I've been working on my 54 ford pick up for about two years now and I finally got it out on the road. I love the way she looks but Iam a little disapointed in the power. I have an 80's 302 and AOD combo and there in lies the problem. I installed a new cam, lifters,chain and sprocket, intake manifold and 600 series carb all from edelbrock and while it runs ok it definately lacks some power. I thought the goodies would help but didn't really help that much. So here's my question. Is it more feasible to try and build this motor [I'll have to send it out]with high compression pistons, roller cam and some kind of induction system or do the crate motor? I thought I could do the trustworthy and dependable thing but she looks so good she's screamin 400 horses. bill

 

I would have started with a 351W or C. They breath better. Let your 302 breath.
Polish
Gasket port
Custom heads that flow. Just ta name a few. Heck run a turbo also.
Get her to breath any way ya can and she can be very pleasing.

 

unless its an HO motor those 80s 302s are totally anemic. the heads are the main problem. A set of heads would wake it up quite a bit. But to be around 400 hp its either a pretty radical 302 or you will need a power adder, like a turbo or blower. A 351 will get to 400hp easier.

 

I'm in the same boat with the 302. What heads do you reccommend? Have a 216 - 484 lift cam. What would you do to get 325-350hp with so low end kick without breaking the bank?
I'm a fence rider!

 

Before you blame the engine.......... (I hope I dont insult you here!) Timing on? Timing advance? Any vacuum leaks? Carb set rich/lean? Whats the rear gear ratio?
A common problem is "over-carbing" the 302's. As someone said, they dont breathe too deeply in stock 2bbl form. Just because you CAN install 4 bbl components, doesnt mean it will make the engine happy. You may find a return to 2 bbl. is best for your engine.

 

fiddysix-
Help me out here as I'm dealing with an anemic 302 myself. Why would it be better to drop the carb size? I thought the old addage "More is better" was true with motors, as more air and fuel gives more fuel to explode and create more power. Wouldn't it be important to make sure you don't have a bottle neck (ie restrictive ports, tiny exhaust, etc.) in the system that restricts the flow of fuel and exhaust?

I struggle because "MORE" means "LESS" when it comes to economy, and I don't know what's best to balance to two to get the kind of driver "I" want to have (not looking for 400hp myself).

 

I drive a 56 with a nearly stock 302 from 1971, it has a RV cam (very mild) and a holly 2BBL, drop in points/elec conversion. I have always been pleased with the amount of power, so Im wondering what others are expecting? These trucks weigh 1.5 tons (If I remember right?) My truck goes on down the road fine, but it does not feel like a muscle car, is that the "feel" people are looking for? Or are the older 302s that much stronger?

 

As has been said, a 351 will get past the 300 hp more easily. I have heard of 302's in the 300-500 hp range, but they are profoundly massaged to do it and aren't very dependable as a result. My 351C was running at 300 hp totally stock with only a cam, intake, headers and a 600 cfm carb. Lousy mileage, but it scooted really well. (It has been massaged further, but isn't back in the truck yet.)

As to how to massage your 302 into the 300hp area, I have no clue. But a 351C crate motor (with the cam and lifters installed) only cost me $2000 three years ago. If your contemplated build of the 302 gets to that budget, I would consider just swapping out to a 351.

 

Packrat-
My 302 runs down the road fine, but (at least IMHO) that's because of rear-end tranny combo, not because of power. In fact, the high gears I run make it too difficult (again IMO) to take off, and get going when there's any amount of traffic on the road. Why don't I run lower gears? I don't want to, I'm not comfortable with the RPMs with lower gears.
Another issue, at least between your 302 and mine is that 72 is the year EPA regulations ripped the guts out of 302's. Smaller cam, ports, and dished pistons gave a 65% (if I remember correctly) drop in power. Needless to say, I'd take your engine stock over mine (which only has electronic ignition in the upgrade department).

Some guys certainly are after the muscle car feel. It's alluring, but I just want something that will get when I need it to.

 

the biggest problem with the 302 in the 70's and 80's were low compression and really crappy heads. both of those are going to limit how much power you are going to get out of these motors even with upgrades like you have done.

these motors only had around 150 - 170 hp from the factory and about 8 or 8.5:1 compression, so no matter what you add, you ain't going to get much hp gain with add on components.

the heads are probably the biggest bottleneck to hp gain on these 302's. they are horrible designs with small restricted ports and tiny valves.

Depending on your mechanical skills, a complete rebuild with good pistons, good heads and such are about the only way to get 300 - 350 hp from the 302.

if you are not very mecahnically inclined as far as engine rebuilding goes, i would definately look into a crate motor. there are very stout packages out there that are built with all the good components that will easily get you 300 - 350hp and be reliable to boot. Just make sure you buy from a reputable outfit (Roush, Eldebrock, Summitt, Jeg's or a well known local performance shop) or the like.
the other option is to get in touch with a local performance shop (do some checking to find a good one in your area) and get them to rebuild your exisitng engine. that way you can sit down with them and get some differnent options and ideas as to what you want from your engine.

the aftermarket support and potential for the 302 now days is so huge that to list all the differnent options and combinations would take days.

hope i was of some help to you.

rgds
Mike

 

Swap in a set of heads (or a whole engine) from a 96-01 Explorer with a 302. They have GT40 heads (GT40P on the mid 97 and later ones), and I bought a complete low mileage one for $410. I swapped a Mustang cam in it, and put it in my 84 Mustang GT, and I am very pleased with it. Plus, I sold the fuel injection crap off of the thing for $255 and just put my Holley back on it, so the engine cost me $155. If you get the P heads, you'll have to buy some new headers because the spark plug angle is different.

 

Do you have a company locally that does dyno testing? In Sac there is a company that will check and adjust your engine settings for about $200. That would tell you the starting point before you start plunking down big bucks on blowers and new engines. Jag

 

Have to agree with Blue 50F1, a good running 302 should give you all you need, unless your racing it.Depends on if you want a driver or a race truck ??
I'd take a look at the gearing. You could make changes in the rear end to give it more low end zip.
With the work you decribed on your engine I don't thinks thats the problem.

 

Blue, you sort of answered your own question. If you can believe it, you help to create a "bottle neck" when you over carb. A bigger carb dumps more gas, if the engine cant use it and get rid of it, performance suffers. Remember what a PITA starting a flooded truck is? The example is to an extreme, but.......... Engines like a certain air/fuel ratio. ( I BELIEVE its 4:1) As you get outside that ratio (rich or lean) performance suffers. Too lean can cause "hot" symptoms, too rich "cool" symptoms. (wet plugs, poor combustion and cooler spark)
As someone mentioned, the GT40 heads are a really good head. You need to be able to use the air/fuel youre pulling in, but just as important, maybe even more so, you need to be able to get rid of it. Stock 2 bbl 302 heads are small. Theyre not good breathing heads.

 

My 289 has an Edlebrock 600cfm with the electric chock. The manufacturer, for some reason, delivers those carbs deliberately tuned way lean. This is good for economy, but bad for performance. Have you looked at your plugs? White or yellow is too lean. Checked your timing? Gapped your plugs?

My 289 runs great. These trucks are too light to handle real HP. Most guys I know with big engines only use them for the top end. To much ooumph off the line just tends to squeel the tires. Fun for a while until you need hew tires. Jag