302 hp
- Thread starter Thomasruth
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
What size Windsor Jr?
I would ditch the cam and convert to roller unless it's already assembled.
My Wild Ass Guess is in the neighborhood of 250 crank HP N/A with more potential.
Are you going to run Long Tubes? What car is this going in? I moved this to Fox section only because there's a lot of Windsor Gurus in here.
I would ditch the cam and convert to roller unless it's already assembled.
My Wild Ass Guess is in the neighborhood of 250 crank HP N/A with more potential.
Are you going to run Long Tubes? What car is this going in? I moved this to Fox section only because there's a lot of Windsor Gurus in here.
Not an apples to apples comparison, but the engine in my Cobra started life in a 68 Cougar. I rebuilt it with hypereutectic flat tops, added a Melling cam, Trick Flow heads, long tube headers, and topped it with an Edelbrock Performer RPM Air Gap knock off with a 650 double pumper. Here's a link to my dyno run and the first post.
stangnet.com
Given what you've listed, I'd suspect something around the same as I have, maybe a little less if you use the stock rocker ratio. Here are the specs of what I have for a cam, they have VERY similar specs.....
If you'd like to come closer to what I've produced, you'll want to swap the 1.6 rockers for 1.72 roller rockers. That will require you to check piston to valve clearance at a minimum. But it's a good running engine, I think you'll be happy with it.
So I did a thing today......
I took the Cobra to a Fox body show and meet and greet at a local speed shop. They were giving 3 pulls for $50 so I said what the hell! It's never been on a dyno, I've always just used the Desktop Dyno numbers that I did when I bought everything for the 302 15-20 years ago. Those estimates were...
stangnet.com
I took the Cobra to a Fox body show and meet and greet at a local speed shop. They were giving 3 pulls for $50 so I said what the hell! It's never been on a dyno, I've always just used the Desktop Dyno numbers that I did when I bought everything for the 302 15-20 years ago. Those estimates were around 350 HP/370 ftlb iirc.
It's still running rich since I put the new manifold on it and took the carb back to stock jetting. I haven't taken the time to try and tune the carb yet at all and it showed! I asked about having them tune it and the price wasn't all that bad, so I may take it back to them at some point and have them go through it. I suspect my dyno numbers will increase once the A/F ratio is a lot closer.
Videos are currently uploading, I will share them when they're available on YouTube.
Given what you've listed, I'd suspect something around the same as I have, maybe a little less if you use the stock rocker ratio. Here are the specs of what I have for a cam, they have VERY similar specs.....
If you'd like to come closer to what I've produced, you'll want to swap the 1.6 rockers for 1.72 roller rockers. That will require you to check piston to valve clearance at a minimum. But it's a good running engine, I think you'll be happy with it.
Blackhawkxx
Active Member
- Mar 3, 2023
- 111
- 129
- 53
I had a 85 GT Fox and I switched from 1.6 stock rockers to 1.72 full roller rockers and I couldn't tell any difference. I also ran it at the track before and after, no difference. Duration seems to play a larger role than small amount of lift IMO. Underdrive pulleys seemed to make a larger power increase. Just my 2 cents.
Yeah, I suppose it depends on a multitude of factors - most importantly the head's flow characteristics.
I had ported Windsor Jr. heads in the long long ago. Like 25 years ago. I never dynoed the car, but it didn't pick up much at the track. There's just very little data on different combinations on those heads.
Kurt
I mean... The OEM CAMs if 5oh HOs were not the weak link. If you take a set of heads that's already at capacity and add more lift well... You're [still] at capacity.
Open up the intake/inlet/heads (just move more air) and [then] add the rockers. That should be enough for a SOTP change and will show itself on a dyno.
The heads on these cars... That's the weakest link. The OEM non-Cobra intakes as well.
Blackhawkxx
Active Member
- Mar 3, 2023
- 111
- 129
- 53
You do have a point and I agree about the heads as the restriction in air flow. Even with good heads, I wouldn't look for massive gains from that little bit of lift but all the little gains do add up.
Not according to this guy....
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPAeepqrY-0&t=32s&pp=ygUacGlja2luZyB0aGUgcmlnaHQgY2Ftc2hhZnQ%3D
Way back in 1999 or so, I did some mods for 2 guys, each with a 93 Cobra.
Ported the stock GT40 heads, stock valves.
Ported the stock lower intake.
Had the upper Extrude Honed.
Stock T-body
Modified the stock MAF
All Bassani Exhaust with shorty "equal length" headers and Catalyst X-pipe
Steeda OTS camshaft.
Steeda CAI
Stock fuel inj.
Stock short block
Stock rocker arms
No "chip", no "custom tune"
RWHP was just over 310 on both cars.
With a "custom cam" I am sure those numbers would have been better.
Ported the stock GT40 heads, stock valves.
Ported the stock lower intake.
Had the upper Extrude Honed.
Stock T-body
Modified the stock MAF
All Bassani Exhaust with shorty "equal length" headers and Catalyst X-pipe
Steeda OTS camshaft.
Steeda CAI
Stock fuel inj.
Stock short block
Stock rocker arms
No "chip", no "custom tune"
RWHP was just over 310 on both cars.
With a "custom cam" I am sure those numbers would have been better.
Not a bad combo! Everybody read the key word “combo”. Parts that work together make good power.
The E7 heads are dog turd logs with a small valve train. I cannot saying any more simple than that. They are the anchors that held the Fox Mustang back but those were the times.
The E7 heads are dog turd logs with a small valve train. I cannot saying any more simple than that. They are the anchors that held the Fox Mustang back but those were the times.
Blackhawkxx
Active Member
- Mar 3, 2023
- 111
- 129
- 53
Man that was an annoying video. I gave up when talked about 4,800 lbs of valve spring pressure like all the springs are open at the same time.
mikestang63
SN Certified Technician
why wouldn't you start with a roller block? better revving and internal choices over a 50 year old non roller block
...or convert to roller. I have not not done this on a Windsor but I hear it is as simple as a special set of rockers for non-roller blocks. 
Blackhawkxx
Active Member
- Mar 3, 2023
- 111
- 129
- 53
Money is one reason some don't convert. Cam and lifters cost way more plus you would also need new pushrods. While I'm not sure about this in Windsors, roller lifters are taller and some require removing the heads to install so If you are building a new motor, it's not a thing but just changing cams is. Like said, in the long run a roller block would be the best way to go....or convert to roller. I have not not done this on a Windsor but I hear it is as simple as a special set of rockers for non-roller blocks.
I used a 68 302 block, 78 stock crank, and 94 Iron GT 40 heads in my 82 for years. Best et was high 7s in the eighth mile. Iirc that came out to 278 hp to the wheels. Ran great, revved to 6 k anytime with an old Rhodes Lifters VVt274 cam and lifters and stock bolt down rockers. Took AFRs to get into the lower 7s.
Similar threads
