In reply to NOHOME :
What kinda ticks me off is... in a normal non-covid summer, I would probably be just East of Toronto right now and I could buzz over and tinker with it.
In reply to NOHOME :
What kinda ticks me off is... in a normal non-covid summer, I would probably be just East of Toronto right now and I could buzz over and tinker with it.
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
That would be awesome, but yeah, this Covid stuff has messed up a lot of stuff . Like I got to get to FL to see Mom who I have not seen since Jan 2020.
In the meantime, my buddy swept out under the bench in his shop and found this manifold. Off to get a cam with a bit more bounce to it tomorrow and hopefully swap it out this weekend. The manifold will need an adapter for the Holley carb.
Are you sure you need an adapter? 8 carb hold-down bolt holes makes me think it could take either. Might check first.
Hopefully that's free, so that it only costs you some time and materials. It's going to be a dog below 3000 RPM. On a 302, it's probably a 4500-7500 RPM manifold.
You need street parts for a street engine.
Example off of my 350: dual plane, long runner.
In reply to Floating Doc (Forum Supporter) :
X10, but I'm sure we'll swap to the taller even bigger Holley intake and complain about loss of low end even more instead.
Agreed. You want a dual plane intake. That Dominator won't wake up until 4000 rpm on a 302 and it will shine at 7000. You want one that wakes up at 1500 and shines at 5000. Dual plane.
Having said that, I think the Dominator is a touch better than what you have on there now.
I believe that bolt pattern will accept square or spread bore, so it can't be a carbureted car thread without my not-so-subtle suggestion that you get a Qjet for it.
Edit to add: I always try to get dual-fit or spreadbore intakes for two reasons... 1) because I'm a Qjet fanboi, and 2) it offers options for the future when I successfully convert YOU to a Qjet fanboi. You can successfully use an adapter to go Spread intake to Square carb without problems. If you try to adapt a Square intake to a Spread carb, you'll never get it right. The primaries will go from tiny to huge and velocity sucks, and the secondaries will try to go huge to tiny and choke themselves.
Long time ago I built a few 289/302 motors. Best thing I ever did was upgrade to the 351w. Looks like a 302 but has loads of torque.
If you're not down with that..
A 302 with a dual plane manifold, 268 cam and headers was always a good street combo.
A tall Holli dominator single manifold, big heads, large roller cam and as much NOS you can afford was good for about 12 passes and low 10....
In reply to scottdownsouth :
If I went so far as to give up on the 302 I would go LS.
The thing I am finding with the 302 is that unless you build a bone stock Mustang EFI engine that can read from the factory manual, it feels like a rabbit warren of choices. Expensive choices.
It got the new single plane manifold and a new cam today. Found an issue with the timing so will correct that. Hope to fire it tomorrow. Fingers crossed.
I've built more than a few 5.0s and 302s. They are simple and do very well with the same mods that work on any engine.
The original Boss 302 had a smaller intake manifold and it was 7000 rpm engine built for Trans Am. If you want more low end, prepare for more disappointment.
The bigger displacement of the 351w offers more low end but it weighs more and is taller and wider.
A simple used dual plane would be an easy way to pick up more low end.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
There was another manifold under the bench; pretty much the same dual plane as I had except that it was not an airgap. Since there was no love for the first manifold I passed on the dual plane. The uneven fuel distribution/mix was another concern with the dual plane.
There are 4 351 engines under the bench, Not going down that road. NOPE.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
The Boss 302 was a whole lot of bad choices, really.... Cleveland 4v heads, which had badly shaped ports with too much CSA for a 351, on a 302? There used to be port plates that more or less blocked over the bottom third of the intake port, and it increased velocity and flow.
And that was the SENSIBLE option, they originally tried a tunnel port setup with sewer pipes for intake ports. Probably had the same tiny cramped exhaust ports as everything else, too.
Wouldn't a factory EFI intake be better for low speed torques.
In reply to NOHOME :
I love you brother, but dual planes SOLVE uneven fuel distribution. Single plane intakes can CAUSE uneven fuel distribution.
You
Need
A
Dual
Plane
Intake.
Please. Trust me. I've built tons of engines. It was my job for the biggest names in the hotrodding world.
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
Preach!
Dual planes work better and usually give up nothing at the top end, which is like .001% of your driving time anyway.
Yeah, they don't look sexy, but who are you trying to impress, your grinning face or some guy at a cruise in who looks under your hood for five seconds as he walks by?
Not like anyone's going to see it under the air cleaner, anyway. Especially if you use one of the nicely engineered Ford air cleaners.
Mismatched engine builds don't work. Never have, never will. I'm done here.
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
Funny think is that it had a dual plane on it to start with. I thought the airgap meant it had to go?
Well fire it up and see what it does. At least it has a bit of cam now. Cant be worse than before. I hope.
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
I agree, but that Holley Dominator probably has more air volume than the Boss 302 intake. Unless you plan on spinning the 302 to 7k+ it's probably not a very good choice. I'd go with a stock 83-85 5.0 dual plane or a Weiand dual plane, get the carb jetted for that and see how it runs first. But that's me.
NOHOME said:In reply to scottdownsouth :
it feels like a rabbit warren of choices. Expensive choices.
Thinking about it the wrong way, my man. There are a dozen magazines with 20+ years of SBF builds in them with dyno numbers. You literally just choose the level you want and grab the parts they use. From there it should just take a tuning session or two.
Cost might be a bitch, but once a year they all seem to do a "budget build"
I like the cam choice. May not be the best manifold, but if you get the tune right, I bet it'll run pretty good. Watching with interest.
In reply to Opti :
Kinda what I am hoping for. Besides, there WAS a issue with the timing so hopefully that should get sorted and make a difference. As long as it is better than it was, I will be happy.
Pete
That's a proven cam...should work well provided your valve springs are up to the task.
DEGREE IT! I know our mutual friend says install dot to dot, but it's good peace of mind to check against tolerance stacking. I have a degree wheel and crank attachment you can borrow. I can drop it off today.
Sorry to hear about your issue. I know it's confusing getting conflicting info from different sides.
In reply to NOHOME :
What was the timing issue?
In reply to MX_Brad :
If you degree it, id be curious if it's off just doing dot to dot. I haven't run across one that was off, mostly chevys though.
Also curious about the timing issue
In reply to Opti :
yeah, same. It gets installed dot to dot, but confirming/degreeing it takes that variable out of the equation when troubleshooting issues. Plus it's a good way to confirm the cam grind specs. Never had an issue myself, but is essentially free to check, so why wouldn't you?
In reply to MX_Brad :
For me? Laziness. If I really care about something, like if I cam the 1LE, it will get checked.
But if I'm doing a moderate build, I probably wouldn't check it.
When I do the 5.0 for the mustang, it will get lined up based on the timing marks and put together. If it's off a few degrees it won't bother me on something rocking stock manifolds.
You'll need to log in to post.
