69' BOSS 302 VS Camaro Z28

[PWMAN]

Originally Posted by Mercracer

To sum it up, the Boss 351 made more power than the Boss 302, and the 429SCJ made more power than did the Boss 351. Pretty simple concept. Bigger engine, more power. Especially when both Bosses used essentially the same heads.
You can't make horsepower without torque since horsepower is quite simply a function of torque and RPM. With less torque at the same RPM, the smaller engines make less horsepower. Basic stuff here.

You can make more HP with less torque, the simple fact of higher RPM...You know the basics.
A smaller displacement tends to rev higher in most cases, thus giving more HP. Like the desktop dyno showed, the 351 only made 20 more PEAK HP than the 302. But, of course at lower RPM.

Oh and the thing about launching-Well, I've only ever driver auto big blocks. 2 of them.
I did drive (as a daily driver) a 2wd pickup with a 383 stroker and 4:10 gears for 3 months. That had no traction whatsoever off the line. I ran a best of 13.1 on it with street tires. Could have been deep into 12's with slicks. That was about a year ago.

[Mercracer]

My computer can beat your computer.....

[PWMAN]

Originally Posted by Mercracer

My computer can beat your computer.....

Probably

[Mercracer]

What your Desktop Dyno does not show is that because of the factory Cleveland 4V head design, the heads work better on a 351 cube engine than a 302 cube engine, so with both using the same factory cam, there is more than a 20HP gap it their peak outputs.

[PWMAN]

Originally Posted by Mercracer

What your Desktop Dyno does not show is that because of the factory Cleveland 4V head design, the heads work better on a 351 cube engine than a 302 cube engine, so with both using the same factory cam, there is more than a 20HP gap it their peak outputs.

Umm, no. The bore size is really the only thing that makes a head work different on a different engine. The bore sizes for the 302 and 351 are the same, 4''. Plus the heads are not the same, the boss 302 had 2.23 intake valves, helping the 302's peak HP output.

[PWMAN]

My point was the 302 will make good PEAK HP with the cleveland heads. Yes of course it will have no bottom end or throttle response.

[Mercracer]

Originally Posted by PWMAN

Umm, no. The bore size is really the only thing that makes a head work different on a different engine. The bore sizes for the 302 and 351 are the same, 4''. Plus the heads are not the same, the boss 302 had 2.23 intake valves, helping the 302's peak HP output.

You are pretty clueless to Cleveland head based engines aren't you?
Don't even bring up the 69 Boss 302 heads which were too big for even the open track racing. No one used these heads when given a choice. The Boss 302 changed to the standard 351C 4V sized valves (2.19/1.71) for 1970. The hard core Cleveland drag racers did not even use these oversized valves.
Bore size effects valve shrouding.
Air volume and velocity effects head efficiency. This is the true difference between the 3.00 and 3.5" stroke engines.

[Mercracer]

Originally Posted by PWMAN

My point was the 302 will make good PEAK HP with the cleveland heads. Yes of course it will have no bottom end or throttle response.

Peak HP is only good for bragging rights. Peak HP with no area under the curve does not win any competition of speed. Either way, the Boss 351 made more than 20HP greater than the Boss 302 did stock for stock.

[PWMAN]

Whatever, I don't fell like arguing anymore. Blah blah blah you win

[Mercracer]

Originally Posted by PWMAN

Whatever, I don't fell like arguing anymore. Blah blah blah you win

Typical internet Cowboy type action.....hiding behind your cute little insulting smilies. Anything I typed to you , I would say in person. I don't hide behind a keyboard. Don't get whiney because I stand on my points. I never said that you couldn't make good power with Cleveland heads on a 302 cube engine, just that the Boss 302 as delivered from the factory is not an example of this, not that it didn't have potential.
A little history.....I took my drivers test in a 73 Mustang. The first engine I built was a 351C. That engine was in my 73 Mustang when I made my first of many passes down the 1320.
Tell me about your experience or at least of someone else's car that you saw run at the track, or that you talked to after they ran their car at the track. Don't hold the Desktop Dyno as the final authority on anything. It is a tool. Learn to use it and put it into a proper perspective.
Learn to debate like an adult, not a 16 year old kid who just got their license, reads magazines and hides behind a keyboard. Adults don't resort to direct insults when they do not like what someone else is saying.
If you don't want to discuss these motors anymore.....fine. If you do, then be civil.

[PWMAN]

I'm not getting whiny I'm just tired of your BS excuses. All you say is I don't know what I'm talking about, and thats all you are going to say to anything I throw at you so I'm done.

[Mercracer]

[quote=PWMAN]I'm not getting whiny I'm just tired of your BS excuses. All you say is I don't know what I'm talking about, and thats all you are going to say to anything I throw at you QUOTE]

I made one statement that you are clueless when it comes to real world performance of the Cleveland head, and I stand by that. Just admit that you have no real world experience.
You have continued to refuse to address any of the technical points that I have brought up. You merely come back with something different, and continue with the insults.
You drift from the original points. Maybe you should stick to the boards where you can say whatever you want and people won't question you, you will have better luck.

I am open to discuss the Boss 302 and Boss 351/351 Cleveland engines, or any other Ford engine if you are man enough to do it without the childish insults.

[PWMAN]

Fine. So you rebuilt your 351 in your mustang, BFG-I bet it didn't even have 4 bbl heads. So because you rebuilt 1 cleveland, that makes you an expert?
I've rebuilt a 351M, 400M, 390 FE, 273 mopar, 350 chevy, 283 chevy. 383 stroker chevy, 307 chevy, 331 FE, 318 mopar, and soon a 360 mopar when I get the rebuild kit this week..probably more just cannot think.

I will admit that I have no experience with any clevelands, but plenty with modified's which is a whole different animal though.
But like I said before I have experience at the track, and launching cars that it's hard to get traction. Just no manuals, all auto's. We used to have a 67' GT vert mustang with 289 4 speed, drove it a few times but it was more like a show car and my dad would have killed me if I took it to the track. Even with the little 289, not to mention 3:1 airplane gears it would just spin through 2nd gear without much effort. Maybe if it had a posi...

Btw, there are things you didn't answer me about either so I don't want to here it.

[Mercracer]

Originally Posted by PWMAN

Fine. So you rebuilt your 351 in your mustang, BFG-I bet it didn't even have 4 bbl heads. So because you rebuilt 1 cleveland, that makes you an expert?
I've rebuilt a 351M, 400M, 390 FE, 273 mopar, 350 chevy, 283 chevy. 383 stroker chevy, 307 chevy, 331 FE, 318 mopar, and soon a 360 mopar when I get the rebuild kit this week..probably more just cannot think.

I will admit that I have no experience with any clevelands, but plenty with modified's which is a whole different animal though.
But like I said before I have experience at the track, and launching cars that it's hard to get traction. Just no manuals, all auto's. We used to have a 67' GT vert mustang with 289 4 speed, drove it a few times but it was more like a show car and my dad would have killed me if I took it to the track. Even with the little 289, not to mention 3:1 airplane gears it would just spin through 2nd gear without much effort. Maybe if it had a posi...

Btw, there are things you didn't answer me about either so I don't want to here it.

This has degraded into silly chest thumping....I guess that I will digress one more time, and reserve my future responses to those things of a purely technical nature.
Well.....my friend......11 whole engines.........more than most internet "experts", but I have you more than covered. I not only have rebuilt many times more than you, including my share of Clevelands, I have run most of them on a dyno, although not the Clevelands. I never
claimed to be an expert or have all of the answers, I just refuted the points which you were attempting to make about how the Boss 302 made 400HP from the factory.
Not only have my many Cleveland engines had 4V heads, I still have several pair on the shelf for future projects. You admitted yourself that you have not even a single pair on any of your engines. Although that has nothing to do with you thinking that the Boss 302 was better than it really was.
By the way, leave the M off of the 400 Ford engine when you describe it, it doesn't belong. There has only been 1 400 Ford engine. The M only applies to the 351M. Just because someone puts a typo on a truck valve cover (351/400M), people think that there is a 400M engine.
You will find no reference in Ford literature including the master parts catalogs about a 400M, just the 400.
Your experience with 400 and M engines directly applies to 2V head applications. The heads do not know if they are on a 351M or a 351C. Other than the intakes, they are on an engine with a 4" bore and a 3.5" stroke. They are functioning the same. The disadvantage to the M is the weight.
This all started when you were defending the Boss 302 against the Z28, and made the statement that the Boss 302 was the second fastest Mustang. Magazine test times, and real world drag strip performances do not support this. You also couldn't believe that the Z28 made more power stock. With the dual ram intake, it most assuredly did. The 2.02 valve GM heads worked better on the Chevy 302 than did either of the oversized valve Boss heads.

If you are willing to try this again, let's keep this to technical info. Bring it on...........what questions did I not answer? If we continue with the stupid stuff, I am sure that the thread will get locked.

[PWMAN]

Well I wasn't thumping my chest, just trying to show you I have SOME experience under my belt.

anyway, about the 400M thing-you are right but everyone says it so I do too just out of habit. Don't make a BFG over it.

I will definitely admit that chevy's 302 made more low end power. And what are you talking about dual ram intake? The DZ302 had a single holley 4 bbl with 780 CFM.