85 Ranger getting some teeth...

I finally think I am ready to start a swap thread to keep my swap questions in...

Anyway, I dug up a '78 302 I am going to go check out possibly as early as tonight. Any idea what the hp should be? I know it is going to be pretty sad but I am still curious.

I have a set of '67 289 heads (condition unkown), would they help get the compression up to halfway liveable level and interchange easily since it isn't a roller? Any advantage to using the 289's exhaust manifolds too?

The 302 was in a '83 Mustang so it "should" have the dipstick in the pan.

I am going to put a 4bbl on it of some sort if it doesn't have one already, duraspark ignition (plug and play since the truck is already set up for it) and a C-4/5 mutant with the stock BW1350M transfer case.

I don't have a heated shop to work on a dead truck in, so for now the plan is to put the 8.8 in the truck this fall, so when I back it into its hole for heart surgery next spring it is already in place for driveshaft issues. The truck fills up its alloted space so I can only work on one end at a time. And then I get the engine set up how I want it during the winter.

It would help if you knew what it came out of, but expect it to be low compression, around 7:1, about 140 horse.

Depending on the deal you get, remeber you can possibly fing an '86 or later roller engine cheap. With headers, and good 4bbl intake, you'd be in the neighbourhood of 250.

My bro dyno'd his RX7 last week, with a '79 302 and T-5, it made 129 horse at the wheels, with headers and an Edelbrock Performer intake. Luckily, the car only weighs 2000lbs.

It is kind of a bandaid, I don't think my 2.8 will last long enough until I can afford to rebuild my 289 (or any other engine). So if I get the heads for the 289 checked out this winter and stuck on this engine (if it will work) that is a step towards the final goal and will get me more time to come up with a stage 2. Plus the truck will aready be set up for a V-8, so installing the 289 or whatever else I find will be easier.

I have been shopping for a couple months, the asking price is about 1/4 ($150) of what I see later roller engines going for... and who knows what kind of shape they are in. I hate to sink a bunch of money in a used engine, even the Explorer 5.0's can be getting to the point of needing rebuilt and I haven't seen one of them for under $600 yet.

If I can get 200hp out of it I think that would be plenty for what I do, heck my F-150 is has a ton on it with 260 hp at the flywheel and it gets around pretty good IMO. Even stock if it has 140 hp that is 30hp more than than the 2.8 could put out if it was running right, and probably about twice the 140 lb-ft of torque it would make. My Ranger is a pretty much stock 4x4 truck that I goof around with, no serious wheeling or drag racing for it.

The sad thing is while I am shopping, my brother has a bunch of fairly late model F-150 roller 302's lined up to blow up at the dealership he works at...

Well the thing followed me home for $100. It is a 302 out of a ’78 LTD so I am going to take a wild stab that it isn’t a really hot engine. Fully loaded with all of the accessory brackets that I didn't have for my 289, alternator, power steering pump (that he said was quiet, unlike the howler on I have on it now), Motorcraft starter, small 1:08 venturi 1250 carb that I could stick on my 2.8 (or resell as a package deal Duraspark kit with my 2.8 dist), duraspark distributor with a new looking cap/collar/rotor, and a blown up 2wd AOD.

The story was shortly after he put this in his ’83 Mustang, he turned out of his driveway and the county had put a big gravel/weed bank along the edge of his gravel road which ripped a tranny cooler line loose, thus killing the transmission before he even knew he had a problem. He found a ‘84 302/AOD combo and pulled this one to replace it as an assembly but ended up selling the car first. Really, the fluid in the tranny doesn’t look bad, and I am leery of it running out of fluid and just dying. Usually they run out of fluid and stop moving, possibly causing some pump damage at worst, so it might be worth something to someone for if nothing else a core.

I figure worst case, I still made out pretty good, the DS distributor was more than $100 fully loaded for my 2.8, plus the brackets and spare parts, even if everything else ends up in the scrap bin. The spark plugs are well worn and look very good, a welcome sight after the ones I pull out of my Ranger dripping with oil. The only thing that I really took a risk on was it still has the dipstick in the timing cover, with the same run of the mill dipstick less dual sump pan that I already had. It showed it had oil in it, of course it wasn’t reading right but it was nice and dark, due for a change but no scary debris in it.

I have read that the tall deck 302’s ended production in ’76, and in ’77 they lowered compression with massive chambers in the heads with flattop pistons. There isn’t much info out there for these era engines, but I did find a post on a different forum (don’t remember where) where someone said earlier 289/302 heads will get you 10.5:1 compression with one of these shortblocks, that maybe a tad high for what I want but it should still be tolerable for a street engine. I have also procured a factory Holley 4bbl carburetor off of a ‘80’s 5.8HO that works VERY well, I just need to dig up an intake and the induction system is taken care of, and I won’t need that for awhile yet.

It is kind of fun to see it start coming together after 6 years of packing parts away.

Some pics of the new potential powerplant:

I'm sure the info is out there. The '73-76' 302's had 8:1 compression and in '77' went all the way up to 8.4. Heads on the 73-76 had 58.2 cc head and really dished pistions. The 77 had 69 cc heads with more of a flat top piston. Small block rebuild book that I have shows that with the earlier 289/302 heads (54.5cc) you would get 9.8 to 1.
"How to rebuild your Small-Block Ford" by Tom Monroe is my source.
Dave

Mac said:

I'm sure the info is out there. The '73-76' 302's had 8:1 compression and in '77' went all the way up to 8.4. Heads on the 73-76 had 58.2 cc head and really dished pistions. The 77 had 69 cc heads with more of a flat top piston. Small block rebuild book that I have shows that with the earlier 289/302 heads (54.5cc) you would get 9.8 to 1.
"How to rebuild your Small-Block Ford" by Tom Monroe is my source.
Dave

Click to expand...

Cool, 9.8:1 sounds a lot better than 10.5:1.

Do you know of any valve clearance issues? My 289 has slightly dished pistons with valve reliefs cut in them, if these are true flattops as I would think of them they would be flat with no dish or reliefs. That would be my biggest fear, putting this thing together and smashing valves against the pistons.

I have the three books by George Reid, they really only hit on the early 289/302 and the late 5.0's, and really not a whole lot about anything in between aside from don't use the heads and some have a taller deck.

I also found the '78 LTD in a Ford car book I have, 134 brake hp at 3400 RPM and 250 lb-ft at 1600... that is at a really low RPM. A wagon has more, but he didn't mention a wagon.

This is off the top of my head,I would have to look at my notes to to be positive....
Iam running a 73 302 block,dipstick in the block,.040 over with flat tops.
67 289 Heads,Isky 300 duration and I belive 500 lift cam.
No valve clearance problems.

COPPERHEAD85 said:

This is off the top of my head,I would have to look at my notes to to be positive....
Iam running a 73 302 block,dipstick in the block,.040 over with flat tops.
67 289 Heads,Isky 300 duration and I belive 500 lift cam.
No valve clearance problems.

Click to expand...

Did you drill the block for the dipstick or was it done before you got it? I have heard it thrown around on here before but nobody seems brave enough yet to try it.

Well I have been continuing to squirrel stuff away, picked up a set of factory headers off of a '94 Mustang for free, factory holley 4bbl off of a 351HO also for free... small but neat stuff like that.

I was hoping that it would have a good shortblock, and in a way I guess it is. It needs rebuilt thru and thru, and I figured that if I just go thru it I would essentially have a nice fresh '68 302 when I am all said and done. I don't think the thing as ever been apart before, it is just politly tired.

Crank is going to be turned and get new bearings all around.

Going to try to hone the block and see what it looks like, it does have a ring groove.

And I need to have my 289 heads checked over, dunno what kind of a can of worms that will be the way this is going.

Talk about a late answer..........lol!
Mine came with the stick in the side.

85_Ranger4x4 said:

Well I have been continuing to squirrel stuff away, picked up a set of factory headers off of a '94 Mustang for free, factory holley 4bbl off of a 351HO also for free... small but neat stuff like that.

I was hoping that it would have a good shortblock, and in a way I guess it is. It needs rebuilt thru and thru, and I figured that if I just go thru it I would essentially have a nice fresh '68 302 when I am all said and done. I don't think the thing as ever been apart before, it is just politly tired.

Crank is going to be turned and get new bearings all around.

Going to try to hone the block and see what it looks like, it does have a ring groove.

And I need to have my 289 heads checked over, dunno what kind of a can of worms that will be the way this is going.

Click to expand...

Check that 78 block's casting numbers. If they're D8VE, then you've got a great candidate for a 352 stroker there. The D8VE blocks weigh as much as the Mex blocks did,(136 pounds vs an 87-2001's 126) only had the std smaller main caps. I don't think the std caps were ever an issue as far as breaking. Surely wouldn't be if used with a main girdle. The final comp ratio's going to depend on the piston's pin height and how far down the hole it is at TDC. SBF flat tops vary from 1.585 to 1.620 in pin heights.

baddad457 said:

Check that 78 block's casting numbers. If they're D8VE, then you've got a great candidate for a 352 stroker there. The D8VE blocks weigh as much as the Mex blocks did,(136 pounds vs an 87-2001's 126) only had the std smaller main caps. I don't think the std caps were ever an issue as far as breaking. Surely wouldn't be if used with a main girdle. The final comp ratio's going to depend on the piston's pin height and how far down the hole it is at TDC. SBF flat tops vary from 1.585 to 1.620 in pin heights.

Click to expand...

I checked really quick this morning and I think it is a D8VE block. A stroker would be fun, but I don't think I will do that this time thru the engine... unless the crank is shot or something (which I doubt it it is). I am just looking for a comfortable driver, not a full blown drag truck.

Is the pin height measured from the face of the piston to the center of the pin hole?

Wonder why they bothered to add material to a block going in a LTD of all things? Do you know where they added it?

The pin height is measured from the center of the wrist pin to the top of the piston. That block is thicker all over. Bores, main webbing, everything. It's was a redesign for the Lincoln (V) with a crankshaft position sensor, but the sensor boss used maybe two ounces of metal.(it's located in the rear, above the rear main saddle) I had one awhile back that I gave to a friend that was into dirt track racing. He was definately impressed with it's construction. The weight info was gleaned from Ford's 5.0 Mustang book, put out by Ford Racing. It likely was the basis for the recent sportsman block. Go figure why Ford made it, probably the same reason the Explorer's and Mountaineers got 8.8's with 31 spline axles, rear discs and trac-loc. And the late 70's Versailles got 9" rears when the Granada's and Monarchs mostly got 8's.

Well, with my caliper it looks close to the 1.585 (a widget over 1-9/16), looks much closer to that than 1-5/8 anyway. All the pistons say on them is Made in USA with a Ford oval, flattops with valve reliefs. The bores are still 4" so I think they are very likely original.

The block casting #: