Register now to get rid of these ads!

Projects 302 w/351Windsor heads

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by 2muchwork, Mar 24, 2014.

  1. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    I'm putting 351W heads on a 302. Comp flat tappet cam, new springs, lifters, chain, etc & a new Edelbrock RPM manifold. I bought the inserts to take up the excess head bolt space & I think I'm ready to go. Cam is in & I'm going to install the heads & get a length on pushrods - then get them ordered.

    I have a concern about water jackets & the maniflold mounting correctly. Anybody done this?

    Also - 164 tooth flywheel & aluminum bellhousing - every starter I look at seems to be $170+. Standard toploader 4 speed with this. According to the book, flywheel & bellhousing were meant for each other, but why so much for a starter??
     
  2. finn
    Joined: Jan 25, 2006
    Posts: 884

    finn
    Member

    Unless they are 1969-mid 70's 351W heads, they are the same as 302 heads, so you won't gain anything.
     
  3. tylercrawford
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 726

    tylercrawford
    Member
    from Buford, GA
    1. S.F.C.C.

    Finn already got it but the 351 and 302 are mostly the same except for additional deck height (length added above the water pump bolt holes so they use the same timing cover) and head bolt size (and a slight few other rotating dimensions).

    The D0OE heads were the old school desirable ones. Eclipsed by the gt40 and later gt40p heads and not that close to the modern aluminum heads but they will work.

    I made 240rwhp with a 306, a ported set of D0OE heads, RPM airgap and a b-cam.
     
  4. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    I have the same heads D0OE. I picked them up because they were fresh- new valves, screw in studs, etc. The valve & port size is larger & I've read they are a low buck way to go to gain a little extra...& with with new valves, guides & studs - @ $200 bucks - way cheaper than refurbing the heads that came with the motor. The cam I'm using will need the screw in studs.
     

  5. tylercrawford
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 726

    tylercrawford
    Member
    from Buford, GA
    1. S.F.C.C.

    Wow, you got those for a steal then . . . but I guess the low cost of the aluminum stuff has really pushed those down as of late.

    I paid like $400 back in 2004/2005 for a ready to bolt-on set like yours.

    Those were the best windsor-based intake ports for a long time until the gt40 heads came out in the early 90s which were based on the D0OEs (or so the internet lore goes).

    They work really well with some bowl work and 1.94/1.6 valves.
     
  6. That will make very decent power; grind the smog knobs out of the exhaust ports if they're not already gone. You do need to make sure you have the right intake gaskets (351, although FelPro used to make a dedicated gasket for this combo IIRC) and use some sealer around the water ports, getting those sealed can be a bit tricky.

    $200 with studs? Ya stole 'em!....
     
  7. Relic Stew
    Joined: Apr 17, 2005
    Posts: 1,147

    Relic Stew
    Member
    from Wisconsin

    Use the early 351W intake gaskets to match the shape of the water port. The bolt hole goes unused, but it's not an issue.

    Are you looking at geared mini-starters or something? Should be able to get a regular starter at the local parts store for ~$50 plus core.
     
  8. 65COMET
    Joined: Apr 10, 2007
    Posts: 3,086

    65COMET
    Member

    Those heads will not gain you much if any power! They have huge combustion chambers so with stock flat top pistons you may have 7.5 or 8 to 1 compression!! They need more work than they are worth,you need domed pistons to get compression back up,port work especially on the exhaust,special head bolts,and you still end up with a head that is nothing special! ROY.
     
  9. JeffB2
    Joined: Dec 18, 2006
    Posts: 8,977

    JeffB2
    Member
    from Phoenix,AZ

    65COMET has it right,it is a waste of money putting them on a 302 you will lose compression and the cam swap will only make it worse.The 69-70 heads were only good for 15-20 HP IF you have the compression up,For a budget build you would be better off using 1964- early 1966 289 heads with 1.84 SBC intake valves then you gain compression and these have adjustable rockers stock:Read the 289 section: http://www.mre-books.com/interchange/interchange5.html While we are on SBF myths if you were to use GT40 heads or GT40P's the gain would be 25-35 HP but it would be money wasted again because you would need to upgrade the rockers and the springs are very weak for even minimal performance also the GT-40P's won't fit most headers.You should give this a read:http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_1302_six_budget_ford_heads_that_work/ The Flo-Teks are a good budget "bang for the buck" if you want to save up for them.
     
  10. JeffB2
    Joined: Dec 18, 2006
    Posts: 8,977

    JeffB2
    Member
    from Phoenix,AZ

  11. JeffB2
    Joined: Dec 18, 2006
    Posts: 8,977

    JeffB2
    Member
    from Phoenix,AZ

  12. R Pope
    Joined: Jan 23, 2006
    Posts: 3,309

    R Pope
    Member

    If you don't bump the CR you will end up with less power than you had before. By the time you buy new pistons, rings and such, you will be in deeper than a set of aluminum 302 heads.
     
  13. tylercrawford
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 726

    tylercrawford
    Member
    from Buford, GA
    1. S.F.C.C.

    Then mill them and run 1011-2s at .041 compressed thickness instead of the .049" graphite gaskets . . . ?

    The D0OE heads should be in the 60-62cc range which is going to put any flat top 302 motor in the 9:1 range.

    The heads are already worked. Bushings are like $20 or you can run stepped studs/bolts.

    The D0OE head is arguably the best windsor pattern small block head ford put in a production vehicle.

    Like I posted earlier, I made 240rwhp (through a C4 automatic no less) with a ported set of D0OE heads and a relatively mild street setup that I drove for several years while in college. They work fine when you intend them to be a nice street/strip combo.
     
  14. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    Just answered the $84 question...water jackets and gaskets. Wasn't sure if I was getting 302 gaskets or 351 gaskets.
     
  15. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    That's what I'm thinking, but everywhere I look - the 164 tooth flywheel starters are $$$$
     
  16. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    The D0OE heads have 60cc chambers, 1.84 intake valves & 1.54 exhaust.

    The guy I got these heads from bought them for a Mustang he was building in the mid 90's. While the heads were getting done, teh barn burned where he kept the car and he lost it. He doesn't remember all he did to the heads. I don't have what I need to cc the heads. I'll try swinging by the local drug store for some sort of measuring device. Those heads may be cut - the finish is fresh & flat.
     
  17. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    That's a good article. The book I have been using to locate & ID parts is the one they refer to at the end of that page in the article. [​IMG]
     
  18. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    I need to find a way to cc those heads - they were at least ground and may have been milled. The finish is fresh & flat.
     
  19. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    I have access to a machine shop...been so much work to get where I am now, but you're right. If I set those up in a mill and plunge straight down is there anything I can damage? I could plow out 1/2" of material from each port! Does the valve guide come down in there?
     
  20. mustang6147
    Joined: Feb 26, 2010
    Posts: 1,847

    mustang6147
    Member
    from Kent, Ohio

    I would rather open up the exhaust ports on the 302 heads, and 2.02 intake valves and use a 351 cam and firing order. You would gain better power.

    Windsors like compression. 351 heads will hurt.
     
  21. tylercrawford
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 726

    tylercrawford
    Member
    from Buford, GA
    1. S.F.C.C.

    The ports are pretty much the same in every windsor SBF head I've seen. The only difference being the size of the thermactor hump. I've ported a set of 289 heads, some 70s casting 302 head, a smogger 255 head, about 5 sets of E7 heads and one gt40 set.

    The worst thermactor bumps are in the late 70s/early 80s . . . The 255 head has a thermactor hump that looks like a second valve guide however you can end up with a port that has a similar cross section once you are done with the die grinder.

    The major exhaust port difference is the 86 only E6 head . . . the seats are up like an 1/8" or so vertically into the head. Short side radius is meh.
     
  22. Mike51Merc
    Joined: Dec 5, 2008
    Posts: 3,856

    Mike51Merc
    Member

    What 302 block are you working on? Deck heights vary with some production years plus your block may have been decked before. 302s came with heads with 58.2CC, 63CC, and 69CC combustion chambers. If your 351 heads have 60.4CC chambers you may end up either raising or lowering your C/R.

    What pistons are in it? Different dishes and flats were used and may have been swapped out over the years.
    What kind of valve train?

    You need to know what you have in combination with what you propose to install and then use a compression calculator like this one: http://www.csgnetwork.com/compcalc.html

    Also look at this site: http://www.mustangii.net/headswapcompression.asp


    Oh, and about those thermactor humps, I have heads with no thermactor ports that still have small humps inside. I wonder what Ford was thinking?
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2014
  23. sunbeam
    Joined: Oct 22, 2010
    Posts: 5,330

    sunbeam
    Member

    Remember to put washers under the head bolts because of the difference in head bolt size.
     
  24. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    Bought the spacer. Thanks!
     
  25. 2muchwork
    Joined: Jun 10, 2013
    Posts: 22

    2muchwork
    Member
    from Webster NY

    The block I have is a '74 Mexican block. Caps are larger and was recently rebuilt. I'm using that block & rotating assembly with the 351 heads, a comp cams .512 lift flat tappet, new springs, roller rockers, etc. I've got to find a way to cc the heads. I'd be willing to bet a few thousand came off.
     
  26. Mike51Merc
    Joined: Dec 5, 2008
    Posts: 3,856

    Mike51Merc
    Member

    '73-'76 302 blocks (assuming Mexican are the same) have a higher deck height, resulting in deck clearance of 0.034, instead of the normal 0.016, and they have 58.2cc combustion chambers (stock was 8:1 compression). These engines also used dished pistons with +12CC tops unless your rebuilder used eyebrowed flat tops with +3cc. Use these numbers in your compression calculations.

    I found a reference for milling which says that every .006 milled reduces the chamber by 1cc.

    If I were you I'd be looking to mill those heads at least to 58.2cc. I'm having a set of 64cc GT40 heads milled right now. With a .030 cut, they're down to 59cc. I may go another 0.010 to get compression up higher.

    A '74 block with a 0.030 overbore, flat top (+3cc) pistons, 0.039 head gasket and a 58.2cc head results in 9.19:1 static C/R.

    If you find something to accurately measure water, all you need is a piece of flat plexi-glass and some Vaseline to cc your heads. Drill two 1/8" holes in the plexi and seal it in place with vaseline. Fill with water from a measured source. I found 60cc and 5cc medical syringes that work for me.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2014
  27. tylercrawford
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 726

    tylercrawford
    Member
    from Buford, GA
    1. S.F.C.C.

    Uh oh, its on now :D

    I had a friend make around 800hp with that block . . . its the strongest production windsor block.

    Incon twin turbo kit couldn't kill it :cool:
     
  28. 40FordGuy
    Joined: Mar 24, 2008
    Posts: 2,907

    40FordGuy
    Member

    Some of the 351 W intake manifolds had 4 more bolts, than the 302 Intakes; I learned that, when assembling my 351 W. I understand that later engines used the same intake bolt patterns.

    4TTRUK
     
  29. powrshftr
    Joined: Mar 29, 2013
    Posts: 4,550

    powrshftr
    Member

    You can't run a 2.02 valve in a stock sbf head.The valve spacing is too close.

    Scott


    Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
     
  30. George
    Joined: Jan 1, 2005
    Posts: 7,460

    George
    Member

    69-77 used 351 heads with the higher number of intake bolts. After that 302 heads were used, so intake bolt set up is 302.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.