• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

help me ID this block

  • Thread starter Thread starter VTStang66
  • Start date Start date Aug 3, 2007

VTStang66

Founding Member
Apr 2, 2001
2,407
0
0
Rockwall, TX
Aug 3, 2007
#1
  • Aug 3, 2007
  • #1
It's a mexican block 302. I found this thread about decoding numbers, but according to that, the ID number is supposed to start with a letter. Mine starts with a 7.

75ZY-6015-AA above the starter


5-J5 on the other side


and "HECHO IN MEXICO" on the top


Do the mexican blocks have a different coding system than the domestic blocks? What can I tell from these codes?
 

fasttback

New Member
Apr 16, 2005
471
0
0
Northern CA
Aug 3, 2007
#2
  • Aug 3, 2007
  • #2
The "7" does seem odd. Both Mexican blocks I have had started with C8 or D1. That block does have the "Hecho in Mexico" in the valley, as did both of mine. The big ticket item would be the main caps, pop off the oil pan and take a pic of caps.
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Aug 3, 2007
#3
  • Aug 3, 2007
  • #3
Other than it's clearly a 75 Mex block, not much.
 

VTStang66

Founding Member
Apr 2, 2001
2,407
0
0
Rockwall, TX
Aug 8, 2007
#4
  • Aug 8, 2007
  • #4
What is the deck height for a 75 mexican 302? I just talked to speed pro (pistons) and they said that the pistons that I have in my block (L2484 0.030) won't give me 10:1 compression no matter what my combustion chamber volume is because the deck height is too high. He said that the compression figure in jeg's (9.09 w/ 63cc head) is for a newer, lower deck block.

To me that sounds like these pistons shouldn't get all the way to the top of the cylinder. But I measured them at TDC and it's about .035" away, which seems pretty close. If the piston were designed for a lower deck block, wouldn't it be sticking out of the top of this one? They're flat top pistons. He said the valve reliefs are 2.7cc, which seems too small too. Here's a pic.

 

SoCalCruising

Founding Member
Jul 25, 2000
2,437
0
47
SoCal
Aug 8, 2007
#5
  • Aug 8, 2007
  • #5
.035" is a lot. What you shoot for is .040-.045" from the piston to the deck of the head WITH the head gasket in place. If you are using a typical .040" (compressed thickness) head gasket, then that's .075" you have, and that's a LOT. This lowers compression and leads to detonation sooner than a motor with .040-.045" piston-to-head clearance.

If you want to raise compression properly, you should have the block decked to give you +/- .005" piston-to-deck clearance. Then you'll be right around .045" from the piston to the head after you torque the heads down.

To see the effect of this, go to a compression calculator and enter in the .075" number where asked and see what the compression is. Then keep everything else constant and just change the clearance to .045". It's a little over half a compression point. Or, you will be down to about 8.8:1 with .075" clearance and nearly 9.5:1 when at .045". THEN, you can have the heads shaved to 55-56cc to get to 10:1. With your present clearance, too much would need to come off the heads.

Got it?
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Aug 8, 2007
#6
  • Aug 8, 2007
  • #6
You've also got to remember this in choosing 302 pistons, not all 289/302/5.0 flat tops are the same. The compression height varies from 1.585 to 1.610, that's a .025 difference. Deck the block .020 and the heads another .010 and you'll move em closer to where you want. Or go more, you can remove about .040 total before having intake fitment problems, and then it's usually just a matter of elongating the intake bolt holes to compensate for the head bolt holes moving toward each other.
 

SoCalCruising

Founding Member
Jul 25, 2000
2,437
0
47
SoCal
Aug 9, 2007
#7
  • Aug 9, 2007
  • #7
Yeah, good point about intake fitment. I've been fighting that with the three intakes I've used and my deck is just 8.195". Re c-h, the same is true for 331 pistons. They can be had with 1.165-1.175" c-h, depending on supplier.
 

VTStang66

Founding Member
Apr 2, 2001
2,407
0
0
Rockwall, TX
Aug 9, 2007
#8
  • Aug 9, 2007
  • #8
Well according to the guy I talked to yesterday from speed-pro, these have the 1.605" compression height, so that's good. How do I measure deck height? Thanks for all the help.

It's crazy that all this time I thought I was running around 9.5:1 compression and it was closer to 8. I was having detonation problems with less than premium fuel and it turns out it was caused by the distance from the piston to head? How about that.
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Aug 9, 2007
#9
  • Aug 9, 2007
  • #9
If those pistons in the Mex block have a 1.605 pin height, then your comp ratio is at least 9 to 1. But the final ratio depends on all the other factors. Deck clearance (measure how far below the deck the piston top is at TDC, you can use a straight edge and feeler gauges for this)For each .010, you'll have about 1.5 to 2 ccs volume to add. A .040 thick gasket yeilds a 9.5 cc volume, figure a bit less for thje smaller bore of the cylinder. Add the gasket volume, chamber volume and then another 5 ccs for the piston top volume. With 1.605's you can easily get to a zero deck or even as far as having the piston poke up out of the hole, depending on how tight you want to stretch things. I'd guess with 54 cc heads,on that short block you have pictured, you'll have a 10.5 to 1 ratio easily. To get it down to 8 to 1, you'd have to have the 70 cc D8 heads on it.
 

SoCalCruising

Founding Member
Jul 25, 2000
2,437
0
47
SoCal
Aug 9, 2007
#10
  • Aug 9, 2007
  • #10
D.Hearne: he already measured it to be about .035". Seems to be a lot for that piston's C-H.

VTStang66: I don't know how to easily measure deck height. I took mine to a machine shop, after measuring piston-to-deck height, and told them where I wanted it.
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Aug 9, 2007
#11
  • Aug 9, 2007
  • #11
If he's got a -.035 deck clearance, something's not right. Add all together and you come up with a total of 8.200. Nominal deck for a 302 is 8.206. For him to have a deck clearance of .035, you'd have a block with an 8.235 deck height. Of course, being as it's a Mex casting, that could be right, I've never looked at one personally, but have read that the quality was sloppy on these. His pics don't look like it's got a piston .035 down the hole, looks more like .0035, same as the slugs on my 331.
 
H

htwheelz67

Member
May 18, 2007
444
0
16
mission viejo ca.
Aug 9, 2007
#12
  • Aug 9, 2007
  • #12
I think that is a mexican block out of a mexico car..........those are not normal casting #'s
 

VTStang66

Founding Member
Apr 2, 2001
2,407
0
0
Rockwall, TX
Aug 10, 2007
#13
  • Aug 10, 2007
  • #13
D.Hearne said:
His pics don't look like it's got a piston .035 down the hole, looks more like .0035, same as the slugs on my 331.
Click to expand...

Nah, 35 thousandths on the dial caliper. The speed pro guy said that with a 75 302 block (I didn't tell him it was mexican), I have the taller deck height, and my pistons should be about .034" from the top, which is in line with what I measured. Maybe even closer. I should have asked him what that height is, but I didn't.
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Aug 10, 2007
#14
  • Aug 10, 2007
  • #14
The only book I can lay hands on at the moment lists it as 8.229. Take it apart and mill the decks. It might need that anyway to get em square to the bores.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine 302 production block selection
  • FastDriver
  • May 19, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
48
Views
7K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 1, 2025
FastDriver
R
1994 GT 5.0L crank no start
  • Red1994MustangGT
  • Apr 15, 2025
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
1K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Aug 19, 2025
Kurt_MO
K
Place to Avoid: Jamison Auto Group in Gulfport, MS
  • D Durden
  • Oct 20, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jul 16, 2026
Noobz347
J
Progress Thread Family member 1989 GT- Backstory and updates
  • JRC99
  • Apr 19, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 26, 2025
JRC99
J
SN Mustang Magnum T56 swap
  • revhead347
  • May 24, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
15
Views
6K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jun 28, 2026
GearHeadGuy
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?