Two suggestions---------- check your deck clearance for the pistons you want to run. Many so called flat tops for 302's have .020-.030 deck clearance, not good for getting the 10 to 1 comp ratio you'll need with that cam and aluminum heads. Suggestion # 2 is , If I were you I'd also check out Brodix Heads and Canfield heads before commiting to waitng on AFR's. Both Brodix and Canfield make every bit as good a head as AFR, no waiting either. I'm running Canfields on my 331 and so far, they're fantastic. Had them on a stock 5.0 short block before and they also were superb. With a Vic jr, Holley 650 DP carb, B303 Ford roller with 1.7 rockers, they pushed the 3800 lb Ranger they were in to mid 13's.steel1212 said:I'm thinking of heads and its down to 3: edelbrock performer rpms, afrs, or trick flows. I have the following: 302 bored .060, comp cam 512/512 and 232/232 its called the 280H advertised, performer rpm air gap intake (open to change perhaps to fit cam and heads), hooker comp headers and flowmasters out the back. I would like to get 300 to the rear wheels, thats why I have the aggressive came and would like a good set of heads that would do that out of the box, if possible. I'm also wanting good torque as well. If the afrs or trick flows are the best which ones? Also will the performer rpm be the right intake or will I need a single plane to achieve my goals?
Sorry for putting words in your mouth Max. The second sentence made me think "obsolete".Max Power said:Dual pattern cams, IMO, are far less necessary with aftermarket heads. They were used back in the day when factory exhaust ports were undersized compared to the intakes, but I think the modern heads have pretty much addressed that problem.
The Dan said:Finally found a set at All Mustang Performance in Phoenix. If you want a set now, give them a call.
I have a hard time believing some of that info in the chart. For example they listed the exhaust flow for std 289 heads very nearly the same as the 3.8 V6 heads. I have examined the 3.8 heads firsthand and while not being able to flow test them, but just by looking at their exhaust passages, there ain't no way they flow the same as a 289 head on the exhaust. The 3.8 exhaust passage is much larger than the 289 head's passage, you can stick three fingers down into the port and touch the valve stem. No way you'll do that with a 289 head. The intake side is vastly improved too.coolblue65 said:
Yes, the chart is straight from Edelbrock.Max Power said:I love those Edelbrock dyno charts. They all use 1-7/8s headers.
Where did you get those, Edelbrock?
D.Hearne said:I have a hard time believing some of that info in the chart. For example they listed the exhaust flow for std 289 heads very nearly the same as the 3.8 V6 heads. I have examined the 3.8 heads firsthand and while not being able to flow test them, but just by looking at their exhaust passages, there ain't no way they flow the same as a 289 head on the exhaust. The 3.8 exhaust passage is much larger than the 289 head's passage, you can stick three fingers down into the port and touch the valve stem. No way you'll do that with a 289 head. The intake side is vastly improved too.
Agreed, but the assembly of the right components is just as important. You can always take the car to a dyno test-n-tune to get the Carb/EFI setup right. You just have to be willing to put in the time if you want to do it yourself.coolblue65 said:66P51GT- Its straightforward if you have your own engine dyno and engineers to build you a motor in perfect tune.
66P51GT said:Agreed, but the assembly of the right components is just as important. You can always take the car to a dyno test-n-tune to get the Carb/EFI setup right. You just have to be willing to put in the time if you want to do it yourself.
LMan said:I'll be a slight party pooper here and say that if you dont change your stock gears first, it doesnt really matter which of those heads you get...you are going to be mighty disappointed. You might look at your priorities again.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?