300HP with a stone stock 302 short block is easy. Cheap too! If that's all youre looking for, I'd save the money you'd be spending on a stroker and put it elsewhere in the car, maybe save it up for a stroker (or a 351w) later on down the road when the 300 HP 302 gets boring. Mild camshaft, aftermarket intake, 600 carb, long tube headers and you're there.
The reason I was considering the stroker is for future expansion. The question I have is, what are my limitations with thing such as a cast crank vs. a 4340 forged one, etc. I don't expect to be running over 400 hp in this car while I'm driving it daily. So if I went with a 331 stroker, with a cast crank, forged rods and pistons, and a mild cam, a set of e7te heads P&P, 3 angle valve job, a 4 barrel intake with a 600cfm carb, a good set of headers, and the rest of the bolt ons, I can later expand to a better set of heads, an a forged crank, etc. I'm also interested in the torque increase on the stroker over the base 302. I'd rather not reuse my stock block, but get a roller to start with.
Check out DSS they are outside of Chicago nice drive for you to pick up a shortblock. http://www.dssracing.com/ I agree the 331 is a better choice for the street due to oil control and block loads. You don't want this to happen http://mmb.maverick.to/attachment.php?attachmentid=7046&stc=1 With a limited budget you may want to invest in heads, cam, intake and carb for your current 302.
Your current block can be retro fitted for roller lifters with a kit from Comp Cams or Crane http://www.mustangandfords.com/techarticles/9234/index37.html
I agree with you on all but this point. The issue is not so much rod ratio in the sense of power potential, as a racer would view it, but in a sense of longevity. A low rod ratio transmits more energy to the side due to rod angularity, which in turn is placed directly onto the thrust side of the cylinder walls. So a low ratio wears out the block quicker than a higher ratio with less rod angularity and side loading. This is the only reason I personally wouldn't run a 347 on the street. I view a street car a something that you should get some decent mileage out of before replacing the block. Yes, the 347 has a rod ratio down with the likes of a 400 Chevy, but you don't see 400 Chevy rods being re-used for perfomance applications. They are tossed for 6" rods in the Chevy crowd. The 350 has 1.63 ratio, which, while not great, is on the low side of acceptable from a durability standpoint. Also, we all know how thin our blocks are, Chevys have a little more meat to work with, a lot more when compared to a late model block. Big block Chevys can be bored .100-120" over in many cases! So it's hard to compare. Then, they also use longer aftermarket rods, like I said before, almost anytime that a performance build is done. Long rods for Chevys are available from a 'zillion' sources, and don't cost all that much. Just pointing out my reasons for my post. Common ratios: 289- 1.792 302- 1.696 351w- 1.701 429- ~1.8 (don't remember at the moment) 460- ~1.7 Those are all decent to excellent. The 427 is high as well, a sign of a good revving engine IMO. Dave
As we anything cast vs. forged it comes down to durability and wearabilty...thats the reason the forged cost twice as much. In the above picture the only thing I can think of that would split a block like that is the crank snapped in half. The engine is only as strong as its weakest component.
Although the picture is on the extreme side. It is known that the stock blocks will crack starting at the main bolts, oil gallery's and main webs when you make to much power with the stock block. This is why main support systems are a common addition. There was an article in one of the recent Ford magazines showing the block options out there. They talk about the factory blocks by year and factory racing blocks as well as aftermarket offerings. In the article they have a picture of a 5.0 block with a crack at one of the main bolt holes.
OK guys, I want 300HP. My 74 Mav has low compression (from 70s gas issues), which is a major problem. I have Edelbrock 600cfm carb, Edel 289 Performer Intake, dualled out exhaust with original manifold and 3" side pipes. I have taken apart and cleaned, painted, and put back together all the way to the crank and pistons from both top and bottom. Stock pistons, cam, heads (but they have been removed, cleaned, new valves and springs). According to MAVMAN, all I need is a new mild cam and I will go from 180 to 300HP? If so, I got a cam on order tomorrow morning. What about that low compression (8.5:1, or lower, I think)? By the way, I have 55,000 miles stock. Will the original parts handle 300HP without damage? Can I go over 4000RPM without rattling the thing apart or blowing it up?\ see progress thus far on www.geocities.com/scottcodon@sbcglobal.net
I'd think you would need better heads for 300HP. What Cam did you go with? I'm guessing your CAM is lifting higher than stock so you are gonna need larger valves, headers and new springs to take advantage of it. Also ... did 74 heads have press in rocker arm studs ... those aren't a good idea with a radical cam either ...
Way-way-wait justa moment. No one ever gets a 120 hp increase from a cam change. You need several things done to approch the 300 hp mark. The heads must flow more air. Compression raised to at least 9.5:1. Intake and carburation to get the airflow. At the very least you should look at the Windsor jr iron heads. The block needs to be decked to get the pistons up to deck surface for the compression increase as well as pay attention to head chamber volumes even if the heads need to be milled some to get the volume in the 54 to 58 cc range. Cam selected that will give a decently broad power curve and not just a high peak number.
Exactly what I was going to say. I didn't say just adding a camshaft is GOING to produce the power numbers, I was just saying that it isn't hard to make 300 HP with a VERY MILD bottom end. I have personally run high 7s in the 1/8 in a 2600 lb car with a 9.2:1 302. Stock crank, stock rods, flat top pistons with 4 valve reliefs down .025" in the hole, basically stock heads but with larger valves and screw-in studs. Cam was hydraulic flat-tapped 229@.050" and .504" lift. Taking a 8.5:1 302 from a stock maverick and just adding headers, intake, and good carb and camshaft can get you real close to the numbers, but those mid-70's heads don't breathe--they only wheeze just enough air through them to make 140 HP or so. Late model mustang owners have much better heads with the E7TE's, and those heads with minor port work can work well on a 302. Not as well as aftermarket offerings, but they do work well enough to make MORE than 300 HP. Enough of that. Back to your decision. IMO, a stock crank and rods will work great up to about 6500 RPM and 400 HP. You'll break the block before you break the crank, but be sure to use better rod bolts and lighter pistons will help a bunch too. Save the money you'd spend on a stroker crank and longer rods (and we aren't going back to the great rod/stroke debate again ) and use the money saved later on for a set of GOOD heads. You will be absolutely amazed on how much power and torque they can add to a motor. Personally, on my old 10.30 302 (1000') it picked up .7 and nearly 9 mph by a simple head change. Everything else was exactly the same, including camshaft, carb, timing, etc. Later changed to a solid roller, forged domed pistons and 830 carb and picked up another .3....which was nearly the same $$$ as just bolting on the heads. I could go on and on about this subject. Bottom line, do as much research and planning as you possibly can. That way you won't be spending tons of money on a mis-matched combo that will make 140 HP but will idle like a race car. We've all been down that road!
Not to change the subject but. Could someone please put a list of bolt on like stuff that will take a stock 140hp 302V8 to 350-400 hp. and if possible put down how much each item increases the horse power. much appreciated.
I know sometime in the past Mavaholic has listed what parts he built his engine with. Since he has documented 303HP at the wheels ... which is probably between 350- 400HP NET ... I would say that would be a great engine plan ... Here is his HP Recipe ... 302 +.30, KB hypereutectic pistons w/ Childs & Albert zero gap rings, stock rods and crank, comp cams roller with 566/576 lift, AFR 185 heads, ported, polished & milled for approx 10.5/1 compression, 1.6 roller rockers, Eddlebrock performer RPM air gap manifold, Demon 650 w/ mechanical secondaries, Hooker Comp headers, DR Gas X pipe, Flowmaster 2 chamber, all pipe 2 1/2", Also running Paxton electric fuel pump.
There is alot of talk about heads in this thread... If you are on a budget, stock heads, assuming you get the right casting, can make good power on the cheap. AFR 185s are good of course, but alot of folks made 300 rwhp with good stock castings in the past. Aftermarket heads weren't always available for our engines. I pulled just over 300 rwhp with 68 SBF heads, very mild porting and Chevy valves. A set of 69-74 Windsor heads with big valves and alot of porting would have been far superior to what I was running. Dave
Heads? Find a 98 and later Explorer and Mountaineer with a 5.0 litre. They have cast GT-40 heads. My sister has a '99 Mountaineer. It has the GT-40 heads and a 3.73 limited slip differential with disc brakes. I keep asking her if she is ready total it and buy something newer. So far, she ain't obliged.
