> Oh, I'm working on the scans, six pages, lost three in my documents some
> where. They're going to be too big to post. Do you want them emailed?
Could I get a copy? daniel.c.jones2@spam-me-notgmail.com (remove the
spam-me-not). I found my copy of the Peterson "Complete Ford Book"
(1972 vintage) with the details on the Mangusta engine build-up.
> I've got a Petersen article on building a 302 for the goose with 351w heads.
> I remember something about it going from 110 to 250 with the mods.
The article I have goes from 110 RWHP to 155 RWHP. They make some claims
that 110 RWHP equates to 242 HP at the crankshaft and that 145 RWHP equates
to 319 HP at the crank, neither of which compute. According to the article,
the Mangusta had a 9.5:1 compression ratio 302 that was equipped with a stock
Ford intake and 470 CFM Autolite 4 barrel carb that made 110 HP @ 5500 RPM on
Ak Miller's chassis dyno. The stock engine appears to be just a 302-2V with
the 4 barrel carb from the 302-4V but not the higher compression ratio. The
article says the lower compression was due to the lower octane fuel available
in Europe. Jerry Potts installed 351W heads and 10.5:1 compression pistons
along with a C90Z-6250-C cam (essentially a hydraulic lifter version of the
289 HiPo solid lifer cam with 290 deg adv durartion and 0.470" lift) but
retained the stock intake and carb (single point distributor, too). These
changes increased power to 145 RWHP with the 470 CFM carb which they equated
to 319 HP at the crank. Switching to a 600 CFM Autolite (still on the stock
intake), they made 155 RWHP.
The Mangusta build-up used some of the parts developed for the Ford Muscle
Parts program. In the old Muscle Parts catalog, Ford outlines 3 levels of
changes for the 289/302 SBF: Impressor, Controller and Dominator with HP
increments for each change relative to a stock 289-2V. Adding the C90X high
rise dual plane intake, 600 CFM Holley carb and an open element air cleaner
was good for 31 HP. Adding the C90Z-6250-C hydraulic cam with matching
lifters and springs along with a 289 HiPo dual point distributor was worth
40 HP. Adding tube headers was worth 15 HP for a total of 86 HP over the
200 HP 289-2V. With these parts in place, the larger port and valve '69-'70
351W heads and 10.5:1 compression pistons were worth 32 HP. Larger GT40
valves added 7 HP more for a total increase of 118-125 HP over the 289-2V.
Switching to a Lemans solid lifter cam brought the total increase to 144-155
HP over the base 289-2V. Going from a 289 to a 302 was worth 11 HP.
Though the parts are mostly obsolete these days, the sequence of part
changes is still sound. Without the C90X intake and headers, the Mangusta
modifications didn't deliver as much as they might otherwise.
Dan Jones
Dans, that's probably it. The name of the article is "The Small Ones".
Petersen. Complete Ford Book. 1972.
If you have it, then there's no sense in sending it.
I don't think that anyone would use the article for pertinent data to build an engine around. It's just a "period" article.
For one thing I personally don't think that 351-w heads are worth the effort. They loose torque and I think you can get more hp out of ported 302/289 heads.
I'm having all sorts of problems with file sizes, etc. It could be that the PC is getting ready to crash.
Give me your fax number. Email is out of the question at the moment. You can PM it to me if you would like.
Petersen. Complete Ford Book. 1972.
If you have it, then there's no sense in sending it.
I don't think that anyone would use the article for pertinent data to build an engine around. It's just a "period" article.
For one thing I personally don't think that 351-w heads are worth the effort. They loose torque and I think you can get more hp out of ported 302/289 heads.
I'm having all sorts of problems with file sizes, etc. It could be that the PC is getting ready to crash.
Give me your fax number. Email is out of the question at the moment. You can PM it to me if you would like.
> Dans, that's probably it. The name of the article is "The Small Ones".
> Petersen. Complete Ford Book. 1972.
> If you have it, then there's no sense in sending it.
Yup, that's the one. I thought maybe you had a different article. Thanks
anyway.
> I don't think that anyone would use the article for pertinent data to build
> an engine around. It's just a "period" article.
Agreed. On the other hand, the Ford Muscle Parts systems approach is still
surprisingly valid.
> They loose torque and I think you can get more hp out of ported 302/289 heads.
If you mean unported 351W versus max ported 289/302 heads, I'd agree. If
you mean, equal amounts of porting, I disagree. A mildy ported and milled
set of DOOE casting 351W heads are are worth 50 HP over production 289/302
heads. I know a IHRA/NHRA record holder who probably has more time and
money invested in ported 289 heads than anyone on the planet. Jim Kuntz
does his port work and Alex maintains it's easy to get 351W C9OE's or DOOE's
to outflow even the best professionally ported 289 heads. He'd love to
run a set of cheater 351W heads.
> For one thing I personally don't think that 351-w heads are worth the effort.
For the cost of labor these days, I'd agree. There are better options like
the AFR 165's.
> Email is out of the question at the moment.
No need to send me anything.
Dan Jones
> Petersen. Complete Ford Book. 1972.
> If you have it, then there's no sense in sending it.
Yup, that's the one. I thought maybe you had a different article. Thanks
anyway.
> I don't think that anyone would use the article for pertinent data to build
> an engine around. It's just a "period" article.
Agreed. On the other hand, the Ford Muscle Parts systems approach is still
surprisingly valid.
> They loose torque and I think you can get more hp out of ported 302/289 heads.
If you mean unported 351W versus max ported 289/302 heads, I'd agree. If
you mean, equal amounts of porting, I disagree. A mildy ported and milled
set of DOOE casting 351W heads are are worth 50 HP over production 289/302
heads. I know a IHRA/NHRA record holder who probably has more time and
money invested in ported 289 heads than anyone on the planet. Jim Kuntz
does his port work and Alex maintains it's easy to get 351W C9OE's or DOOE's
to outflow even the best professionally ported 289 heads. He'd love to
run a set of cheater 351W heads.
> For one thing I personally don't think that 351-w heads are worth the effort.
For the cost of labor these days, I'd agree. There are better options like
the AFR 165's.
> Email is out of the question at the moment.
No need to send me anything.
Dan Jones
Let's just say that my maxed 351w's I was very displeased with. My maxed 302's I'm very happy with.
Perhaps it was just that the 351's couldn't possibly live up to what I expected from them?
Perhaps it was that I didn't expect much from the 302's?
Neither was I running .600 lift with either. At .500 I'll bet they are the same head.
The exhausts ave virtually the same. The intake port pockets weren't worth arguing over.
I do know that the 351w's seemingly are the prefered head for the vintage racers now. I doubt that there is 60hp in them over the 289's, maybe 15 at the top and probably -10 less at the bottom. 15hp at the right time is pretty signifigant.
It all depends what one is building I suppose.
I believe what you say about Kuntz's heads.
He is an intelligent high tech porter. Remember that "they" only admit to you what they want you to know. It's what they don't want us to know is what we want to know.
Perhaps it was just that the 351's couldn't possibly live up to what I expected from them?
Perhaps it was that I didn't expect much from the 302's?
Neither was I running .600 lift with either. At .500 I'll bet they are the same head.
The exhausts ave virtually the same. The intake port pockets weren't worth arguing over.
I do know that the 351w's seemingly are the prefered head for the vintage racers now. I doubt that there is 60hp in them over the 289's, maybe 15 at the top and probably -10 less at the bottom. 15hp at the right time is pretty signifigant.
It all depends what one is building I suppose.
I believe what you say about Kuntz's heads.
He is an intelligent high tech porter. Remember that "they" only admit to you what they want you to know. It's what they don't want us to know is what we want to know.