69 302 heads

stihl-066

New Member
Jan 4, 2006
90
0
0
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
 
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
 
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.


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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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)
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.