69 302 heads

S

stihl-066

New Member

Jan 4, 2006

90

0

0

Jul 18, 2006

#1

• Jul 18, 2006

• #1

I have an 82 302 block. I found a set of 69 302 heads that have been upgraded to 1.90 intake and 1.60 exhaust valves. They are 58cc heads. Will these heads be better than the stock ones. I plan on running a XE262H cam Holley 650, long tube headers,2.5 flowmasters and an edelbrock performer intake with 3:73's

 

B

bnickel

Founding Member

Aug 21, 2002

5,640

3

77

lubbock, texas

Jul 19, 2006

#2

• Jul 19, 2006

• #2

yes

 

S

stihl-066

New Member

Jan 4, 2006

90

0

0

Jul 19, 2006

#3

• Jul 19, 2006

• #3

Does anyone know what I might be running for HP over the stock 157hp that it came with.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jul 19, 2006

#4

• Jul 19, 2006

• #4

Does your 82 302 have a 50 oz/in balance crank? If it does, I'd suggest getting an earlier or late 80's crank or shortblock. The early 50 oz cranks were not good castings and I saw 2 break in stock applications.

 

S

stihl-066

New Member

Jan 4, 2006

90

0

0

Jul 19, 2006

#5

• Jul 19, 2006

• #5

I imagine it is probably just the stock 50 oz/in balance crank. I just bought the car a couple of weeks ago to play with at the track till my Mach 1 gets back from the paint shop. So you think it will break with some upgrades. If it does than I guess I will have to buy a stroker short block. Heck it ought to be able to handle at least 250-300 horse dont you think

 

67Dylan

New Member

May 11, 2006

259

0

0

Phoenix, AZ

Jul 19, 2006

#6

• Jul 19, 2006

• #6

D.Hearne said:

Does your 82 302 have a 50 oz/in balance crank? If it does, I'd suggest getting an earlier or late 80's crank or shortblock. The early 50 oz cranks were not good castings and I saw 2 break in stock applications.

Click to expand...

Uhhmmm they are all 50z balance in the stang. Nothing wrong w/the 82 blocks as far as I remember; what leads you to belive they are no good? More info is needed to tell the story behind your 2 breakage points. Are you suggesting he go to a 28z balance; I would agree w/that point. Why have so much weight on the snout of the crank?

As for the heads; have them slightly ported. Port match the intake exhaust and some in the bowls for a little added power. You will be better off w/those heads IMO.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jul 20, 2006

#7

• Jul 20, 2006

• #7

The early 50 oz cranks just weren't very good castings. Both I saw had broken completely in two at the #2, 3 or 4 journals(this was back in the mid 80's so the actual breaking point of either, I just don't recall). Not at the front snout. And one was in an early 80's Lincoln Town car, the other in a similar year F150. Neither was subjected to any unusual abuse and neither had nowwhere near 100K miles on them. Just a warning, don't be surprised if that one breaks. The blocks are fine as far as that goes, just not worth the money some want for them. I wouldn't pay more than scrap value for a 1970 to an 84 302. The blocks and internals are nothing to write home about and good roller short blocks can be had for the same money.

 

S

stihl-066

New Member

Jan 4, 2006

90

0

0

Jul 22, 2006

#8

• Jul 22, 2006

• #8

The heads have already been ported and gasket matched. Does anyone know if I should get shorter pushrods since I am dropping from 70cc to 58cc combustion chambers.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jul 22, 2006

#9

• Jul 22, 2006

• #9

Push rod length has nothing to do with chamber sizes. The pushrods you have now should be the right length but I suspect those heads will have screw in studs and guide plates too (if they were done right) if so you'll need hardened pushrods for a late 66 to 1984 302/5.0

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jul 22, 2006

#10

• Jul 22, 2006

• #10

The intake you listed was a Performer intake, is that the std Performer, or Performer RPM intake? If it's just the Performer, you'll want to upgrade to an RPM to complement the rest of the upgrades. (or anyother high rise dual plane intake)

 

S

stihl-066

New Member

Jan 4, 2006

90

0

0

Jul 22, 2006

#11

• Jul 22, 2006

• #11

It is the Performer RPM intake. I will get a set of hardened pushrods for it. I should be able to use my stock rocker arms for now shouldn't I. When I get it all done I will let you all know how much it took of my 1/8 mile times. I was running 9.6's with just about everything stock except the 4 barrel I put on it. My 60 ft times sucked at around 2.45-2.5. Got some drag radials coming as well.

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Jul 22, 2006

#12

• Jul 22, 2006

• #12

Look at the valve stems that stick up above the retainers. Is there about 1/4" or so above the retainers? If there's not, and you have rail type rockers, the rockers are going to sit down on the retainer instead of the valve stem. Not good. If they contact the retainers, you'll need non rail types.

 

S

stihl-066

New Member

Jan 4, 2006

90

0

0

Jul 22, 2006

#13

• Jul 22, 2006

• #13

Yes there is a 1/4 inch sticking up. I ordered a new set of hardened pushrods from jegs and some Comp cams Magnum roller rockers to go along with it. I got the stock length. That is what they suggested as well.