302 heads on a 360?

-
J

jeeper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
1,076
Reaction score
32
Location
Klamath County, Oregon
I have been working on a combination for my 73. I remember reading elsewhere that someone had put the 302 castings on a 360 for a cheap increase in compression.

It seemed like it was fairly RPM limited but I don't recall.

If you had a stock 360, early 70's combined with these heads what would be the likely outcome for a torqey (sp) street motor?

I have the heads, engine and a Performer intake. Assumming I had headers and some port work but stock valves, what cam would work with this?

I would like the usual stuff, as much power as possible. A somewhat bumpy idle, decent street manners and reliability.

Ideas on this?

Thanks for your input, ROB
 
Your cam choice would be dependant on your final compression ratio, the ammount of work done to your heads, to a certain extent, and your rear end gear ratio. The choice of a compatible torque converter, if you're going auto tranny, would also figure into the equation. Remember that the bigger you go with the cam, the more compression it will bleed off, and if you're also running a stock type torque converter and highway type rear gears, then a big cam will kill any bottom end torque you might have gained by going to the 302 heads. One thought that might help in your final decision making is to build torque into your engine and make horsepower with the heads. Hope this helps.
 
The one I pulled from my Swinger: 87 360+.040 Mopar reman shortblock (rescued from friend's spare van), '70 318 small port heads, completely redone, guides, seats, 1.88/1.60 stainless valves, ports enlarged to 4bbl size, bowl work, exh ported, milled .050" (yielded 56ccs), MP thin head gaskets, XE268 cam, MP windage tray pkg, old Torker 340 single plane intake, 750 Edelbrock carb. The 302s have better ports, and a small chamber, but similar in size to the early small chamber(still open design) 318s. The engine idled at 700rpm, and pulled strong in 4th gear at 1800 with 3.55s. It did basically shut down at 5600, but pulled strong to over 5K. I would suggest a slightly larger cam, matched springs, the 1.88/1.60 valves, perhaps a little unshrouding and milling to keep the chambers as small as possible. I got a true measured and figured 9.8:1 static out of mine, and that with the dished pistons like .140" down in the hole. For cams something in the XE274H or Magnum 280H would run real nice, and have a lope. With the smaller high velocity port, the larger cam will still idle nice and pull like a freight train low down (under 2K)with the 360 stroke.
 
Here is what I have on hand right now, as in it is at my house or on its way here:

4.10 8 1/4 with a Sure-Grip
Eddy carbs 600 and 750
2 1/2" exhaust
.484 MP camshaft
Windage tray and bolts

My intentions are to use as much of the above stuff as I can, since I already own it.

Other thoughts:

I am intending to build a 904 with a 2.74 first and use a 2500 stall

I realize that this is not the "best" combination but how fast do you think I could get a 3200 lbs. A body to go with it in the quarter?

Thanks, ROB
 
With that cam, rear gear, converter, you should have a good running combination in an A Body. What compression ratio will you finally end up with? I'd suggest you get some new valve springs that are good to .500 lift to go with that cam. It's been so long since I've run the 1/4 mile, I'll let some of the more recently experienced members take a guess at a timeslip. :)
 
We have a 365 w/302 heads that runs 11.40's 1/4 on pump premium with 5.29 rear gear and 9 X 30 M/T slicks and a 5000 flash converter. The cam is a old prostock grind 274 @.050 104 CL .580 lift solid, this thing sounds like a 440 on steroids, the car weigh's 3150 lbs. with the driver and pulls hard to 7000 rpm's it has 129 psi cylinder pressure and it has a 850 dbl pumper. 1.56 60 ft times and 7.37 1/8 mi. times @ 94 mph, 11.40's @ 116 and change 1/4 mi. We shift the car at 6000 rpms to keep the torque in the peak range longer and let it pull through the top end @ 7200 rpm's.
Hope this helps.
 
Wow! I won't get that performance, that is incredible. Does not sound like a good street cam..... I'm kidding!

OK so we have determined that the 302 castings will work. I am after maximum bang for the buck and I really need to run what I have for now.

In the future I would like to maybe upgrade the cam to a "modern" grind and some Magnum heads with an RPM manifold.

For now I just want to get the car on the street/strip. I am entering my "no car" zone here in less than a month so I am not real worried about it until late spring.

I am taking it to the shop for the kids to work on with me. I will do the head work at home and then do install at work.

Anyone else?

BTW- Can someone tell me where the BJR post was that covered the head CFM and all that? I was just reading it here a few days ago I thought.

Thanks all, ROB
 
I did a few searches trying to find it, but I cant dig it up. Maybe BJR saved it in some form.
 
My concern has been volume. I have some J heads at home and these appear to be quite a bit smaller in unported form.

BJR can certainly make them work. I will likely give it a try.

Some time ago I think it was covered on Moparts and it seemed like they made pretty good torque, but shut down fairly early in the RPM scale. "Patrick" or something had some experience I thought, but this was a long time ago and I may have forgotten.

I have a set and know where there is a set that has been redone for pretty reasonable. That is one reason why I wanted to try them. That and the compression help etc.

Just a thought.
 
well, I've done two sets for others, but they are for 318s, and they didnt get flow tested either. Also, neither car is together and running yet. ( both in E bodies)
 
jeeper, the heads deal was cylinder heads 101 I think that I did it in engine performance.


1qwikScamp, This is all motor and pump gas, I don't believe in NOS, in fact the guy they call Mr. 6.00 is a engine that I did a few years ago, he made between $60,000.00 and $75,000.00 in 2 years racing here in Georgia, South Carolina, Tennesee, and Alabama he was invited to the other states and he went and took there money. As for comparing them to X heads well they don't look as good on the bench but they have other advantages that the X heads don't have even with porting. The key to making power is the right valve size and port shape along with the right valve shape, size, and seat angle's.
As for the 302's for port volume they come from the factory at 120 cc's and the heads that we used were 126 cc's and they flowed 213 cfm's @ .400 and held it to .600 lift with a peak of 218 cfm's @ .650. I do have a set that flows 232 cfm's @ .500 with a different valve size and different port shape. The heads that we have on this engine are 62% efficent and the heads that I have with the different changes are 67% efficent. The more efficent the heads the better the engine will perform and the new heads are 136 cc's with very good flow for the port size.
 
The cylinder heads 101 thread is on the 2nd page about half way down. Under this area of topics Mopar Performance Issues.
 
Please excuse my ignorance (there's lots of it!) but are you guys talking about FORD 302 heads?? :scratch:
 
Sweet, thanks for clarifying that...! We didn't have any 318 powered Mopars manufactured in Aussie or NZ after 80-81, so I doubt we'd have many of those heads on this side of the pond! I love this site BTW!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top