folks.. im trying to come up with a good streetable formula for my 72, 302 maverick. its a 2 door, and most all original now. i know a lot of you have already built your engines, and some really like what they did, and some wouldve done things differently. ill tell you what ive got, what my goal is, what ill be using, what im thinking of using. of course your advice is what i need. 1st... im not looking for a race car. i dont expect to be hauling it on a flatbed to the drag strip. this car needs to be capable of being a daily driver. fuel economy is of signifcance. as far as performance goes.. my goal is 250 horse power, and if i took it to the drag strip... @ least low 15 ET's i am currently unemployed, and recovering from total hip replacement surgery. the idea is to re-use everything i can, but only if its safe. my budget is very limited. i will be using my current block. it runs good, and i may try to get away with using the existing crank + pistons, etc. i know the original owner rebuilt it, and its been bored .040 over. ive had the valve covers off, and installed an edelbrock performer intake. i found a VERY clean engine. i presume it has dish pistons, which i dont care for.. but given the cost/quality of fuel now-a-days.. it shouldnt be too bad of a hinderence. i originally wanted to use the 289 connecting rods + the custom flat tops, but dont forsee it happening. i also have a pair of 66 289 heads. i know they will have better compression, and they are in good shape. i will no doubt have them reworked, and want to go on ahead and have them machined to accept roller rockers. is adding hardened valve seats a necessary expense? also... i understand that 289/302 heads arent real reliable with big performance cams. im told that unless i have some major work done to them, a 270 cam is about is big as i can go without haVing to do some custom work. what is your opinion of this? i hear that the rocker arm studs tend to be fragile. id like to know what cam youve got, and where your power band is. do you like it? would a comp cams 268 be a good selection? (remember 250 HP or low 15 ET's is all im looking for) i wont be running headers. i have existing dual exhaust and power steering, so i just dont need the headache. i dont want a loud car. i have headers on my cougar, and hate them. i do believe that i will convert my breaker type distributer to a petronix ignition. and what is your impression of rhodes lifters? are they loud/annoying? i hear they work well... but i want to hear my stereo and not be focused on the sounds of my engine. i do know they make your cam act like its stock until you pump them up. i just wonder about their overall quality and longivity. also... im still looking for a mustang II rearend. i understand many are posi tracks. if i find one... is it as simple as removing the contents of the pumpkin and simply re-installing it in the existing maverick 8 incher? are the splines gonna be the same? as for fuel induction.. i have a edelbrock performer. its a good street manifold, but question how good it is for higher performance. id like to graduate up to a weiand stealth, as everyone ive ever known to run one, has raved over it. i already have an edelbrock 600 carb. i plan on removing the AC, as it doesnt work. (anyone wanna buy it, it aint locked up, and its in tact?) id also love to remove the power steering setup. im not sure how to do it though. i figure that the weight removal and one less pulley working should be helpful. so in a nutshell.. is 250 horses, low 15 second ET's, investment of less than $1000, a (relatively) quiet and reliable car, with decent fuel ecomomy possible? what do yall think?
A rebuilt 302 that is .040 with flat top pistons, will be real close to 250 HP with a good intake, 600 CFM carb, updated ignition, and headers. That combo with a mild cam should put you over 250 HP. Hi-Po 289's, with solid lifter cam, were advertised at 271 HP (most experts agree it was actually over 300 HP). The 5.0 in the mid to late 80's Mustang GT's were advertised at 270 HP. You do not have to do much to get 250 HP out of a 302. As far as the need for hardened valve seats, My dad ran the Amoco white gas (unleaded hight test) of the 60's in his 65 Mercury with a Hi-Po 390. Machinists, engine builders, and enthusiasts will debate on this all day long. Personally, I've never had or seen a problem with the original 60's heads and unleaded gas. Just my 2 bits worth.
I like the 268 cam. I used one in my old 302 with a Weiand Action Plus intake, Holley 600dp, stock heads(smog bump removed), stock manifolds,stock Ford electonic ignition, duels with a 3:50 posi in my '71 and ran high 13's in the quarter. The Idle had a slight lope...worked fine with the stock converter. The car had much more torque, better top end(shifted at 5600rpm)and better fuel milage than stock as a bonus(if you keep your foot out of it). Seemed a very good combo to me
IMO you're on the right track. I built my son's '79 'stang on a budget and ran A little HO cam (.416 lift 195 @ .050 single pattern) with a stock HO intake, edelbrock 600, 3.08 gears,C-4,headers, dual exhaust, stock '77 motor with exhausts home-ported and it ran 15.30 @ 92 MPH. 20+ MPG as long as you weren't playing all the time. I'd stick with edelbrock intake since you already have it a friend runs a 268 with a performer in a '69 fairlane and runs in the 15's with 3.25 gears. that's a pretty big car. The rear center section from a MII will bolt right in your Mav but not many were posi. getting hard to find.check out mustangII.net for door tag codes and such, awesome info site.
cam selection / heads i will be using a pair of 66 289 heads, as opposed to my stock 72 heads. i'm thinking that i should gain a full compression point by this alone. does everyone agree with this? will it make an appreciable difference? also.. i think the 289 heads have adjustable rockers, as opposed to the later model 289/302 heads. does this allow me to use a more agressive cam profile? a buddy of mine who has a mustang ended up buying some after market heads because he kept breaking rocker arm studs. he used a 280 cam. im staying modest, as i dont want to spend a lot of money. he seems to think that the biggest cam im gonna get away with without making expensive head improvements is about a 268. he seems to think that using a split pattern cam will cause addtional stress on the stock heads, and that i should play it safe and use a single pattern cam. id like to know what cams and the specs this gallery has used on thier nearly stock heads, and gotten away with without breakage or other issues. id really like to use a split pattern cam 268-272 if someone makes it. i just want to know if the heads can handle it, and if not running headers would be a hinderance? i do want my car to be a muscle car. i want it to shred the tires @ will, have awesome passing power, and decent top end. i dont really expect it to be more powerful than a 5.0 mustang though. im not sure what the advertised horsepower rating for a 72 maverick V8 is. i would think its beneath 200. actually attaining a horsepower point for each cubic inch is not as easy as some like to imply. if i can get a legit 250-260 horses... ill be very happy. yall keep giving me info, and someone please comment on rhodes lifters.
I havn`t ever used rhodes lifters but I know of a guy who did and didn`t like them a bit because he used too small of a cam with them and had to realy get on it to pump up the lifters and make any power
RoadRage; When I raced a '77 Mav, with a 302, I used a 280/470 single profile cam, a Crower, I believe, and it ran fine with stock heads. Had to get a larger gear and a good converter, a 3500, and it ran 11:50 with 9" slicks. Good car. Got wrecked, went to a tube frame front, 4link rear and 514. Ran 9:90's. Good car!
You want a reliable and performance minded 302. You are starting with a 1972 2bbl engine. You need to have the complete rotating and reciprocating mass balanced. If the engine was rebuilt not too long ago and bored to .040 over then your pistons should be ok to reuse but you may want to hone the cylinders and have the piston knurled to the proper fit. Swapping the heads with '66 289 heads will give you an increase in compression from the 8.5:1 you started with as the chamber volume is decreased by 5 cc's. The valves and ports remain the same size so breathing won't suffer. You will need the pushrods from the 66 because the heads have slotted holes as guides for them. You will need to have screw in studs installed because the press in rocker studs tend to pull out when any additional spring pressure is used. A three angle valve grind with matching work on the seats will be fine. Valve guide inserts are a good idea or replaceable guides is even better. While the work is being done on the heads have them fitted for Perfect Circle valve guide seals. Gentle matching of ports to gaskets is also a good idea. Do NOT use rail rockers! If you do there could be binding on the pushrods where they go through the close tollerance slots in the head. The cam you select will depend on where you want to run your engine. A street engine rarely sees RPM above 4000 but without affecting your idle you can push the range (and power) to close to 6000 RPM with an Erson cams # 210121 and the kit to go with it #821015. If you dont have headers you should put that on your list and an intake manifold rated for 5500 top RPM range and a 600 CFM carb for better throttle response. I would recommend a street carb unless you are going to make occasional runs on the quarter mile and then you might want a street / drag carb as large as 720 CFM but keep in mind that you will lose low end response with the larger carb unless you are willing to do some tuning on it. Besure to use good quality bearings and have the connecting rods fitted with the 11/32 inch rod bolts. Optional but good stuff list would include the windage tray #C9ZZ-6687-B which is good for an extra 10 - 20 Hp and is inexpensive to buy. A three row radiator is nice to have if you live where the heat in traffic becomes an issue but if you are never stuck in stop and go traffic at 90 degrees it isn't necessary. The power that you can expect to get from the engine is close to 270 to 290 range at the flywheel with a smooth idle that is compatible with stock automatic and convertor. PaulS
-1985 mustang 5.0 HO =210 horse -1986=200 horse (but torque was up) -1987-1992 =225 horse the original 302's were rated at 141 hp in the earlier 70's. That's nearly a 100 horsepower difference. True, it's not hard to get 250 horses out of a 302, but it is much more difficult if you are using the old school technology. Honestly, if you went with a plane jane 1987 HO 5.0 roller block and did a basic rebuild on it, did some mild port and polishing on the heads, slapped an e cam in it, and topped it off with that edelbrock or weiand, you'll be staring at an easy 250-300 horse engine with a very low budget. You're going to have to work a LOT harder to get the same output out of the earlier engines. My suggestion is to get an 85-01 5.0 roller 5.0 engine. many of your late model 4x4 wrecking yards will sell a complete 5.0 HO engine from the 96-01 explorers for $650. those particular engines came with the gt40 iron heads from the factory and the efi intake near identical to the gt40 intakes. you can sell the efi intake for $200-$250 on the net to a mustang guy and put your carburator on it. Those engines have a truck cam, so I would suggest an e 303 or so cam along with some better valve springs. You'll hit 300 horse all day long in an engine that cost you $400. just my .02 I'm always broke, so I've become the master at junkyard buildups
Those rhodes lifters are designed to allow you to put in a big nasty cam and have it act like a timid street cam till you get after it and start spinning the thing. I have no personal experience with them but they seem like a great idea to me especially for a dual purpose rig like yours. It seems a lot like a honda Vtec system to me (nobody get mad) allowing you the advantage of variable valve lift and duration. it's like a cam swap at four grand. As far as the rest of your goals. I think you'll have no trouble getting what you want out of your rig. Keep us posted!
thanks 4 the tips! (keep em coming) im reading em all, and will be printing out the most useful ones. im gonna look into a junkyard/5.0 motor. i would just hope that using one would not require all the intimidating wiring/plumbing. i like to keep it simple. anyhow.. good stuff from everyone. this is all i asked for rr
na, junkyard 5.0 is basically the same. swap the oil pan, flex plate, slap a carb and a fuel pump, and a couple other small goodies, and that's about it. Lot's of people here have gone that route. You will only have to worry about a wiring mess if you keep the fuel injection
