302/302HO pistons

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Mar 2, 2009 | 04:24 PM

harrisford

Thread Starter

Senior User

Joined: Dec 2007

Posts: 206

Likes: 0

302/302HO pistons

My buddy toasted the 302HO in his 86 mustang on sunday. found a 302 in a 93 F150 today but the big question is, are the pistons different? he doesnt really want to down grade but he doesnt want to be car-less for too long. thanks

Mar 2, 2009 | 04:30 PM

fordeverpower

Postmaster

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 3,934

Likes: 0

From: iowa

yeah, mustangs are forged. Not real sure on the reliefs, the 86 was a odd ball year, with the different heads, and combustion chamber shape, and i think the 86 was supposed to be a true flattop.

Mar 2, 2009 | 04:51 PM

Conanski

FTE Legend

Joined: Jun 2006

Posts: 31,930

Likes: 1,499

From: Ottawa, Ontario

A '93 truck motor will make lots more HP than the '86 motor with a simple cam upgrade, the pistons are irrelavent unless the car has a blower or nitros.

Mar 2, 2009 | 05:12 PM

fordeverpower

Postmaster

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 3,934

Likes: 0

From: iowa

[QUOTE=Conanski;7210986]A '93 truck motor will make lots more HP than the '86 motor with a simple cam upgrade, QUOTE]

why is that?

Mar 2, 2009 | 05:58 PM

Beechkid

Moderator

Joined: Aug 2002

Posts: 6,104

Likes: 384

From: Southern California

[QUOTE=fordeverpower;7211083]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conanski

A '93 truck motor will make lots more HP than the '86 motor with a simple cam upgrade, QUOTE]

why is that?

The mid-80's 302 were very much smog designed engines ---IIRR the 302 put out 150 net hp

Mar 3, 2009 | 12:02 AM

Conanski

FTE Legend

Joined: Jun 2006

Posts: 31,930

Likes: 1,499

From: Ottawa, Ontario

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordeverpower

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conanski

A '93 truck motor will make lots more HP than the '86 motor with a simple cam upgrade,

why is that?

The '86 Stang motor had a unique set of heads with kidney bean shaped chambers that was an attempt by Ford to promote more air swirl and thus better fuel mixture as the piston comes up to TDC on the compression stroke. When this is done the fuel charge flashes quicker which builds more pressure sooner and that produces more TQ, and that they succeeded on. Unfortunately they made these chambers really deep which shrowded the intake valve, and they also put a massive air injection hump in the exhaust port roof, so as cast these heads don't flow anywhere near as good as the E5 heads that came before or the E7 heads that came after.
Here are these heads side by side with 1/2" valve lift on both..

Mar 3, 2009 | 12:05 AM

fordeverpower

Postmaster

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 3,934

Likes: 0

From: iowa

[QUOTE=Beechkid;7211275]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordeverpower

The mid-80's 302 were very much smog designed engines ---IIRR the 302 put out 150 net hp

I disagree with conanski's claim, the 86 302ho was rated 200hp and 275tq. The 93 302 isn't any better than that.

The E5ae and e7te heads suck too, i agree the e7te are a little better than the 86 castings but not enough for "lots more hp"

Reply Subscribe

Reply Share

First
Prev
1 / 1
Next
Last

Forum Jump