F1 302 rookie
#31
I agree, the only reason to switch is you happen to be building a new setup and the 5.0 motor is available.
You mentioned that you want comparable power to a 350 chev motor. Since you don't have the cubic inches with the 302 to make the same power, it would require a bit more work and usually means more rpm. Not to say you can't get decent power out of a 302 as you outlined it but it won't have the torque of a 350.
I believe you are over thinking this. Just make the mild changes you want to your 302and see how it is. You might be surprised and have plenty of power for what you want to do.
jim
You mentioned that you want comparable power to a 350 chev motor. Since you don't have the cubic inches with the 302 to make the same power, it would require a bit more work and usually means more rpm. Not to say you can't get decent power out of a 302 as you outlined it but it won't have the torque of a 350.
I believe you are over thinking this. Just make the mild changes you want to your 302and see how it is. You might be surprised and have plenty of power for what you want to do.
jim
#32
I would agree with Jim - Do some reasonable improving the airflow upgrade mods to the 302 & see how you like it - If you plan to pull the 302 out for some reason then I'd think hard about spending serious money on rebuilding it. That was my situation - I had the 289 out to put in the Mustang II front end & it just didn't make sense to rebuild a 289 when we could get a lot more performance for about the same money starting with a 351W short block. My short block cost about $400 then the top end kit from Summit was $2000 plus labor to put it all together & install it. So... $500 in upgrades to your 302 to get some nice power out of it like Jim & others have outlined or spend some serious money to get a lot of power. Good luck over there - My advice - tweak it to get it running better & drive it.
Ben in Austin
Ben in Austin
#33
I agree with what's been said. Roller setups have their distinct advantages. However, it is up to you to decide if the cost justifies the advantages. As was said, there is less wear and tear on your internals, no oil additives required, less friction = less resistance and more hp potential, less friction = less heat and oil deterioration, and the one thing not stated is that roller setups allow you to run a much more aggressive cam profile. (Which is not really a factor for a street setup.) Also, roller lifters do not require replacing if you decide to change your cam. Flat tappet lifters should be replaced with a cam swap. If I am spending the money on a build I always switch to a roller setup. It is cheap insurance in my opinion and allows for more potential out of the other parts added to the mix. It is not necessary though. To each his own. Your largest hp gains will always come from heads, intake and exhaust upgrades. Look at it as a pump. The more you can pump in and out of your engine, the more powerful the crank will spin.
(My $0.02 )
(My $0.02 )
#34
The reason I ended up going to the roller cam motor was a cam failure in my flat tappet/roller tip rocker 302. It flat lobbed two cam lobs after 14,000 mile on a rebuild. I was running Mobile One 10W-40. At first I thought I had a lifter adjusted too tight. Changed out the cam and lifters (Comp Cam, .494/.494 lift) and flat lobbed another cam in 100 miles. Decided I had a plugged oil passage or something else internal. Anyone have ideas or similar experience? The roller motor has been flawless for 41,000 miles so far under daily use. This engine is a XXX block with roller lifters but not roller tip rockers.
#35
Did you put Moly lube on all the lobes of the cam when you installed it? Did you have a break-in lube in your oil when you first ran it? And as Hot Rod magazine states "any engine with more than 300 pounds of open spring pressure or 170 pounds of seat pressure (as multiplied by the rocker ratio) should be run in on the outer springs only."
Here's a link to Mobil 1's FAQ about flat tappet cam oils.
Does Mobil 1 Contain the Additive for Flat Tappet Cams
Break-in and valve lash are critical on flat tappet cams. That's all I've got for now.
Here's a link to Mobil 1's FAQ about flat tappet cam oils.
Does Mobil 1 Contain the Additive for Flat Tappet Cams
Break-in and valve lash are critical on flat tappet cams. That's all I've got for now.
#36
Thanks, Chris for your info. Yes, Moly Lube was applied to all cam lobs (first and second cams). I ran straight 30W for the first 500 miles then changed to 10W-40 Mobile One. I did not remove the inner valve springs during breakin. After the cam change, back to 30W but 100 miles later the same two lobs were eaten up. Made the decision them to move on and cut my losses.
#37
Oh I didn't think flat tappet cams needed an outer and inner springs? My brother inlaw put together an engine with double springs and a flat tappet cam and it wiped lobes. He found out later the double springs were for a roller/solid cam. I just always thought double springs were for high lift applications but I'm not sure.
#38
You can use double or single springs. It all depends on the cam profile that you are using. The spring rate and recommendation is almost always listed on the cam card when you buy the cam. If you follow the cam card you can't go wrong. That is another possibility though. Did you make sure the springs weren't too stiff for the cam? Did they match the cam card specs?
Edit: Also, if you're ever unsure as to whether or not your current springs will work with your new cam, don't chance it. Most machine shops can check the spring pressures and tell you if they will work with the recommend pressures on the cam card.
Edit: Also, if you're ever unsure as to whether or not your current springs will work with your new cam, don't chance it. Most machine shops can check the spring pressures and tell you if they will work with the recommend pressures on the cam card.
#39
Chris is dead on the money. Never ever accept what you are told about the springs, always check them for yourself. I have done a fair amount of racing and I have built a few engines and I never just put in a set of springs without checking them first. Also be sure to check them at height. This info is on the card.
jim
jim
#40
Boneman10,
I don’t know where you are located, but in my area (central Illinois; car-part.com) I can pick up a 1996/1997 302 for around $800. As Reed1951 stated, the 1996/97 302s have very good cylinder heads which gave these motors around 300 hp. In addition to good heads, these are roller motors.
If you go this route, all you will have to do is add an intake (Edelbrock RPM), carb, headers, and a good distributor giving you an engine with 300+ hp for around $1200. Just my 2 cents….
Lance
I don’t know where you are located, but in my area (central Illinois; car-part.com) I can pick up a 1996/1997 302 for around $800. As Reed1951 stated, the 1996/97 302s have very good cylinder heads which gave these motors around 300 hp. In addition to good heads, these are roller motors.
If you go this route, all you will have to do is add an intake (Edelbrock RPM), carb, headers, and a good distributor giving you an engine with 300+ hp for around $1200. Just my 2 cents….
Lance
#41
I'd be careful about removing the inner springs. The primary reason for double springs is that there are resonant frequencies that can cause a spring to lose its tension. If there are two springs of different diameters, they will have different resonant frequencies. That means that through all rpm ranges, you won't reach an rpm that leaves you with virtually no valve spring tension. It really isn't much of a problem on daily driver type engines.
#42
You can use double or single springs. It all depends on the cam profile that you are using. The spring rate and recommendation is almost always listed on the cam card when you buy the cam. If you follow the cam card you can't go wrong. That is another possibility though. Did you make sure the springs weren't too stiff for the cam? Did they match the cam card specs?<br />
<br />
Edit: Also, if you're ever unsure as to whether or not your current springs will work with your new cam, don't chance it. Most machine shops can check the spring pressures and tell you if they will work with the recommend pressures on the cam card.
<br />
Edit: Also, if you're ever unsure as to whether or not your current springs will work with your new cam, don't chance it. Most machine shops can check the spring pressures and tell you if they will work with the recommend pressures on the cam card.
<br />
#43
Chris is dead on the money. Never ever accept what you are told about the springs, always check them for yourself. I have done a fair amount of racing and I have built a few engines and I never just put in a set of springs without checking them first. Also be sure to check them at height. This info is on the card.<br />
<br />
jim<br />
<img src="http://images.ford-trucks.com/forums/images/smilies2/compute.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Typing" smilieid="21" class="inlineimg" />
<br />
jim<br />
<img src="http://images.ford-trucks.com/forums/images/smilies2/compute.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Typing" smilieid="21" class="inlineimg" />
<br />
I used a K kit from Comp Cam which included springs, lifters, push rods, etc. Spring heights were shimmed to Comps specs.
#44
Decisions, decisions.
I have a strong, albeit old, 289 and decided that as long as I have the motor and trans out of the truck for the IFS upgrade I might as well upgrade it too. I have ordered the E-street heads and cam and several other parts that will build power from idle to 5500 rpm. They claim it will produce 323 hp and 337 ft lbs on a 302. I hope to get close to that with the 289. I already have an Edelbrock performer manifold and Holley 4 bbl. I thought about rebuilding the 460 I had and putting that in there but then the price of gas went so high I started thinking about going for mild performance and economy. I don't want a drag strip truck, just something that gets decent acceleration and acceptable mileage.
I learned a lesson with some Harley's I owned. I had a 2004 Electra-Glide Standard. 88 ci and I left it bone stock. It got 38 mpg. Uphill, downhill, with the wind, against the wind, didn't matter. 38 mpg flat. I traded it for a 2006 Street Glide. Same motor and chassis. This time I bumped the motor to 95 ci and expected to get less mileage with the larger motor. Imagine my surprise when I got better mileage. The only thing I could figure was that with the larger motor and extra power I wasn't having to open the throttle quite so far on the highway to maintain speed and so, the result was better mileage.
The last time I drove the truck it was getting 16 mpg at 65 mph. If I get anywhere close to that when I am finished I'll be happy.
I learned a lesson with some Harley's I owned. I had a 2004 Electra-Glide Standard. 88 ci and I left it bone stock. It got 38 mpg. Uphill, downhill, with the wind, against the wind, didn't matter. 38 mpg flat. I traded it for a 2006 Street Glide. Same motor and chassis. This time I bumped the motor to 95 ci and expected to get less mileage with the larger motor. Imagine my surprise when I got better mileage. The only thing I could figure was that with the larger motor and extra power I wasn't having to open the throttle quite so far on the highway to maintain speed and so, the result was better mileage.
The last time I drove the truck it was getting 16 mpg at 65 mph. If I get anywhere close to that when I am finished I'll be happy.
#45
As I have said I have a 307 in mine basically stock with 4 brl and swap headers but with a 4:10 gear. On the highway for 175 miles I averaged 17.5 mpg. When I change the rear gear to a 3:23 I expect closer to 25mpg and if the occors I will be happy.
And yes it will move out right smartly. No I can't use full throttle now as it will just spin the tires. So a mildly modified motor should be an excellent power unit with decent gas milage.
jim
And yes it will move out right smartly. No I can't use full throttle now as it will just spin the tires. So a mildly modified motor should be an excellent power unit with decent gas milage.
jim