually its a 5.75" - and most of them come from the other side.

Well my old XE before the mods was a 5.73.........cuz it had .02 carbon build up on the piston tops......................

Hey if its good enough for the shops to round up.........

Regards
Paul
__________________
Regards
Paul

2016 S550 TY GT Coupe....some loud bits and some glass bits

I like My GT SHAKEN, and Blown
Happiness is a TY S550, a 1911 semi automatic, and the Lovey Lizzie by my side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovely Lizzie
whilst looking at man riding a pee wee 50
"That sure does nothing for his masculinity"
FPV GT is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 09:41 AM   #21
XD 351 Ute
Excessive Fuel Ingestion
 
XD 351 Ute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central Queensland Coast
Posts: 1,586
Default

A 351 bored 30 thou over should clear up any confusion........

Ed
XD 351 Ute is online now   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 09:48 AM   #22
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default fixing quote/unquote

Quote:
Originally Posted by FPV GT
Always has been referrred to a 5.8, only the wannabecleverclogswhocantbe sprout "Well, actually its a 5.75" - and most of them come from the other side.
I was talking mathematically, not marketing wise. If you took much of my post seriously, then well you need to lay off the medicine. : I was primarily pointing holes in the number that Steffo came up with as a cubic centimetre displacement for the 5.8L/351ci engine.

Now - about that comment about me coming from 'the other side'... got much proof of that? or shall I be seeing you at Sandown with the rest of the Ford car club ticket purchasers hopefully cheering on a hopeful blue victory. I know I will be there, wouldn't miss it for the world.
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...

Last edited by parawolf; 05-09-2005 at 11:02 AM.
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 09:50 AM   #23
dogbreath_48
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
dogbreath_48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Croydon, VIC
Posts: 501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parawolf
Exactly :
...ohh yeah, shoulda read your post first :P

-Stu
dogbreath_48 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 10:29 AM   #24
LTDHO
The one and only
 
LTDHO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Carrum Downs, Victoria
Posts: 9,053
Default

351 is 5.8
it's easy.
However I think Ford should have kept the EB V8 a 4.9.
The two reasons I see is 1) to sepparate it from the 302C and 2) because the americans call it a 5.0.
__________________
1992 DC LTDHO 360rwkw built by me
Tuned by CVE Performance
Going of the rails on a crazy train
Other cars include Dynamic ED Sprint, Dynamic DL LTD, Sparkling Burgundy DL LTD, Yellow, Red & Blue XB sedan & Black XB Coupe
LTDHO is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 11:11 AM   #25
chevypower
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
chevypower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Utah
Posts: 3,479
Default

When I read the topic heading I thought you were giving info on the BF GT!!!!
chevypower is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 11:29 AM   #26
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogbreath_48
Of course we're presuming these engines displace exactly 351.00/302.00ci (i^3) So some published cm^3 measurments may just have been measures more accurately.

-Stu
Ford's 351 is actually 352.2 ci (4.002" bore and 3.500" stroke)

352.2 ci is 5776.08cc, which is 5.8 litres. :Reverend:
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 12:08 PM   #27
parawolf
beep beep
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffo
Ford's 351 is actually 352.2 ci (4.002" bore and 3.500" stroke)

352.2 ci is 5776.08cc, which is 5.8 litres. :Reverend:
5776cc or didn't you read my above year 9 maths discussion? 4 signifcant digits is the least accurate number you have. :
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
parawolf is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 12:12 PM   #28
RED_EL_XR8
Banned
 
RED_EL_XR8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Not suffering Fools Gladly!!
Posts: 2,864
Default

Is this stuff actually worth argueing about? honestly :
RED_EL_XR8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 12:24 PM   #29
GreenMachine
Mopar/No Car
 
GreenMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down the Obi..
Posts: 4,648
Tech Writer: Recognition for the technical writers of AFF - Issue reason: Sensational write up about drum brakes. 
Default

There's an old story about a lawyer, an economist and a statistician who go hunting. They come across a massive deer, standing in a clearing. The lawyer aims, shoots, and the bullet kicks up dust 3 feet to the right of the deer. Quick as a flash, the economist aims, shoots, and kicks up dust 3 feet to the left of the deer.

The statistician throws his hat up in the air and screams "we hit it! we hit it!"



This post only has a very tenuous link to the topic at hand.
__________________
ColumnShift Media

'72 Plymouth Scamp
'80 Courier
'13 Kawasaki ZX14-R
'13 Berlina
'92 Suzuki DR650

If you don't fight - You lose
GreenMachine is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 05-09-2005, 12:36 PM   #30
Gammaboy
Grinder+Welder = Race car
 
Gammaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Briz-Vegas
Posts: 3,937
Default

who cares... 351C >> 350 chev :P
__________________
"No, it will never have enough power until I can spin the wheels at the end of the straightaway in high gear"
- Too much power is never enough....Mark Donohue on the Can Am Porsche 917.
Gammaboy is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Reply


Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 07:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL