Ken Block AWD 1965 Mustang "Hoonicorn RTR" 845HP

Or more likely a Roush-Yates 358cui Nascar engine.
A word of advice: every motor in NASCAR is based on a Cleveland. The only difference between what would be considered a Chevy and a Ford in each NASCAR car is the chassis.

That said, Mr. Block's new toy is essentially a NASCAR car if the 1965 Mustang was racing under today's NASCAR rules. I find no fault in that.
 
A word of advice: every motor in NASCAR is based on a Cleveland. The only difference between what would be considered a Chevy and a Ford in each NASCAR car is the chassis.


So you're basically saying that it doesn't matter if the motor is made by TRD or Triad or Pro Motors or ECR or Hendrick or Yates Power, They are all the same engine and that basically, the names are nothing more then badges?
 
So you're basically saying that it doesn't matter if the motor is made by TRD or Triad or Pro Motors or ECR or Hendrick or Yates Power, They are all the same engine and that basically, the names are nothing more then badges?

Hell no.

The thing about building 900hp, 9000rpm small blocks for stock cars that drive for 3 hours on full tilt is that it's really freaking difficult. When you get to that level, the amount of trade secrets and proprietary engineering is incredible.
 
So you're basically saying that it doesn't matter if the motor is made by TRD or Triad or Pro Motors or ECR or Hendrick or Yates Power, They are all the same engine and that basically, the names are nothing more then badges?
That isn't what I was quite saying. What I was saying is that the Cleveland is the "Father" engine to where all other NASCAR engines are based off of today. I'm sure that the teams tweak the engines to where no two teams are the same engine, but for dollar for dollar, you can build a comparable NASCAR engine with off the shelf parts if you do everything right.
 
Hell no.

The thing about building 900hp, 9000rpm small blocks for stock cars that drive for 3 hours on full tilt is that it's really freaking difficult. When you get to that level, the amount of trade secrets and proprietary engineering is incredible.
So, for the most part, I was right?
 
The widebody kit isn't very well done. It looks tacked on compared to something like the GoPro Camaro which blended the existing lines into the flares well.

SEMA-Pro-Touring-17.jpg
 
So, for the most part, I was right?
Clevelands are well known to be high RPM screamers with some work done, that was part of the appeal back in the day. Clevelands dominated NASCAR up untiil about 1984 when it was dropped for a 351 Windsor with a Cleveland top half (basically a Boss 302 but with a 351 block) until 2009, when the FR9 was developed. The FR9 engine built by Roush-Yates resembles a 351C in a lot of ways. Parts won't interchange, but similarities betwen them are pretty apparent.

Yes, there is some change over time, various weakness fixed etc, but for the most part, just about every NASCAR engine has roots or is based on the 351 Cleveland. The basic design was clsoe to state of the art; it was a engine that could run down big blocks of the day. And it shows too. If you disect them all and laid them out, you can find very distinct similarities between a standard production 351C (more specifically, the high compresion 4V version with closed chamber heads, or better yet, the Boss 351 Mustang engine) and it's NASCAR variant. Clevelands quite plainly were the king of small blocks until the LS1 came out; and rumour has it that the LS1 was designed similarly to the C. I actually think the heads bolt onto each others respective enigne block. I have been told that the small block 5.7L used in Tundra TRD's is actually pretty close to the Cleveland as well; but I can't say for sure. This would kind of make sense since Toyotas engine is based off of the trucks small blocks, and the NASCAR variant has some noticeable similarities.

The FR9 motor is based on the Boss 302 style engine, with a Windsor type block and Cleveland top end; but it's not either of those engines, more so based on them with the same architechure and what not.
 
Last edited:
Okay off topic but I have to clear this up a little.
A word of advice: every motor in NASCAR is based on a Cleveland. The only difference between what would be considered a Chevy and a Ford in each NASCAR car is the chassis.

That said, Mr. Block's new toy is essentially a NASCAR car if the 1965 Mustang was racing under today's NASCAR rules. I find no fault in that.
The chevy sb2 and sb2.2 used in the 1990's and early 2000's are just Chevy small blocks, the heads are the magic which is actually a canter valve design simillar to a chevy big block head and they will fit on a regular old small block without a problem, and is actually done more than people think. The new r07 is heavily influenced by the lsx series but is fairly unique being built within the NASCAR rules as I isn't allowed most of the things that make them so great like the head design.
Clevelands are well known to be high RPM screamers with some work done, that was part of the appeal back in the day. Clevelands dominated NASCAR up untiil about 1984 when it was dropped for a 351 Windsor with a Cleveland top half (basically a Boss 302 but with a 351 block) until 2009, when the FR9 was developed. The FR9 engine built by Roush-Yates resembles a 351C in a lot of ways. Parts won't interchange, but similarities betwen them are pretty apparent.

Yes, there is some change over time, various weakness fixed etc, but for the most part, just about every NASCAR engine has roots or is based on the 351 Cleveland. The basic design was clsoe to state of the art; it was a engine that could run down big blocks of the day. And it shows too. If you disect them all and laid them out, you can find very distinct similarities between a standard production 351C (more specifically, the high compresion 4V version with closed chamber heads, or better yet, the Boss 351 Mustang engine) and it's NASCAR variant. Clevelands quite plainly were the king of small blocks until the LS1 came out; and rumour has it that the LS1 was designed similarly to the C. I actually think the heads bolt onto each others respective enigne block. I have been told that the small block 5.7L used in Tundra TRD's is actually pretty close to the Cleveland as well; but I can't say for sure. This would kind of make sense since Toyotas engine is based off of the trucks small blocks, and the NASCAR variant has some noticeable similarities.

The FR9 motor is based on the Boss 302 style engine, with a Windsor type block and Cleveland top end; but it's not either of those engines, more so based on them with the same architechure and what not.
I can't speak for the block itself as I'm not super familiar with the 351c but I do know the lsx and the cathedral port heads are completely and totally unique as is the extremely shallow valve angle (12 degrees I think)so its kind of an apples to oranges comparison there.
 
They were based on the closed chamber 4V Cleveland heads with canted valves from my understanding; I can't say for sure but I've heard some motors used splayed valves and some used canted. They aren't the same as the C heads, but very similar from a few people that I know who have experience with both. Up until the LS1 came out, nothing really touched the Cleveland as far as small blocks go. The blocks aren't the same though; the bolt pattern and water jackets line up from what I hear however. I don't have experience as far as them being side by side so I can't say for certain; most of it's just word of mouth from guys who have. I believe Robert Yates also helped with the head design. Basically big block heads on a small block.
 
The concept for this car is absolutely got damned awesome. The aesthetics for it are incredibly ugly. Yet again, it's a Ken Block video car, so it had to scream. Imagine this thing in brilliant black with all the carbon fiber parts bare, and deep, magnesium, center-lock BBSs in gold and it would be perfect.
 
I quite like these discusions. Keeps things interesting.

They are interesting, but they're interesting on a 351C thread on a Ford Forum or somewhere like the tech section of LS1Tech.

We're discussing an AWD Rally car, NASCAR, Mustang hybrid. There are better things to discuss than the specifics of the 351C.

But hey I'm not going to tell you to stop, go nuts if that's what you like.
 
They are interesting, but they're interesting on a 351C thread on a Ford Forum or somewhere like the tech section of LS1Tech.

We're discussing an AWD Rally car, NASCAR, Mustang hybrid. There are better things to discuss than the specifics of the 351C.

But hey I'm not going to tell you to stop, go nuts if that's what you like.
And those specifics of the 351C are what gives you what you see in this thread :rolleyes:
 
And those specifics of the 351C are what gives you what you see in this thread :rolleyes:

No it doesn't. They could drop any high power V8, or even any high power motor in there and this car would warrant discussion.

The specifics of the 351C are what give you NASCAR competition or the details of some old Ford in a build thread.
 
No it doesn't. They could drop any high power V8, or even any high power motor in there and this car would warrant discussion.

The specifics of the 351C are what give you NASCAR competition or the details of some old Ford in a build thread.
And yet they didn't and we are discussing what it in relation to what it was based on. I don't see the issue.
 
And yet they didn't and we are discussing what it in relation to what it was based on. I don't see the issue.

There is no issue. It's just boring.

You're not discussing the Cleveland in relation to this car, you're taking another opportunity to regurgitate as much classic Ford knowledge and word-of-mouth rumors as possible. Nobody cares how much the 351C supposedly influenced the LS1 and TRD 5.7. Nobody cares about the water jackets on the LS1 vs 351C. Nobody cares whether the valves on the Cleveland were canted.

I'll say again. We have a 800hp AWD Mustang that's going to do donuts, drifts, and jumps in sexy slow-motion for our viewing pleasure. The FordRSoGud history lessons belongs where it's interesting and important, not here.
 
There is no issue. It's just boring.

You're not discussing the Cleveland in relation to this car, you're taking another opportunity to regurgitate as much classic Ford knowledge and word-of-mouth rumors as possible. Nobody cares how much the 351C supposedly influenced the LS1 and TRD 5.7. Nobody cares about the water jackets on the LS1 vs 351C. Nobody cares whether the valves on the Cleveland were canted.

I care about it, so you'd be wrong in saying no one does.

I'll say again. We have a 800hp AWD Mustang that's going to do donuts, drifts, and jumps in sexy slow-motion for our viewing pleasure. The FordRSoGud history lessons belongs where it's interesting and important, not here.
You're missing the point.
 
The concept for this car is absolutely got damned awesome. The aesthetics for it are incredibly ugly. Yet again, it's a Ken Block video car, so it had to scream. Imagine this thing in brilliant black with all the carbon fiber parts bare, and deep, magnesium, center-lock BBSs in gold and it would be perfect.

It would have been awesome if they had actually used a 65 Mustang body.
 
Back