I'll agree that the 302 came out in '68, but the 289 was a few years before that(same block)
Scott

 

302's are awesome motors, like 68 351 bronc said the 5.0 HO motors and one of the best small blocks ever. They are easy to build up and run strong, they are the perfect motor if your wanting to build a fast car for less money. Thats why so many people ****** up those 87-93 mustang 5.0's.

 

Well, actually it started as a 221 in '62, then went to 260 six months later, and the 289 was introduced in '63. A 302 is just a stroked 289. -TD

 

yeah but a 221/260 has a different bore, which is why I didn't mention them as having the same block, i think theyre all the same "block" though, IIRC a 221 came out in '62, and a 260 is a bored(not stroked)221, and a 289 is a bored(not stroked) 260. These three all used a 2.87" stroke crank, a 302 is the only one that uses a different crank.
Scott

 

i put a 302 h.o. from 1996 mustang in my 1994 f-150 and it run good but im trying to trace down a idle problem that comes and goes. and yes stock 302 has nylon gears. just about all stock motors come with same.
moondogg

 

Ford just kept increasing the bore size until they made the 302, then they finally increased the stroke, leaving the bore at 4.00. Externally, they all appear the same. I've only seen one 221, it was in a Jeep. My Tiger was originally a 260, but it had a 302 in when I got it so I stayed with that. There was also a 255 built in '80, but it wasn't much to get excited about. It still had the 302's 3.00 stroke, but the bore was dropped to 3.68. -TD

 

Lol, I drove a 255 in a mustang...what a joke!!! Better than the 4cyl probably, but not the 6cyl in any way shape or form....
Scott

 

Yeah and that was one engine out of hundreds of thousands, so you cant really base all 302's are junk on one engine, one of the best designed and most easily adaptable engines to come out of michigan in the last century, it just took a while for people to relize it.

 

He probably owns a dodge.....
Scott

 

My only complaint with the 302, is that its not really a great truck engine. Other than that, you can't kill them. Even with massive blow by, and needing a valve job, my 92 5.0 ran great at 240k miles. Plus they are easy and cheap to build up.

 

The 86 HO was the first with sequential EFI, called SEFI. It came out in the fall of 85. The 86 HO looks exactly the same the 87-95 EFI HO's on the outside. It's Speed Density EFI. The 85 four barrel carb HO actually was the first 5.0 with the renowned roller tappet cam. These roller cam HO motors do not have nylon gears. I've been into a few of them to change cams..ect.., and they all had double roller steel gears stock. I don't know about the regular pass car and truck 302's? The 86 HO longblock has the same cam as the 85 HO, but otherwise had E6S swirl heads and a siamese bore block. The 87-up HO longblocks are virtually the same as the 85, but with SEFI EFI on top. 87 and up HO's use the E7TE head, that breath much better than the E6SE. The HO E6 head has smaller 61cc chambers than the regular E6 heads used on non-HO motors too. The 86 has a slightly smaller thottlebody, and upper intake runners than the 87-up EFI HO's. 85-92 HO came with forged pistons. 93-up HO's use hypereutectic pistons.

I have beat the living hell out of 302's for years and have never blown an engine. I can't say that about brand C and D small blocks. A stock 302 will take 6,000 rpms all day long. If you really study the engineering of the Ford small block you will find it better engineered than brand C and brand D too.

The limiting factor on power production of the Ford small block has always been the stock heads, particularly the puney exaust port. A set of TFS or AFR heads really wake up the 302. An otherwise fairly stock 5.0L HO with TFS heads an E303 roller cam will produce a reliable 350 ft-lbs and 350 HP on pump gas. On a dyno with a more radical Comp cam, a 130,000 mile HO short block made 396HP, with unported TFS heads, and 417Hp using ARF 185 heads. 85-92 Power adder HO's, with stock bottom ends, can support 400-500 HP.

Many people don't know this, but the 289's first race was at the 1963 Indy 500. From the mid 60's to the mid 70's, the most winning indy car motors were really gussied up 289's. engines like Kelsy Westlake, Foyt Coyote, Drake Offy ...ect were basically nothing more than Ford 5 liter small blocks, topped off with exotic cylinder heads, fuel injection, and turbochargers.

Of course Shelby used less exotic 289's and 302's to good effect. The GT40 and Shelby Cobra racers used four barrel carb 289's. The small block cars out handled the big block power cars in the twisties. However the big block cars could actually out brake the small block cars on the high speed tracks, not that the 427 wasn't a much more powerful motor to begin with. In those days engine braking was essential, and a larger displacement motor gave better compression braking.

It's hard to find a pushrod small block with a more storied racing history than the Ford 289/302.

 

I have to say after reading that post I have a bit more respect for the 302's. Maybe ill mod the hell out of one for my next project. You think 400hp is unreasonable for a 302?

 

400 hp is doable for a 302, you might want to go for the 347 stroker kit. Bored .030 over with a 3.400 stroke. I raced a 302 (stock 3.00 stroke) at our local circle track against the 350 Chevys and did well. Our track rules only allowed a Holley 500 cfm 2bbl carb, but it was probably putting out around 350 hp. Here's a pic of the car. -TD

https://www.ford-trucks.com/user_gal...=59537&width=2

 

Cheap. Easy to find. Easy to work on. Dependable. Good gas mileage. Great power. Inexpensive to build up.

This sound like anyones worst engine to you?

They are still building Shelbys with them in BTW, stroked out to 347 @410 horses. Carrol Shelby is not well known for sticking with dog motors for over 40 years.
http://www.vpmotorcars.com/shelby/GT350SR.html

Great Engines.
People who tell you otherwise are just misinformed.

 

I had a Boss 302 short block with HP 289 heads on it (long story). It had a Paxton supercharger and I would take it up to 7000 rpm. It didn't blow up.