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

which AFR's?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 67staaang
  • Start date Start date Apr 19, 2006
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
6

67staaang

Member
Mar 30, 2005
132
0
16
Apr 20, 2006
#21
  • Apr 20, 2006
  • #21
so can you guys help me get started on building up a stroked 302. where would i find stroked parts? and what is the best way to get a block buying one new? or getting one off a 5.0 car and rebuilding the whole thing? will the used block be the same as a new? thanks.
 
S

Sicarius428

Active Member
Jan 6, 2004
2,085
5
49
Apr 20, 2006
#22
  • Apr 20, 2006
  • #22
http://www.rnhperformance.net/
Email Rick and he can fashion you an engine to do whatever you want. If you are going to go power adder in the future, get a 331. Otherwise get a 347. There were a few problems with oil consumption of the early strokers. They fixed that with better designed pistons and stuff so don't let that sway you. I would say get a shortblock built at the very least by one engine builder just to make things easy with the machineing.
Kevin
 

S-Car-Go

Member
Mar 25, 2003
332
0
16
San Jose, CA
Apr 20, 2006
#23
  • Apr 20, 2006
  • #23
Ineteresting thread. A lot of good options. Is there a budget? This went from a simple head swap to building a stroker. Cha-ching.
67staaang, have you done your exhaust yet? If so, a 351 won't bolt up, if not, there's some exspense there too.
Real rough numbers here but you're looking at $5-6,000. You can always go cheaper and the sky is the limit. Don't forget you've got to get all the support stuff too. Carb, intake, valve covers, fuel pump, etc. That ebock carb and performer intake ain't gonna do it. I'm in almost the exact same boat as you with my 68 convertible, but I don't care about the 05 stangs. I just want it to be fun and not embarrass myself if a bowtie is in the next lane.
Here's another option if your 289 is in good shape. This is what I'll probably end up doing. For $3-400 more you can get AFR 165 competition model. They flow about the same as the 185's but with the smaller ports of the 165. Bolt these onto your 289 with a custom cam (Ed Curtis, Jay Allen, etc), get your roller rockers, RPM/Stealth intake, a better carb, and good headers + exhaust. This will set you back around $3,000. Later if you want more power (and you will) those heads will support a 331. You can get a shortblock and swap your top end over without taking a big bite out of your wallet.
I can't decide to do this or blow my wad and do the whole thing at once. $$$ Exhaust is next month, so I don't have to decide yet
 
6

67staaang

Member
Mar 30, 2005
132
0
16
Apr 21, 2006
#24
  • Apr 21, 2006
  • #24
thnx for all the info guys. Scargo you pulled up an option that got me thinking now. my 289 is in really good shape. actually, what im thinking about doing is get some afr 165s comp model and continue doing my efi conversion. then get a custom cam, and roller rockers. Do you think all that will work? i do have headers and exhaust done already. oh yeah and if i get those comp afr 165s do i need to get the ported? thanks again.
 

Vinyl66

Member
Mar 21, 2004
398
0
16
Apr 21, 2006
#25
  • Apr 21, 2006
  • #25
I like S-Car-Go's idea as well. Get a good set of AFR's and do a build up around those kick ass heads if you do not want to do a stroker now. Be sure to get the components that would be optimum for a 331 IF that is what you have in mind for the future.

Most of the time "The Future" is a lot closer than you think when it comes to modifications and you end up kicking yourself for not doing it the way you wanted to in the first place.

That being said, last year I used my early model 302 block with low compression dished pistons and threw some 61cc Twisted Wedge heads/small Comp. cam/ RPM intake/ Hooker headers and measly 3.55 gears on it and went consistent 13.2's. I was quicker than every 05 Stang at the strip the few times I went and didn't have much $ into it.
Since then I got the 347 I had "planned" on using "later on." Now I am enjoying the traction problems I am having while running easy 12's!
 
S

Sicarius428

Active Member
Jan 6, 2004
2,085
5
49
Apr 21, 2006
#26
  • Apr 21, 2006
  • #26
I wouldn't bother with EFI honestly. There is a lot more involved cost than you would imageine. Between the fuel pump, intakes, mass air, throttlebodies, injectors, computer and what not... I could have bought several carb and intake combos. As for gas mileage... its not worth the expense.
Kevin
 

S-Car-Go

Member
Mar 25, 2003
332
0
16
San Jose, CA
Apr 21, 2006
#27
  • Apr 21, 2006
  • #27
I'm with sicarius428 on that. EFI? Whoa curve-ball. Don't mess with the top end, then convert to EFI, then put a stroker bottom end in it, then upgrade your EFI setup for the stroker... If you must have fuel injection (and I wouldn't bother either) finish the motor before tackling that project. Throttle body, mass air meter, fuel injectors, intake manifold, etc would have to be swapped out from a FI 289 to better flowing units for a FI 331/347. Big waste of money, very little payback over a good carb set up. Spend your money on a dyno tune instead.


Those comp 165's are ported from the factory. Any more and you have a 185's. The short story is that you want the most amount of air through the smallest port possible. You can get more air though a big port 185-225 but the big port kills your low end performance. Small motor needs a small port.
 
M

mtbdoc

New Member
Nov 2, 2003
245
1
0
Apr 21, 2006
#28
  • Apr 21, 2006
  • #28
Boost + blow through! That will take care of any late model Mustang unless they too are boosted.

Then again, look at my sig: I LOVE boost! Even the wife's car has a turbo.
 
J

Jimmys66

Founding Member
Nov 28, 2001
419
0
0
Paw Paw MI
Apr 22, 2006
#29
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #29
I hate to be the guy that makes things difficult, but I read a build up article on a 302 with 165 and 185's. The engine had a carb and intake but was otherwise stock.

The 185's barely outperformed the 165's (10 hp) because of the stock cam. Here's the kicker. Both heads performed equaly well at the bottom end. The 185's didn't suffer at all at the bottom.

The final conclusion from the build up was that they thought there was absolutely no reason to buy a 165. If you want more than stock you might as well step up to the 185 right off the bat and it will give you room to grow in the future.
 
J

Jimmys66

Founding Member
Nov 28, 2001
419
0
0
Paw Paw MI
Apr 22, 2006
#30
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #30
Just to be even more difficult, Fordmuscle did dome dyno testing between 165's and 165 comps heads. They made 460hp on the comp head.

http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2005/05/DynoDuel/

I'm not trying to make your decision harder really.
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Apr 22, 2006
#31
  • Apr 22, 2006
  • #31
If the 185's have larger 2.02 intakes, and the 165's have 1.94's, that in itself is the best reason not to buy 185's. You don't have piston to valve issues with 165's. Combustion chamber size is another factor. With 289/302 builds, you're way better off with 58 cc or smaller chambers. If the 185's are 64's then that's another strike against em. Smaller displacement engines work better with smaller heads, in just more than one way. Flow isn't the only factor in building the right engine. Bigger isn't always better.
 
6

67staaang

Member
Mar 30, 2005
132
0
16
Apr 24, 2006
#32
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #32
hm. you guys got me thinking. what do you guys think about the ford gt-40 crate? is it worth it? or should i custom build my engine?
 
D

D.Hearne

New Member
Sep 29, 2000
11,730
6
0
south louisiana
Apr 24, 2006
#33
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #33
If you're not experienced and aren't made of money, go with the crate. Building one yourself can really cost you if you screw up in some instances.
 

SoCalCruising

Founding Member
Jul 25, 2000
2,437
0
47
SoCal
Apr 24, 2006
#34
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #34
Both 165s and 185s are available in 58 or 64cc chambers. The main differences between the heads are the valve sizes (1.90 vs 2.02) and bowls. The bowls on the 165s are sized/shaped for the smaller valves and reduce the overall runner volume. As I understand from Ed Curtis, the Comp 165s were made to maximize flow rates and still meet certain class rules in drag racing.

Summary: if you have adequate valve reliefs for 185s, get 'em. If not, and you don't want to swap pistons, get the 165s. That's what they're for.
 
6

67staaang

Member
Mar 30, 2005
132
0
16
Apr 24, 2006
#35
  • Apr 24, 2006
  • #35
well what i think i might end up doing is getting the gt40 crate for now take my original 289 out make it either a 302, 331 or 347 and rebuild that with 185s.. thanks for all the info stang experts it really helped my decision A LOT!!
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Best place to source power steering parts for a '67? (control valve, ram, hoses)
  • SophiaTatum
  • Jun 15, 2026
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
2
Views
191
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jun 18, 2026
SophiaTatum
S
Salvage/rebuilt title question
  • djj62478
  • Oct 2, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
5
Views
194
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Oct 2, 2026
DadLife0724
S
347 with Vortech V2 and Holley quick fuel, AFR Renegades a tremec tko 600 advice for newbie pls
  • Schargedfox
  • Jul 20, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
22
Views
708
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 3, 2026
Schargedfox
S
Electrical Dash wiring
  • RileyDymond
  • Jul 19, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
6
Views
156
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 19, 2026
RileyDymond
2001 SVT Cobra slow return to idle speed
  • phil2001svt
  • Oct 21, 2026
  • SVT Tech Forum
Replies
3
Views
135
SVT Tech Forum Monday at 11:07 AM
phil2001svt
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?