Search results

The only heads I remember reading about that would give a benefit is a '69 or '70 351 head. The valves are somewhat larger. Intake is 1.84 versus 1.78, and exhaust is 1.54 over 1.46 They were great back then because they looked just like a 302 head, and your oponent could not tell your...

It is offset more than 1/2 an inch

the axle widths are different, but the space in the wheel well should be the same backspacing is the most important factor - it is a pretty tall tire compared to stock, but if it is tucked in under the fender lip, you should be alright.

The 289 three speed in 68 is undoubtedly a C-code rated at 190 hp. The heads had larger compression chambers, and the carb was a 2bbl. The rear was a 2.79 peg leg. If the engine was swapped for a 302, you can tell by taking off the intake manifold. "302" was cast on the block above the lifter...

on the 8" the tubes are removed with a cut off wheel

as it is now

I've got that size in a differrent tire on my 68. I had rubbing issues until I rolled the fender lips. Now it only rubs if I go over one heck of a bump. Also, the backspacing will help you determine fitment. Mine is 3.75 inches. 4.5 would be perfect. Another thing to consider is that your...

I am rebuilding a 5.0 roller and have the same accessories. I am still on the hunt. The pullies on your accessories are for a v-belt and will need to be changed, or you may have to change the accessories themselves. An easy swap would be ideal. I have seen pictures of serpentine set ups but...

they came on 87 and up 5.0 based engines. The Ford explorer got the gt40p's which flows better stock, but not after the 7's are ported. Also the p's use different headers.

If the rods are forged, I should not have to replace them, right? I figure if I need to replace the crank and rods, I might as well go 331. But if the stock crank is good and the rods are forged, why replace them. I would be perfectly fine with a 306 that will give me a thrill. My stock engine...

If you are going to spend any money on the heads, perhaps having the valve seats hardened would be a first choice, then roller rockers. With the 2bbl setup, it does not sound like you are looking for performance gains, just reliability. There are late model 5.0s with well over 150,000 miles...

I have used this stuff for a couple years now. The first time was on a toyota pick up with 210,000 mi. Not only was there mad smoke - but small chunks of crud on the concrete under the tail pipe - it points down It works better if you have a friend: Driver can rev engine ( 2 grand worked)...

thank you sir!

http://www.powerheads.com/ these guys replace the valves with one piece stainless in adition to the cnc port work you can retain the stock look with much better breathing

I've got an 89 longblock that I will rebuild an drop in my classic. Was the entire bottom end forged or just the pistons. Cause if it is just the pistons, those will be gone anyway in the rebuild. Need to start formulating my plan so I can make it happen this year. :nice:

so it runs fine at slow idle?

So, If they went on a 5.0 block, would a regular rpm airgap work? And I guess the tunnels and everything match up? I've not heard of running cleavland heads on a small block except the 351w.

go to www.4speedtoploaders.com Good info why you want a toploader. I see 3 spds sell for $50 = not wanted.

That sounds familiar. That was probably it. I wasn't sure of the reason and therefore the :shrug: . I just remembered something detracting about 16's. I didn't go with 17 because I wanted more than 3" of side wall. So it probably wouldn't matter in the 15 to 16 sizes. It would just...

You will have a couple issues if you try to stroke the 289. First, a machine shop will have to remove some metal on the block to allow the connecting rods for a stroker to clear. Second, there are a limited number of roller cams you can use with the 289. It would be far cheaper to use flat...