Pros and Cons of an old 302 vs. 5.0

Discussion in 'Technical' started by 924 Mav, Feb 8, 2008.

  1. Derek 5oComet

    Derek 5oComet Tire burner

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,629
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Welland,Ontario,Canada
    Vehicle:
    1972 Comet ,5.0L,5spd,9",3.89 trac lock, 12.40@110, 1967 Mercury Cougar 390 stick,1985 Mercury Capri 5.0,5 speed,1979 F150 4x4 460,1992 F150 Flareside,99 F250 SuperDuty V10
    Boy you hit the nail on the head! I have a B303 in my car and it sounds like a solid lifter engine.I always thought something was wrong with it.
     
  2. baddad457

    baddad457 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,861
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    171
    Location:
    Opelousas La.
    Yea, that's the first hp roller I used. The looks on my kid's face and as well as his teenaged friends(as well as the reactions & comments), was priceless when I first fired it off in the shop, with open headers:thumbs2: and soon as it was idling on it's own, stuff started shaking off the shelves along the wall. That really got em hooked.:bowdown:on this stuff.
     
  3. scooper77515

    scooper77515 No current projects.

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    14,672
    Likes Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    233
    Location:
    Issaquah/Grand Coulee, WA
    Vehicle:
    Fresh out of Mavericks
    Glad I revisited this thread...I was really thinking i was going to lose my lopy idle when I got the 5.0 roller, I have heard it is a firing order issue:huh:

    Hope my cam is weird enough to keep that sound.

    And that description of "radial aircraft" is a PERFECT description of how my old motor ran.

    Hope to have mine in and running by tonight, tomorrow at the latest. and will let you all know how it goes and will try to put up a sound clip, if I can:dance:
     
  4. svthauln

    svthauln Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Mounds,Ok
    Vehicle:
    1972 maverick
    I've got a TFS stage1 cam in it and it is lopy but not as lopy as a high compression solid cam.It don't have the pop if you know what I mean.:evilsmile

    I have used the E and the B cam ,but the tfs made more power.I have never used the z cam.
    What I ment by smoother idle was lift for lift the roller will idle better (y)
     
  5. scooper77515

    scooper77515 No current projects.

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    14,672
    Likes Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    233
    Location:
    Issaquah/Grand Coulee, WA
    Vehicle:
    Fresh out of Mavericks
    I always wondered what made that POP...I thought it was an effect of the methano/alcohol fuel and high compression, and not a side effect of the solid cam.

    Never really tried to figure out which ones popped and which didn't.
     
  6. rthomas771

    rthomas771 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,081
    Likes Received:
    970
    Trophy Points:
    498
    Garage:
    1
    Location:
    GA
    Vehicle:
    '74 Maverick 302 5-Speed.'60 Falcon V8. '63.5 Falcon HT
    True, the casting quality should be better, we have computer control tools now days. As far as metal being the same is debatable. I’m no metallurgist, I’m just a country boy from Georgia. But what I have seen personally in my life is they make things cheaper each year. What ever happen to the magnesium added that made the 9 inch ‘N’ case to make it such a strong rear end? Could it be the cost factor? Same goes with what metals and alloys are mixed together to cast the new blocks in this "Do it the cheapest way" world we live in today.
     
  7. GTwannabe

    GTwannabe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2004
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Acworth/Kennesaw, GA
    Vehicle:
    94 mustang GT, '73 Comet GT 302 toploader 4-speed
    i agree, the "N" or nodular case was very stong. they quit using good metal a long time ago. the price of scrap has gone up, so there is a lot of recycled stuff out there. as far as 302s and 5.0s i used to think that older was better but after a couple rebuild of each i see them as the same. that is as far as the blocks them selfs. i like the rollers for the fact of roller anything is more performance. but for the older cars you have to worrie about equalizer bar threads in the block, dipstick location, reverse water pumps, etc.
     
  8. 924 Mav

    924 Mav Ed Winegar

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Location:
    Pattison, Texas
    Vehicle:
    (2) 1970 Mavericks and a 1971 4dr Maverick
    I am going to build a 347 stroker with an old 302 block. Thanks for all the replies. Before I buy the stroker kit is there anything else I need to know.
     
  9. Mavman72

    Mavman72 Gone backwards but lookin' forward

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    6,759
    Likes Received:
    272
    Trophy Points:
    273
    Location:
    Buffalo N.Y.
    Vehicle:
    1972 Maverick 2 door.Original V-8 3 spd std shift.Also a 72 one owner Sprint sporting a 351 Windsor
    Yes make sure you get a kit for the correct deck height,the older engines 68 to 73 had a shorter deck height than the 74 to 84 which were taller to drop the compression.After 84 they went back to the short deck height.This also applies to 351 windsors,but the 351s' stayed with the taller deck after 84.
     
  10. 924 Mav

    924 Mav Ed Winegar

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    77
    Location:
    Pattison, Texas
    Vehicle:
    (2) 1970 Mavericks and a 1971 4dr Maverick
    Thanks, my block is a 74 so the deck height is taller. Any advantage or disadvantage to this?
     
  11. Mavman72

    Mavman72 Gone backwards but lookin' forward

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    6,759
    Likes Received:
    272
    Trophy Points:
    273
    Location:
    Buffalo N.Y.
    Vehicle:
    1972 Maverick 2 door.Original V-8 3 spd std shift.Also a 72 one owner Sprint sporting a 351 Windsor
    Easier to build a stroker out of it,Compression ratio will be down at least a point from the Ideal 9.5:1 on a street build,but.You can have it decked at a machine shop and get it down to a point where it is not a problem.Lots of guys will zero deck an engine anyhow when building a good performance engine.Zero decking brings the top of the piston up even with the block deck for better quench and more compression.Parts just seem to cost more for short deck stock blocks when you try to get stroker kits for em.Its not really a big problem but one to be aware of thats all.Good luck with your build.
     
  12. EFIMAV

    EFIMAV Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    Messages:
    719
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Location:
    Davenport Iowa
    Vehicle:
    1974 Maverick, FRPP 5.0, AOD, 3.80 equaloc
    what about the roller vs flat tappet

    A roller with the same specs as a flat tappet will produce more power. The roller ramps are far more aggressive so the valve is open longer at max lift. Remember the build in one of the mags using the AFR heads and stock EFI cam with 1.7RR made 400HP. That equates to about .470 lift with very conservative duration. In my opinion roller cams are/were a major advancement in technology and HP production.
     
  13. baddad457

    baddad457 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,861
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    171
    Location:
    Opelousas La.
    Just mill the decks, the extra material is only .020 more. It's a non issue if milling, something you want to do anyway to be sure the decks are square & level.
     

Share This Page