I pulled most of the top end out of an '87 Thunderbird HO. I have the E7TE heads and HO intake manifold, I just need injectors to complete that. I'm going to do a little bit of porting with the E7's and swap out the old exhaust manifolds for headers. Though the E7's aren't the best, they're probably better than what was on my old motor. I have a newer, less-worn non-roller block with valve reliefs and dishes in the pistons that I'm swapping the HO top end onto. I need a better, less-worn cam, though. Since the rockers on the E7's are 1.6 ratio and look to be in good shape, I wasn't planning on changing those out. I was looking at this cam in my Summit catalog, and it looked good to me. If that cam is too radical, how about this one? How much difference in high-end power is there between the two and versus a stock '70's cam? I found that a '75 cam has .368 int./.380 exh. lift and 270 int./248 exh. degrees duration. I understand that I should replace the valve springs on the E7's as they are too stiff for a flat tappet drivetrain. I have no idea where to start with that.
What year is the 302 you are useing...You may not have the compression ratio with the E7 heads to use either cam effectively...As for the valve springs...Summitt should be able to recommend/hook you up with the proper springs...
I think that is the same cam I had in my last engine. Similar in specs to the Edelbrock Performer Plus. Just be sure whatever cam you use, the springs match. Roller cam uses different springs. I used that cam with flat tappet lifters, with stock GT40 heads (originally a roller cam, so tighter springs), and they ate up my cam. Springs are cheap, so figure out what cam you want, decide to go roller or flat tappet, and then call the cam manufacturer for a suggestion on springs, so that they match. EDIT--I used K3600 cam. Duration 262/272, Lift .448/.472, gave it a nice lope.
Alright, so I found out the block I'm working with (putting into the Maverick) is a C8OE, a 1968/69 302 and it's .030 over. Other than that this block is stock, so is the rotating assembly all cast? What compression was this year supposed to have?
In 1968 the small block Ford was stroked to 3.0 in (76.2 mm), giving a total displacement of 302 CI (4.942 L). The connecting rods were shortened to allow the use of the same pistons as the 289. It replaced the 289 early in the 1968 model year. The most common form of this engine used a two-barrel carburetor, initially with 9.5:1 compression. It had hydraulic lifters and valves of 1.773 in (45 mm) (intake) and 1.442 in (36.6 mm) (exhaust), and was rated (SAE gross) at 220 hp (164 kW) @ 4600 rpm and 300 lb·ft (407 N·m) @ 2600 rpm. Optional was a four-barrel version rated at 250 hp (186 kW) @ 4800 rpm.
The destruction may not have been the result of the springs. The stock roller springs are pretty tame. Might have been just another in a long line of flat tappet cam failures due to bad lifters and/or bad cam cores.
The crank is cast nodular iron, which is damned near indestuctible, it's as strong as a steel Chevy crank. The pistons are cast, which again is not an issue unless you're going to spray it with heavy doses of NOS. The 289 Hi-po had the same cast pistons, as did the 428CJ, GT390, etc. All Ford pushrod motors had forged rods, just some were better than others. The rods in that 68 block are good to 7500 with ARP bolts. Compression ratio depends on what pistons are actually in it and what heads they're run with. Just to guess that it's a 9.5 to 1 motor, you might be right 50% of the time. Only way to know for certain is to pull the heads and see what pistons they are (dished or flat topped) and measure the deck clearance at TDC. Just going by the block's casting numbers will get you nowhere, it's been rebuilt, it may or may not have pistons in it that acheive a 9.5 to 1 ratio.
It has dished pistons with valve eyebrows. After doing some porting work on some C9TE's I have (identical to the C8OEs, I just messed up and ported the wrong set) I will be checking the chamber volume for sure.
If it has valve "eyebrows", aren't those considered "flat tops"? Dished pistons don't have eyebrows, but just a dish that is even all the way across. Confusing, I agree. But that is what I have heard in the past.
You're wrong. I've seen many dished pistons that have valve reliefs. I can show you a half dozen I have in my piston collection.
If those are the pistons you're using, you can find out the dish volume and calculate the comp ratio just by using the part number stamped into the piston top.
