302 OR 352??

[65Lover]

65 came with a 302 but originally had a 352. Didn't really test drive it much with the 302 before we started taking it apart, so don't know what it's like driving it with the 302. Picked up a 352 to use years down the road to make it stock, but had wanted to run it with the 302 to see what it was like.

However, right now the shop has the whole front clip off to do the firewall, inner and outer fenders and core support. This would be a GREAT time to either pull the 302 and overhaul it OR overhaul the 352 and put it in!

What to do??!! Would like the truck stock but would also like good mileage and performance!

How do they run with 302's and how do they run with 352's?

[BigMike]

If you're not worried about originality, nothing wrong with a 302 as long as you're not planning on towing much. I'd go for a 302/C4 combo in an F100 SWB.

[huckdeuceman]

I have a 351w in my 65 and it will get it done!..the 302 is about the same'' so? for mpg's' go with the 302..my 2cent's.
PS, a nice 4 barrel setup will give some extra punch and still do OK on mpg's! I put a Holley ''Street Avenger'' on mine 570cfm..run's like a scalled dog and not very thirsty either!

[charliemccraney]

What to do??!! Would like the truck stock but would also like good mileage and performance!

Well,
Compared to Y blocks, most 302s are dogs in stock form. They are down on torque and mileage. So far, the only exception I've seen that is actually better is an 80s or newer fuel injected, roller cammed 302. I understand Greg will be running a roller 302 converted to carb, but I don't thing he has any miles on it yet to know how it compares.
I simply would not consider a 302 if I had money to spend.
From what I've seen, the 352 doesn't get great mileage either, but it should have more torque than the 302.
If you want good mileage and performance, you need a Y-Block. Without overdrive, I get about 14.5mpg at 70-80mph. And in overdrive it averages about 16.5mpg. And it has some power, too. It is not stock.
But honestly, I think you can achieve about the same mileage with a 352. Truck motors are typically really low on compression. If you optimize your compression for premium, or even mid grade, your power and mileage will go up, most likely enough to cancel out the bump in the price of the higher grade fuel. I've done a lot to my engine but the compression increase is probably most significant, about 1 point increase form the previous build, and 1.5-2 points from stock. By the way, advertised compression is often much higher than actual. they don't take into account the head gasket thickness and the fact that they come from the factory with the pistons in the hole. So an engine advertise at 8.5 is closer to 7.5-8 in reality. This means you can have a 1 point increase in compression and typically still be able to use regular fuel. Consider this compression spiel as something to think about. FEs are not familiar territory for me and Ford may have started more accurately representing the compression by the mid 60s.

[Uncle Skip]

Ruthie, its a long slippery slope you're about to go down.
You keep telling us you want a bone stock truck.
302 is not bone stock.
If you choose wrong, you know what will happen.
We've all been there and once you start, you can't quit.
First its just a little bit of chrome to dress up the 302.
A disk brake front end.
Power steering.
Then its the harder stuff.
Blue silicone wires and hoses.
Stainless bolts and nuts.
More chrome.
Custom wheels and tires.
Custom interior and head liners.
Base coat clear coat paint.
Engine upgrades for more horse pressure.
It never ends and you know its true.
I kan't hep it..........
My name is Uncle Skip and I'm a Slick-a-holic

[Broncotom]

Keep in mind you have two other SBF, makes it nice to swap parts from one to another if you don't like, say the set up on the Mustang you could move it over the the Slick or the Cougar.

I have a 302 in the EB and it's no speeed demon but it will chirp the tires everytime I hit second gear and it will cruise at 75MPH all day long, consuming mass quanities of gas all the while, actully the Bronco get's way better mileage than Reba did.

352 Would fillup the engine compartment better. Hard choices.

At this point I would go with the one that is in the best shape.

[brian gilbert soares]

302/C4 moves my 66 well, 10:1 pistons, mid lift cam and 600 cfm holley.
Runs strong!

[Greg D]

Ruth,
based on numbers a bone stock roller cam 302 (rated at 210 HP 1985) has similar torque and HP to a 352 2v - it should feel similar if not better.
Now if you want to drive it alot I would advise a roller cam 302 with an AOD or a T-5. My 5.0 should have very similar numbers to a 1985 carbed 5.0 or a touch better. I used the same size but a different part # 600 Holley, I have long tube headers vs the shorties stock to the Stang and I won't have a converter choking it. You will need to change the whole timing cover and add a fuel pump eccentric to the cam to convert an EFI engine, EFI timing covers don't have the fuel pump provision. Most roller 5.0s use a duraspark ignition.
I should be in the 20s for MPG with 3.50 gears.
No it's not stock but for todays world is likely the better choice.
The roller cam & lifters also have less friction, and you won't have to ever worry about wiping a lobe off the cam or buying high zinc oil at double the price.
I think you would find a stock flat tappet 302 (especially 72-81) to be a disappointment. Even in 1985 the flat tappet GT engine only made 165 HP (these were in automatic cars, 5 speed cars got the roller cam).
I used this combo in this truck because I had it, the reasons listed is why I had it around in the first place (it was slated for my 85 LX vert).
I originally wanted a dual carbed 300-6 with an AOD in this truck (I actually planned throttle body injection in place of the carbs), this can be swapped out later on so I can build the 6 the way I really want it though - pretty much an engine swap from the 5.0.

[Gritsngumbo]

FWIW: My vote is for the 352. You have it, it's original to the truck. Should do the job quite well.

[banjopicker66]

Um, Miss Ruth? I suggest a different approach.
A 460.
With an E4OD and a 3.25 rear end.
My Jennifer would say "silly boys, TRUCKS are for girls!"

[ezernut9mm]

i had a 68 with a 360 and a 3 speed. there is a hill on the way to a friends house that has a pretty severe grade. i could pull that hill in third pedal to the floor and maintain speed (usually 60 or 65). i also had a 70 that was identical, but had a 302 and a 3 speed. both trucks were as close to stock as you could get. the 302 would lose seven to 10 mph on that same hill. you could definitely feel the difference in torque between the two.
now this is just a stock to stock comparison. so a built engine would change everything. hope this helps ruth.

[Toyz]

I'll have to agree with Greg! The fuel pump problem can be gotten around with an electric pump if needed. I don't know the origin of your 302, but there are some important changes to be noted. Going with the roller motors will also require a 50 oz. imbalance flexplate and corresponding balancer, and may, depending on the origin of your C-4, require a small-pattern flexplate to match up. Water pump applications are also another problem; serpentine systems utilize a reverse- rotation water pump, which may not allow pulley clearance, again dependent on application.
As to power, my EFI Bronco has always seemed under-powered, even for it's weight, but has unbelievable torque with the 3.73's. The F150 I inherited from my dad, on the other hand, was the first year of the truck EFI (49 state), and had unbelievable seat-of the pants torque and power.
Next dyno-day, I should be able to give power specifics on the 306 set-up in my Cyclone that matches Greg's.
I would not personally consider rebuilding a 352, unless originallity was desired, even then it would probably grow some displacement, since the larger parts are probably more common, thus potentially cheaper.
Again, like Greg, I think a built 300EFI-based inline would make a great conversation piece with the potential for fair fuel economy.
Paul

[frdnut]

I've never been a fan of a 302 in a truck..They just don't have enough torque...My daily driver is a 96 with a 5.0 automatic with 3.73 gears...It's an ok driver for if you don't want to pull much weight..Gets good mileage on the highway but horrible in town..

[ICEMAN6166]

i would have the 300 6 over a 302 any time.

i also would choose 352 over 302.

about the only time i would pick 302 for a truck is a choice between 302 and the boat anchor 351M/400.

[didgeytrucker]

If you swap in the 352, you'll need a bellhousing to go with it, the bellhousing on the 302 won't work. I'm guessing you are talking about keeping the 3-speed? The input shaft might not work on the 352. I know the car 4-speeds have different length input shafts for big- and small blocks. If you're going to run an automatic, you'll need to find a C6 for the 352. A cast iron "Green-Dot Cruise-O-Matic" was original equipment. Good luck finding one of those. The 302 is already mounted, swapped... and running. You'll go nuts running down all the different pieces to mount the 352 and it's transmission.
I say keep the 302, it's already there. Install an RV cam, a dual plane aluminum intake a 600CFM four barrel carburetor if the 302 doesn't already have one. An RV cam is designed for low end power, or as I say "from stop light to speed limit". That's where you're going to be driving the truck most of the time. That's what I put in the 429 in my '78 F-150 many years ago and the 351C in my '66. I'm VERY happy with that choice.

Tracy

[aarons428]

Not that my opinion matters but i would put the 352 back in just for the wow factor. I love it when people come up and ask WHAT IS THAT MOTOR. You always see small blocks and big blocks (385 series) in most ford products, and i just want to be different.

[Rusted64]

Come on Ruthie, we're in Texas, go big or go home. The bigger, the better. Everything is big in Texas.

Ok, so obviously I don't have a qualified opinion about performance, but I am one for original specs. Can't go wrong with that.

I guess it comes down to your budget, what you want from the final product and what you are willing to give up.

Just my half a cent.

Sorry I am not as helpful as others.


J

[Toyz]

Sounds as if you've made up your mind already.
Do you have all the parts needed for a change back to original, and in known usable condition?
Paul

[sully5]

My 64 is going the gas mileage route with 302/AOD 3.70 rear gears. My daughter will be feeding it and she needs all the mileage she can get. Everone I know with the FE's complain about gas mileage, but they're satisfied with the power.

[64 f100]

Build a 390 out of the 352, people won't know the difference unless you tell them or they check the stroke. If they are that close then they are to close. Cost should end up being about the same for the build. Pistons are a real cost problem on the 352 the last time I checked. Building the 390 will give you a lot more torque and power. Mileage may suffer a little but will still be in the same ballpark. Rearend ratio has a lot ot do with mileage figures. If, you are going to tow anything heavy, then don't go with the 302. A lot depends on what you intend to do with the truck and what options you might want to plan for. Putting the 352 bakc in the truck is not a big deal, and I have several cruisomatics if you need one.

Rich