engine question

N

N242

Member

Aug 13, 2006

90

0

6

Sep 1, 2006

#1

• Sep 1, 2006

• #1

Hi everyone here at stangnet
i want to know what is the difference between 302 to 302HO ?

and what engine better for my 67 mustang:
old 302 or 302HO (mustang 87-93) or 351 (truck) or 351M (from bronco)

in my car i have rear axle 8.8 ring 3.0/1
my trnny is menual 3 speed 3.03

thanks

 

5

57fairlane

New Member

Apr 2, 2005

560

0

0

Oakwood, GA

Sep 1, 2006

#2

• Sep 1, 2006

• #2

85 and up HOs had hydraulic roller cams as the earlier motors had flat tappets.

Asking what the best motor is depends on your plans and your budget as well as what you can do yourself (which is actually related to the budget).

How is it that you have an 8.8" in the car?

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Sep 1, 2006

#3

• Sep 1, 2006

• #3

N242 said:

i want to know what is the difference between 302 to 302HO ?

and what engine better for my 67 mustang:
old 302 or 302HO (mustang 87-93) or 351 (truck) or 351M (from bronco)

Click to expand...

5.0HO has a hydraulic roller cam, more power, and the 351W firing order.

A 351M is not in the same engine family as a Windsor and will not even come close to interchanging. It more like a 429/460 than a 302, but isn't as upgradable.

 

N

N242

Member

Aug 13, 2006

90

0

6

Sep 2, 2006

#4

• Sep 2, 2006

• #4

so if i understanding
the bast engine for me is the 302HO ?
in my contry ford V8 engine not popular
and i went to do personal importing from USA .
did you recommendation other engine ?

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Sep 2, 2006

#5

• Sep 2, 2006

• #5

Well, what country are you in? If Ford stuff is hard to find, then just get whatever is easy, except the 351M. If you already have a 289, then the "old" 302 will fit right in its place. A 302HO will also, but there are some things you need to change for the clutch linkage and a few other things.

 

N

N242

Member

Aug 13, 2006

90

0

6

Sep 2, 2006

#6

• Sep 2, 2006

• #6

65ShelbyClone said:

Well, what country are you in? If Ford stuff is hard to find, then just get whatever is easy, except the 351M. If you already have a 289, then the "old" 302 will fit right in its place. A 302HO will also, but there are some things you need to change for the clutch linkage and a few other things.

Click to expand...

my orginal engine in my car is 289 (A COD) but stupid guy cheng it to 200 cid .

302 ho is better then old 302 right ?
if i take 302 ho engine what i need to cheng ?
which kind of flywheel and cluth (in inch ) i need?



dudi

 

Attachments

• IMG_0004.webp

  27 KB · Views: 94

B

brin0357

New Member

Jan 26, 2006

169

0

0

Sep 3, 2006

#7

• Sep 3, 2006

• #7

351 Modified (400) is a big piece of crap. Its similar to a 351 cleveland/ 429 / 460. While they CAN be made into some killer torque motors smog and the heads they had really choked the motor up. Windsor or early 302 would be the best. I wouldnt put an HO because in my opinion Id rather build off an early block (mexican block if you can find one).

 

N

N242

Member

Aug 13, 2006

90

0

6

Sep 4, 2006

#8

• Sep 4, 2006

• #8

HO engin not strong from old 302?
which kind of flywheel and cluth (in inch ) i need?
what is the compression ratio (stoke engine) in 302 and 302HO

thanks for the help

 

Max Power

Active Member

Jul 31, 2003

1,774

1

36

St Paul

Sep 4, 2006

#9

• Sep 4, 2006

• #9

Newer HO engine used a cable system for the clutch rather than a linkage system. The newer block is missing the bosses for your linkage, so you would probably have to put a newer trans in as well.

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Sep 4, 2006

#10

• Sep 4, 2006

• #10

The 302 HO does not have the boss on the block for the clutch linkage, but you can get retrofit brackets just for that. That's what I have, but I had to make spacers because my scattershield has a thinner flange than a cast bellhousing. No need for a new style transmission.

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Dec 30, 2006

#11

• Dec 30, 2006

• #11

Has anyone else been getting PMed with these same questions?

 

D

D.Hearne

New Member

Sep 29, 2000

11,730

6

0

south louisiana

Dec 30, 2006

#12

• Dec 30, 2006

• #12

If he's got an 8.8 rear, it's got a 3.08 ratio, not 3.00 to 1. Only the 9" rears had 3.00 to 1. Not all 50. HO's had roller cams or blocks. Rollers started with the 85 model year. Block strength is debateable. The newer blocks have the same amount of iron as the old ones, but the casting quality is vastly better in the 87-up blocks.