I own a 1970 Mustang Boss 302 since May of 1970 and broke a piston skirt on 2 of the original Fomoco pistons. Had Arbor Garage in Omaha, NE. repair my engine installing new TRW High Domed 13.5-1 pistons and doing a .030 over bore on the cylinder walls due to the damage of the broken piston skirts. They dyno'd it at 608 H.P. and with a Holley 1050 Dominator Carb, it ran a 10.33. Keeping with NHRA rules, I ran it in "B" Stock and put on my original Holley 780 carb, it ran a 10.88. For a stock engine, this is one of the fastest Boss 302's I've ever rode in or seen. The photo to the left is my car. Race 'em if you got 'em racers!
Boy does this video bring back memories.... High school parking lot filled with SS Chevelle’s, Camero’s, GTO’s, Mustangs, various Mopars, just to name a few....
Class of 86 way out in the country, zero import “fast” & futless junk, whole lotta lead sleds in various conditions 90% fast as hell, remember tossing the biggest engines we could fit in gremlins, pintos & vegas, chopping firewalls to cram big blocks in em, racing for pink slips the first Friday every month on our deserted state highway, didn’t get to see em new but was cheap & easy...ish & everywhere, good good times
@@patrickancona1193 There was some of that it 71 too. I bought a 340 Dodge that had lots of work done to it. Came out of a totaled Challenger. No idea how much HP it had but it was strong for a small block .
Don't forget the Olds 442 and Buick GS Stage 1's...crushed many of the ones you mentioned with my plain Jane 442. Beive it or not the one car that was a real match was a 383 magnum Charger...a bug fart would determine who won...THOSE WERE THE DAYS!!!
Same here, we had in school auto shop where the kids would build their car's we had two Chevelle's a 70 and my friends 71. Another buddy had a 71 Camaro RS SS i believe a few there was a 69 mach 1 with a 351 Cleveland and 69 mach 1 427 dcj mustangs a 67 charger the 70 383 super Bee, and a 69 440 road runners started as a 383. And my 64 Impala. We would Cruise brookside and memorial in Tulsa before hitting the midnight drags at Tulsa dragstrip where it's run what you bring, and put up or shut up. It's mainly grudge matches and running the cop's in the quarter mile. But some of those cop's could twist a wrench and it wasn't easy to beat them but there were usually a few cars that would get the better of the cops. If you won again them you got 50 bucks and a certificate with the name car and time slips for both car's stating you stomped Johnny law and took them for fifty bucks.
A retired master mechanic I know had built a DZ302 back in the day and put it in a base model '72 Nova with a 4-speed and a 3.08 rear-end. He said it was slow off the line, but he'd usually pass people halfway down the 1/4 mile and win. He said that car worked best on the highway where he had enough top-end to leave Corvettes in the dust. Oddly enough, he got most of his speeding tickets in town because the speed limit was 25 mph and the car couldn't maintain 25 mph in 1st gear without bucking.
I owned both a 1969 Z28 and a 1970 Boss 302. To me, the Z28 had the toughest motor, and the Boss 302 had some problems with piston skirts cracking. I also prefer the rear sump of the Z28 to the front sump of the Boss 302. The engineering of the body and suspension of the Boss 302 I thought was superior to the Z28. These are just my observations. Ken
The Boss did have piston skirt issues. As I remember, there was occasion with that - no doubt in part due to piston rock from large piston to wall clearances. The other was the OEM valve springs - they were more than a bit soft for the intended engine speed of the Boss (7000+), it's been said that was done as a backup to the factory rev-limiter to help reduce warranty claims from blown up engines.
@@everettamador9870 The Ford block was no slouch. It had 4 bolt mains and could take over 500hp at 10k RPM for drag racing when it was equipped with a roller cam and balanced correctly with upgraded pistons. It would live all day at 7k. Might spin a rod bearing with reapeated use at 10k but any engine might at that RPM.
I'm a huge FORD fan and particularly Clevelands or Clevors. Down her in Australia we didn't have any Windsor's past 1969. We only had 302 and 351 Clevo's. My next engine build will be a 4.125 bore 351 Windsor with CHI 3V Alloy clevo heads. Only thing stopping me atm is a car to put it in. Lovin this stuff thanks Richard.
My first car cougar witch I still own has a 351 cleveland in it 4bbl carb headers and 4.11 gears ⚙️ drove it all through high-school in the 2000s lol there wasn't a Honda Civic Camaro or anything my buddies had that I couldn't bust in the quarter mile
It's so nice and refreshing to see someone who loves all kinds of engines. I came here for the awesome shootout between really close sbc and sbf because I understand and appreciate both, and at the end you mentioned the B16 honda cylinder head flow as an example. I just today put together my forged CSS b18c1 bottom end with b16a3 top end turbo engine in my del sol so as an enthusiast of all kinds of stuff I appreciate what you're doing here. Keep up the awesome videos
Yup, I’m a mustang guy and never really been a Honda fan but I’ve been a Richard fan forever soooo.... I can’t hate on Honda’s like I used. Or chevys for that matter. They all rip,just different flavors
My dad had a 70 Boss 302. He had 4 Boss motors setting on the floor. 2 of them were from Holman and Moody. He and his twin brother would go up there often and buy stuff they used on the track that didn't work for them in sustained RPM racing but would work very well in drag racing. The Boss had just 15k miles on it. Most were put on it 1/8th mile at a time. It ran a 7.74 in the 1/8th the early 80s with full interior and nothing removed. It was a stock car except the slicks and some homemade ladder bars. No one knew they were going to be worth what they are now so it was a street race car most of it's life. My uncle bought the car new and my dad bought it from him in 1972 when he got back from Vietnam. He had a solid roller cam motor in it once and it would turn 10k. I dont know how it stayed together at that RPM. I guess Jack Biggerstaff and Pat Pendleton at Carolina Crankshaft had the balance spot on. It had 427 FE with Holman and Moody stuff swapped in it for the longest time. It ran a 7.07 with it with the same suspension setup. Sadly he got hooked on pills about 5 years for he died and sold the car for $68k and sold the rest of the Boss motors and all the spare parts for another $25k. I worked on that car with him my entire life and was repeatedly promised it when he passed. Then he up and sold it for dope money. I would have paid him for the car but my wife had just had our second child and I was still recovering from the doctor bills from that. It's all I wanted in his will but the power of drugs proved to be to strong. My cousin has the car now and told me he would sell it back to me for what he paid but I don't know if my heart is into paying for something that I was promised my entire life.
My experience with classic Mustangs ended up poisoned as well. As much as I try to like the modern hotrods, my mind automatically compares or converts any connection I make with the old Cars. I’d give anything to have the memories you and your father had, as mine died in 69, at 22 years old. I know my father would have been all about racing, as there was a hi-po Falcon, a 58 Chrysler 300(donor car), and a pale yellow 67 z28 with black stripes parked in the driveway when he passed. I didn’t realize how fast time goes by as my time as a young man with motor mania came and went. You have a golden opportunity to make better memories with your kids as this time too will pass before you know it… Best regards…
Hurts to hear man. You may never get your dad's 70 back but that doesn't mean you shouldn't go out and buy one of your own and build with your kids. Recently bought a 64 1/2 D code after going 14 years without a Mustang. Couple weekends ago my 14-year-old daughter (what a coincidence 14 years) comes out in the garage pulls up a stool and helps me rebuild a Edelbrock. I was in shock. Kind of like when you see a deer really close and you don't want to spook it so you don't move too quick. Yeah that's how I was with her lol.
A great starting off point for sure but his dedication to experimenting was hard to match not to mention his work ethic, course we all knew that . tires me out just to imagine it .
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link and the Cleveland exhaust ports don’t flow exceptionally well. Cleveland heads look impressive but they aren’t very good without a lot of reworking. When NASCAR mandated factory castings the Small Block Chevys clobbered the Clevelands so bad Ford dropped out of the series for a decade.
@@timsharpe3498 exactly...Glidden was way ahead of his time. The r&d he did was amazing! The things he did back then was pretty much the technology we have today. He dominated so much with the 351 cleveland that gm started cryin, nhra came up with the 500” rule. They also pretty much had a engine program ready for them, they made Glidden start all over and he still came back and dominated again! 351 stop light to stop light was known as the “big block killer” back in the day
In 1979 I had 69 Z28 with the DZ 302 4speed and 410 gears. It was fast. I never raced a Boss 302 but I bet it would have been good. Keep up the great content. ✌
I had a restored 69 z . I could hang with my buddies 67 427 435 h.p. vette and a host of other cars . I had a general kenetics cam . Same spec as the offroad cam and had it balanced. 780 holley and factory headers . 410 gears .
I have to admit I'm a die-hard Chevy man but I knew in my heart the Chevy small-block lacked in the cylinder head Department show enough you showed us that is true my hat's off to you Richard!
Manny R. : As an endurance engine, the DZ 302 always had a better rod ratio, better block with thicker walls and better rods, deeper pistons which were very strong and the CrossRam intake...a much better design. Remember...it was a Ford guy who told you that. Its not all head flow, its about the whole combination. Chevies can handle lots of detonation without killing parts...a wedge has a wide range before incipient detonation becomes "oh sh1+ that sounds like heavy det.." bang...
Victor Sanchez : Ford had to save money in plant costs and that happened with a reduction of wall thickness from about 240 thou to an average of 187 thou according to Ak Miller. The bore thickness eventually got taken down to 130 thou, not in the Boss engines but certainly the common Cleveland 351s and the Windsor 351s. Bulkhead thickness and low Brinell numbers below 249 is why the Boss 302 had to have blocks thrown in to make it win. All the other automakers never went as close to the thinwall concept as the Bill Gay iron foundary rationalisation of 69. The crank unbalance was another factor. So sacrificing peak cfm on the LA's, AMC's, ĎZ's and Trans Ams wasnt an issue. Ford even epoxied the lower intake floors of those 2.7 sq inch intake ports. Chevy added extra carburation and got better reliabilty, but missed out on peak power. The Trans Am results prove that fact beyond reasonable doubt. Credit where credit is due to the Chevrolet and Mopar and AMC engineers for not penny pinching grey iron from race V8 blocks. Ford kept the 289 strength, but it wasny quite enough because the valve gear and springs in Boss engines is way overworked compared to the 1.5 ratio Chevy. Point after point. Ford guy admitting the weaknesses of the FoMoCo Boss 3 0h 2.
@@deanstevenson6527 thank you for the feedback, but you should know I'm a 55 year old man I've been tinkering with small block Chevys for quite a long time now and yes hands-down the small block Chevrolet makes a pretty tough little engine among other things, but I moved along I no longer Tinker with a small block Chevrolets I'm all about the LS stuff now, but perhaps you can shed some light on y GM never did anything about those Niemiec cylinder heads!...
Nobody takes into account the test was done with 30 CFM smaller opening on the carburetor and not a dual cross ram DZ 302 would rap 7000+ RPMs where the hell's your ford in a million pieces cuz you're going rap 4500-5500 max
Despite being a Ford guy and the comments about its superiority here, these engines are more or less the same in terms of power. They’re almost in lockstep with each other in this graph outside of the extreme high RPM range one should rarely, if ever, live in. I do see some divergence on the low end, and would appreciate seeing the curves from 800 - 3000 RPM, which is where street engines spend 75% of their time. In the end, I’m impressed by both the Boss and DZ 302 motors, and didn’t expect them to be as similar as they are
LOVE this ole school stuff!... yeah yeah, I know your turbo and LS videos have great contents. But, like the Pontiac stuff, THIS is the stuff I DIG. As I mentioned in previous comments, I ran the 327 fuelly engine for years on the drag strip.. always the underdog, and struggled to keep up with everyone's big inch engines, but everyone still appreciated it. For whatever reason I don't see enough modern information about these old setups. Maybe everyone writes them off as too Antiquated to care about. But YOU ARE the man Richard. Thx
Really cool seeing this test. I had both of those motors back in the 70's. The 69 DZ 302 was ordered as a factory crate motor about 1971, cost like $600 if I remember. It was left stock but we balanced it and added a tunnel ram and two 600 Holleys. Had it in several cars, 60 Corvette, 70 Nova SS, 65 Chevelle. Ran great. Sure could wind high. It usually saw 8500 everytime I left the driveway. The Boss 302 was also stock, except for the Holley 850 DP I put on. It was in the factory 69 Mustang fastback it came in. Both good runners. Sure wish I still had them....lol Traded the DZ for a new L78 396 for my Nova. Sold the Mustang for like $1500. Hey thanks Richard, I watch all your videos. Especially the LS comparisons. Just built a new 408 with good flowing heads. Can't wait to see what triple digit turbo horsepower feels like compared to a DZ.....lol
Richard. If you doing trans am 302 you have to put the. 140. Trans am cam shaft. On ford they had a trans am cam too but I don't have. The numbers. But I know the Chevy cam number. It made a lot of power. In small block Chevy. Ok. If you can get one. Maby a 800 holey. Would work better on both motors. You know the race teams modified carbs ? I believe both 302 made over 500 HP ? Way over okay ?
I enjoyed this video, you got down to some of the technical part which is the "good stuff" for me. This was a no BS review of two racing engines from what I also believe to be the best racing series in modern automotive racing history. The Trans-Am Series was responsible for a lot of car sales and a lot of dreams for those who desired a car just like the one that they saw on race day or maybe in a magazine. Having been alive and a Trans-Am fan during that era of factory participation, it was difficult to find a source which allowed us to watch the races and newspaper coverage was scant if anything at all. A subscription to a weekly publication like the "National Speed Sport News" was about the best way to keep track of the events, a magazine sometimes was another source, but without the internet, the latest info was scarce. In short, racing coverage sucked back then. The final years of the intense, factory sponsorship got really exciting when Chrysler decided to join in and GM's Pontiac Division, (using Pontiac engines), also joined the fun. Then there was Roger Penske's championship winning Chevy team with driver Mark Donohue deciding to go with American Motors in 1970. Talk about a shock to the racing world! Mark Donohue would find enough victories driving the Javelin to create two manufacturers championships, (almost three, but for lacking of one point in 1970) for American Motors. Just imagine, damned fast cars from the manufacturer who used to build slow, clunky, old people's Ramblers. This was great stuff! There's so much interesting info that surrounds the early years of the American Trans-Am Series; the politics, the exciting racing and the innovation are all great stuff. Richard, many thanks for sharing what you have accomplished here. Even though this video is a year old, it still remains of great interest in regards to what was happening in automotive history 50 years ago. Keep up the good work, a subscription is well deserved.
Ford Engineers understood the relationship with the Boss heads and cam timing. If they had used a camshaft with a ton of duration, the overlap combined with the huge heads ports would have really killed the low-end torque for a tiny rise in peak power. Besides, they didn't need it. They knew NOBODY had a head like this at the time. This is back when they put BOSS on something, it really was the BOSS.
The newer boss engine runs circles around this engine. It is an extremely capable engine capable of spinning to 8k plus with the stock engine and can take 800+ rwhp with forced induction. Id say it is well deserving of the boss name even if it didn't come from 1969.
It has been said in the past that Ford did a lot of testing in the cams they choose for that era of engines. Well modern day dyno results are plentiful and show how good Ford did with cams they ran in their engines. Especially compensating for some of Ford's so called bad exhaust ports. Well just bump up the lift and duration on that side of the cam. Take for example lift and duration of a stock 1969 351 windsor. In the day this was a go between engine, semi performance, many a cougar and mustang had a 2.75 rear end with this engine. But the cam worked well for its designed application. Street driving.
@@michaelharris748 when motors pull like that, its a whole different experience. I have a 347 in my 67 fastback with a billet crank. Redline is also 8k. Anyone whom hasn't experienced that usually shit a brick. There are 10k motors around here also though. So I dont race...
Great comparison. The factories needed to keep the listed power under 300hp for insurance purposes. The SS Camaro had a higher premium than the 69 Z/28 I once owned from 70-74. In stock form, it had a lot of power. That car was fast. The air pump on it for emissions was horrible... it never seemed to work well. So, off it came. Power went up and so did fuel mileage. Eventually, I modified the car a tad. It had a 3.73:1 posi rear end, Lakewood bell housing, a 50lb flywheel with a clutch package that took a lot of experimenting. I used the Hurst Comp Plus shifter as well. Eventually, I found an air hood for it, had it painted to match (dusk blue with white stripes) and it looked great. It had 1 5/8 Hooker long tube headers, a mechanical advance distributor, Accel coil, and worked on the 780DP to provide the proper amount of fuel. That work on the Holley came after a major valve and head job. Everything from screw-in studs, double roller timing chain, to everything being ported & polished and CC'd the combustion chambers. They also used stronger springs, push rods, and a special angle on the valves. In the end, it was seeing over 410hp. I had also used Koni adjustable shocks on it and was planning on getting these over-the-counter parts: rear discs; stronger sway bars; and maybe the cross-ram dual 780 manifold. That car was fast and handled very well. Of course, it's gone now, as I sold it to return to school and never wanted another money pit. 🙂 It was great fun, though, and I learned a lot.
No cars were ever under rated for insurance--total myth. They were all over rated by 20% by using the overblown GROSS bare engine dyno numbers which dropped 20% once all the accessories like air filter, belts, and muffler were put back on which was the real NET hp. Gross was banned after 1971. Your 410 hp motor was only doing 325 net horsepower in the car.
I've been waiting a long time for this comparison. These engines came about when I was in my early 20's. Unfortunately, I lost friends to both of the engines when they underrated what these engines would do. The engines got quite a ways ahead of the chassis during that time frame. The "tunnel port" 427 heads had to be seen to be believed in those days. You could throw a cat down those storm drains. The port was actually too large and one of the problems with it was to keep up the velocity thru the ports. More ain't always better......I keep telling my wife that, but she's not convinced..... I loved the 30-30 Duntov cam.....tighten up the last for more lift/duration.....loosen it up and let it clatter for less of both....depended on the traction of the track that day.
The lift was multiplied by 1.73 rockers. Chevy had 1.5 rockers. That's more lift at the valve. Ford camshaft have a larger base circle and larger lifter contact area on the cam. This gives more duration. It's not about the size of the cam but how long the valve stays open.
The 304 that AMC used in A/T Racing was a one off engine made up of specials parts. The rule change for 1970 stopped the Homologations rule so any high bred engine could be run. This made for more competition but there were no rules for production like there was before 1970. The sad part of this was the exotic parts couldn't be purchased by the average joe! The manufacturers told us the parts were available right up to the time we tried to buy them!
@@darrellsomers5427 lets see, I had a 304 in a '75 Jeep, '73 Gremlin & a '71 Javelin & were great for not being a production engine that came from the factory that way
Now ya went and done did it! There's gonna be millions of people screaming "Chivy is the best, no, Ferd is the best"! This is the best content testing legendary muscle car engines. Can't wait for more!
@@robinesavage404 I've seen crazier things happen, so it's possible. Does it make sense if you wanted a keeper, perhaps not, but some person who might be interested in cheap fast mods might, would I or others with brain cells? But more than likely not no matter what. But I have seen crazier things happen. Best wishes.
All three US Manufacturers had there good points, Chevy were real good at getting low cost Horse power to the masses, They made good high performance car s for the street! Mopar and Ford liked to do there winning on the Race tracks! If you were a Mopar guy and wanted to spend the money, the Hemi was installed in many a street car1 Ford on the other hand never offered real race engines to the public but serious racers could get them! Ford proved they could win in every kind of racing in the World!
The fact that you went from competing domestic straight to the b16 was great. True tech and no stomping on one verses the other. I started with a 72 impala at 15 and into Toyota and Honda's by 19 and have expensive with most anything driven.... It's just nuts and bolts in different designs so whatever works, i make it work better
Finally, something empirical. Back in late 1971/early 1972, one of the major car magazines (e.g., Car Craft) took bone a stock '69 Z28 and '70 Boss 302 - '69 Boss wasn't available - and did a side-by-side comparison making incremental upgrades like timing, advancing the curve, headers, traction bars, rejetting, and maybe a couple of other things. These were all relatively cheap upgrades commonly made to muscle cars back then that did not involve opening the engine itself. Both cars started off with runs in the mid-to-high 14s stock and ended up in the high 12s, with the Boss being a little quicker. As I recall, no single upgrade made a huge difference by itself, but each actually solved issues that the cars had coming from the factory (e.g., axel hop, non-optimal timing, allowing the heads to breathe). I don't recall the axel ratios but it's probably safe to assume the Z28 had the standard 3:73 and the Boss a 3:91. I also can't recall the tires but I think it's also safe to say they were OEM type (e.g., no 50 series Mickey Thompson's). More than anything, I believe this shows how muscle cars coming from the showroom were easily and relative cheaply pushed into 1/4 times we see with today's Mustangs, Camaros, et al. I myself put a 800 Holley spreadbore on my '69 SS Chevelle along with a distributor kit. Made a decent difference but the biggest performance difference came from just finding a decent mechanic that knew how to tune the car. Amoco Super Premium didn't hurt either.
These two, along with the T/A Challenger/AAR 'cuda 340 are my all-time favorite muscle car engines, bar none. Sure, the big crazy big-blocks were the dragstrip kings, but these motors sounded SO GOOD, revved to the moon, and were light enough that the cars they were in could actually handle. Love them, if I had the money, I'd have one. It's mind-blowing that the factory 5.3l LS in my Colorados (a 4WD Z71 and a ZQ8) made right around those power levels, and considerably more in the mildly tuned condition they're in now.
Don't Kid your self there were plenty of well tuned small blocks running at the Drag strip! I can remember My buddy's boss 302 running 13.86 and putting a 14.2 second 440 Charger on the trailer.
@@mylanmiller9656 Oh, I’m not, I’m well aware of what small blocks can do and prefer them. There’s really no arguing, though, that the gnarliest (L88/LS6 Chevies, Hemi/440-6 Mopars, and 428/429 Fords) big-block cars were kings of the dragstrip hill. The 340 Dusters/Darts/Demons were probably the fastest car per cubic dollar ever made, and regularly outran fairly healthy big-block cars. Same with 327/350 Novas to a slightly lesser degree. I’m sure small-block Fords have a similar example (Falcon? Comet? Not really a Ford dude, so I dunno, but I imagine a good 289, 302, or 351W would’ve made those move just as well for just as cheap.
@@kkoch666 Neither do these engines, but my 2WD makes about 350/350 at the tire. My 4WD might make that at the crank. Factory, they were 300/325 at the crank. Also remember, post ‘71(? Maybe ‘72?), automotive horsepower and torque started being measured via net rating, not gross. That means accessories, full exhaust, etc, so probably a nearly 10% difference. A factory 5.3l actually probably makes a smidgeon more power than a factory DZ302.
@@The_sinner_Jim_Whitney I bought a 1966 271 hp 289 Mustang, My best friend had a 1968 Mustang GT with a 390. My car was stock but the guy that had it had it well tuned. My car had 3.89 gears his had 3.91 gears. When ask him if he wanted to race he said, are you kidding I have 40 more HP than you. We would pull side by side until 4th gear then the 289 would pull ahead!
I had a ‘66 Mustang we rebuild the engine to K specs, then added an edelbrock performer intake. It ran pretty strong, but the shop teacher at school had a set of 351w heads he gave me. We milled the water ports and did a little matching and it made a huge difference in performance. Head flow is everything!
There's a video on RUclips showing the founder of the SAMTECH school(in Texas,if my memory serves me correctly)putting his stock DZ 302 on the dyno and it made 365 hp,proving those engines made about 360 in stock form.Great video,by the way.
This is a great video and even though I've had a couple of mustangs over the years , the 1969 Z28 is the Camaro I would love to own. You can really appreciate both of these engines and the cars they were designed for.
Great test Richard! As a Ford guy, this Chevy vs Ford 302 dyno test was more about the differences of the engine builds; Pistons- flat top vs domed Rod length- Short (1.7) vs Long (1.9) camshafts-duration vs lift Heads-port size & airflow at different lifts It's interesting how the longer rod engine did not compensate for a weaker flowing head (@ .500 lift, about 40cfm I&E). Did the short rod help low end torque, even with the large ports? Was the flat top piston worth more power than the 1/2 point in CR? What was the 'area under the curve' between the two camshafts-did the shorter duration/more lift prove more beneficial than more duration/lower lift? Please more testing of this nature-rod lengths, compression, camshafts, intakes, header, boost vs back pressure, intake air temps & boost.....Thank you Richard!
@@DWO619 YUP I SAW RODGER PENSKES CAMARO BEAT THE MUSTANGS ALL DAY LONG.. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY IT WAS RONNIE BUCKMAN THAT WON OVER PARNELLI JONES IN 1968 AT KENT RACEWAY IN WASHINGTON… I BELIEVE MARK DONOHUE WON IN 1969 …THOSE WERE THE DAYS..! THE REASON THAT RODGER LEFT THE BOWTIE BOYS WAS THE SAME STORY… CHEVROLET BEAN COUNTERS WOULD NEVER GIVE ANY SUPPORT SO HE SWITCHED TO AMC…😫
It’s also been noted several times that one of the better engines from back in the day that gets very little recognition is actually the Boss 351. That same set of Boss heads on the 351 proved to make a really nice torque curve and some pretty good power.
On YT channel -340 vs the world, the Boss 351 was tested and was the small block that made the most HP and torque of all the small blocks from the late 60's and early 70's.
It would be interesting to see testing focused on the bottom end of the curve, especially one investigating how changes in duration of the valve opening event affects torque when all other cam specs are equal (i.e. a "factory spec" cam with duration/LSA of the factory hydraulic stick, but in solid roller with the most aggressive possible ramp profile). Maybe the torquey Ford 460 you showcased a while back? It would make a great starting point. Slam the valves open and closed as quickly as possible, but with the duration, lift, and LSA of a stock bumpstick. Will the quicker event opening equate to better low-rpm cylinder fill? Will it result in any changes in dynamic compression? Will it help? Will it hurt? Will it do nothing? Are the trade-offs in valve train stresses worth any potential gains? I ask because there are a lot of us out here who appreciate that throttle response and off-idle torque are more important than overall HP for everyday driveability and enjoyment. It's also a nod to those who might be building a motor for actual work use versus a weekend toy which will never see a trailer hitch. Keep up the good work. Vids are supremely interesting and the info is great.
You know it's not the same thing right? Different block. The 302 cleveland was the same block as the 351c. The Boss 302 had a block based on the 302 Windsor. Much smaller engine, and 4 bolt mains. And the the 302 clev run 2v heads.
@@ibast1 oh really 😏 gee I'd never have noticed if you hadn't pointed it out. The reference was to 302 cubes and Cleveland heads as a production motor but without the extravagant cost, how many boss 302s did you ever see back in the day let alone nowadays, the 302 was a popular choice cheaper to license, slightly better fuel economy cheaper insurance, way less carb issues ( until they did 4bbl automated 302 later) and guys could push it past the wifey in a lot of cases, the 4V heads were not a big asset, don't know about you but I've done and seen a lot more successful 2V heads with 4V valves in my time than 4V stuff, the only 4V deal I was truly impressed with was a genuine ph3 motor with 13:1 pistons and ported heads running on Avgas or acetone as a street motor that my mate still has, there are others I know but the old 302 Cleveland was a winner and I'm a chevy guy but I did a lot of Cleveland's for people and mates, I also did a lot of F truck Cleveland stuff ad no one wanted to touch them back then
Haha I remember reading this story when it came out and yelling at the magazine for not using the cross ram intake on the dz ... always wanted to see a Smokey 302 dyno’d 👍🏻
I heard that the smokey engine with the cross ram manifold made well over 400hp and close to 500hp with racing fuel. These numbers came out of one of his how to build small block Chevy books by the master
just like this dumbass Bob that keeps talking s*** about the 302 Ford they didn't even make a 302 Chevy in 1970he thinks I need help you bobby needs to do some research if there' was a 302 Chevy in 70it would have kick the s*** out of it just like you didn't 67 68 69 where as did win title I 70 parnelli Jones driving but they lost it again and 71 to a javelin that's got to hurt couch
@@vulcan-900bobber7I know they should have used a 780 Holly just to do it with the the original carb was a 780 but the two cross riam carburetors were 600 CFM a piece that motor would kick the s*** out of a Ford 302 BS my dad worked for Ford and sold 19000 Ford motors and it wasn't because they were built good it's called job security and a piece of s*** crank. You can have can have all the head flow jn the world if your motor doesn't stay together ain't gonna do shit 👍
@Jeremy Thompson Well, at the same time, the 409 was being limited by what plagued them in NASCAR. The bottom end wasn't stout enough to turn the high RPMs, that the short stroke was willing to produce. That was the main limitation to that series of engine... I guess if they had good rev limiters back then, they could have aimed for higher peak numbers.
@@ldnwholesale8552 I owned a 1971 Boss 351 back in the early 1970s. My favorite Sport was hunting down Z/28 LT1 Camaro's. I owned that car for 12 years and was never beaten by a 350 Chevy of any type! if My engine had low end power the Chevy had less because they always got beat!
I'd be curious how the 70 340 six barrel does in comparison. They didn't have the greatest flowing heads and had to be de-stroked to compete, but they were kind of a neat package.... I've got a couple 2bbl Clevelands and the heads are impressive even on the 2bbl engine...
I bow to both the Boss 302 and the '69 Z-28 302; never driven either but did get a ride in a '69 Z-28...………….Wow! (College days back when they were new.)
My foster dad had one in cherry red with the black stripes.. I've never been in something so loud in my life. The smell, the sound, the feeling... It was just awesome. I just felt badass in it. 😎
Had friends with and drove both cars back in the day. The Z28 was a more street-able car with slightly better low end. The higher top end power of the Boss 302 was never realized in factory stock cars due to the rev limiter Ford installed on the cars. And if you disconnected the limiter you lost your warranty.
Great comparison. The different engineering philosophies are crystal clear here. Chevy guy here but total respect for the Fords and Chryslers of the day. I am getting ready to revive my 67 327. The engine came in a 1968 Chevelle. It had a factory 4-speed. It was a stripped down car with no power options. It didn’t even have a console. Oddly, it had 462 2.02 heads on it. Unfortunately, I sent the engine to an engine builder many years ago and never knew what camshaft it had originally installed. It might have helped solve the puzzle. It did have a cast iron, square bore 4 barrel intake. Nothing really spelled L79.
I had a 69 Z/28 and street raced many a 69 & 70 Boss 302. It was always a toss up, depending on gearing and tires. It was the same for other 69 Z/28s too. I remember back in the day Sports Car Graphic (Could've been R&T, or MT?) had a head to head test with both cars, and it was basically a dead heat. Still have the magazine someplace too.
I had, and still do my 69Z. It was an enigma then, meaning it ran very well for what it was, with either the DZ or the 70 LT1 I put in it later. I made lots of money with that car. I didn't have toss ups with the Bosses. But again, other Zs did from time to time, but those didn't run like mine either. Not sure why mine was faster. It was an awesome time. But in mags it was so close and some tests were better than others. We even had a local 70 Z-28 that ran LOTS faster than all the others, not sure why on that but it did have 4.10 gears for some of that time. I have some other cars too, but that Z will be with me until my death and I hope that's still 20 or more years out, but I still love it, it kept me out of a lot of issues other kids had time for that got them into trouble. Best wishes.
The Boss 302 had bigger heads and valves than the Ford 428 and Ford 429, that were available around the same time. Which tells you that it wasn't built the way it was intended to run, in stock trim.
The Boss 302 had Cleveland heads with Bigger valves ,your comparing apples to oranges! There were versions of the 428 and 429 FORD that would blow away cars with Boss 302s ! . The 428 FORD and 429 were 2 altogether Separate BLOCKS! ,428 FE series 429s were Lima BLOCKS! .
@@cavscout62 , well explain NASCAR and Mopar for us . . . . . . I mean really ? ? ? ? I do like Ford engines though , used to play around with them years ago . The BOSS 302 would run d stay together ( actually we never did blow it up ) in excess of 10,000 rpm stock ..We just improved the ignition and put more carb on it . Used to be the formula for horsepower was the three C's . Can , Carb and compression . All sorts of ways to ' cheat ' that formula to get more and more on up into the thousands when it comes to horsepower and torque of an engine..Trick is to keep them together . Why now the ' techie ' engines or the new generation engines operate primarily below 7000 rpm . Me ? I like to near the power band between 12000 to 15000 rpm . . . .But that's just me . Speaking of Fords , the ' Clevor ' was popular back in the day at the dirt tracks a was fun on the street . Cleveland heads on a Windsor block a they worked well . It'd be fun to do this combo and then throw a stroked rotating assembly in the mix and toss it on a dyno . . . . . There were several 351 Cleveland heads back in the day . Yeeeaaars back a friend of mine put together a Merc outboard engine in a outlaw dirt track car . . . . . .Flipped it so it actually was ass backwards as far as exhaust and intake or carbs . Whipped everything until it was banned . Some of you ole guys might remember this running at tracks in Wisconsin . . . For a short time anyway . Thing being we were worried about low rpm torque . Found that wasn't a problem as you could push start it by hand . Get it rolling engage the ' box ' and as soon as it fired it'd just take off . The fella he built it for had some yahoo tell him it fuel injection was the way to go . . . . .They put it into a small Triumph a TR3 ? ? Can't recall except it was a Triumph small and light . The fuel injection was all screwed up and the owner with his fuel injection ' hero ' brought it to my buddy d her an them off. Sorry about the book but you got me remembering . . . . .LOL ! Down here in Florida a few years back at the swamp buggy races there was an old boy who cut a BBC in half for the 4 cyl class . Was long before the Chevy V4 . . .It was a winner but the chain drive system wasn't up to the challenge. Be well .
BOB GLIDDEN still managed to put lots of competition away in pro stock back in the day when guy s were still using factory block s an heads no matter how much weight they threw at him . gotta love the clevland style heads
cavscout62 It went both ways and still does today. If one becomes dominant, they start to handicap them. Chevy throughout history is handicapped time and time again. Dodge has been handicapped, and Ford has been handicapped. Would love to just get the politics out of racing and let them all just have at it.
Back in 1989 I was trying to build a street car on a college kid budget. I had a buddy working at a local speed shop so I used his discount to buy a Crane Blueprint DZ302 camshaft and dropped it in my 030 over 350 sbc shortblock, with a pair of old school hand ported double hump heads. These weren't no race heads, just 1.94 / 1.5 valved heads with a rookie port job. I topped it off with a 2x4 tunnel ram with 2-600 holley vacuum secondary carb's. This is all not matched parts but this car pulled like a mad man to about 1000 ft with a turbo 350 auto, 488 gears in a 1976 camaro. This video sure brought back memories of how I used to plan a build, budget first, never put much into parts matching. lol The same buddy from the speed shop had a old Chevy II with 307 shortblock, doublehump heads and DZ302 camshaft that was a screamer to about 7500 rpms daily and never had any issues with too many rev's. Funny how now we just spin the LS motors and don't worry about the pistons anymore either.
Back in the day, it was reported that the Australian Cleveland 4v heads could flow more air, out of the box, than stock open chamber Big Block Chevy heads.
4Vs were never cast in Australia. We only did blocks and 2V heads in either closed (302) or open (351). Blocks were all based on the square (not D) D2AE casting. The only way you could tell that it was Aussie was from the Geelong Foundry casting logo (GF) as opposed to the Cleveland Foundry (Cf). The iron used in our castings was much harder too, to the point of needing new tooling to cope with the increased wear rate. By the middle of the XB Falcon model run, the 4V was dropped altogether and all Clevelands were cast and assembled locally. To retain a performance variant, a 4-barrel square bore manifold was first introduced to go with the 2v head, identified by an Aussie part number that resembled the US original equivalent but had "AR" in front of it. So that part would be something like AR D2AE with the AR standing for "Australian Revision". From XC onwards, another 4 barrel manifold was created, this time with a universal Ford Australia part number that used the year number followed by "DA". So that part number would start with "76 DA". The reason why the Aussie 4V may have flowed well is possibly due to some blueprinting done by the performance division during the GTHO program. Those engines were effectively Boss 351s but locally developed. Many reported to have 370-380 HP despite an advertised 300.
@@BuzzLOLOL perfected by ford! BIG BLOCK KILLER! Had my ass handed to me couple of times street light to light. Once in my 66 chevelle with a 396 and my dads with a 454! Made me a believer
Interesting video. Back in late 70 or 71 Hot Rod magazine took a stock 1970 Z28 and Boss 302 and tested both engines with several common modifications. They did identical modifications to both cars, headers, carb tweaks, traction bars, etc. Each time the Boss did just a little bit better than the Z28. You would never have known that from the action on the street. Plus there are tons of affordable parts for small block Chevys, but very few parts for Boss 302s. I had a 70 Boss 302. 0f02g125461
I didn't have trouble with the Bosses but my Z was an enigma too. Something special, not sure what, it just ran better. Made lots of money with it because of that. But I'm sure there were some good running Bosses out there too.
@@kenblack4802 I had two Friends that had Boss 302 Cars back in 1970. One was close ratio 4 speed and 3.50 gear. the other had wide ratio and 4.30 gears. the one with the Close ratio and 3.50 gears was a stone that run high 14 second runs the one that had 4.30 gears and wide ration would run in the height 13 second range ! Ford sold a bunch of cars that were not driver friendly!
@@mylanmiller9656 Those numbers match what we saw at the track also. That wide ratio made a HUGE difference in getting them going. It saved mine but it made me win a LOT of races too with them. Best wishes.
The Ford motor will go over 500 hp with a big cam and lots of RPM. Slap a solid roller in it, some higher compression, and top it with an 850 Holley. If you're machinist and balance guy are really good, it will take 10k for short drag racing bursts. My dad had one and it would make me cringe every time he would launch it at the track or on the street. I just knew I would be putting sleeves or a spare motor in after the rods broke. It never happened though. It spun some rod bearings once but he had a supply of cranks and blocks and an additional 4 complete Boss motors "just in case." He got 2 of them from Holman and Moody. I have no clue how he kept finding Boss 302 parts but people would come by and buy or trade stuff all the time.
@@joeydover Yup, that's before there were companies like ARP that produced fasteners that could hold the rod (and main) caps in place instead of them distorting and letting the bearings spin. That Boss was one Bad A$$ character, no doubt about it!
@@joeydover yeah right put over 500hp too a 302 block good chance it will split down the lifter valley seen many Chevy block made tougher than a ford Block
We can thank Richard Nixon for that one, He Forced the manufacturers to stop spending money on racing and start. building crappy American Cars So the Japanese Cars could take over!
With regard to my original comment, I have the article right here: 1971 Popular Hot Rodding Engine Annual. Both the Chevy and Boss were purchased over the counter, received at the Autolite dynomometer facility in Long Beach, CA, removed from their respective shipping crates and given a 6 hour run in on the dyno. Both were setup with headers. With both engines stabilized and in top trim with respect to ignition and carburetion settings, the results were as follows: the Boss 302 put out 327 HP @ 6600 rpm and 290 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm. The Chevy Z/28 302 recorded 325 HP @ 6800 rpm and 289 ft-lbs @ 5200 rpm. I thought it was important to get this right for historical significance.
The 1968 Tunnel Port 302 : Ford was using racing as a way to battle test this engine to check for weak points prior to making mass producing the engine ( as we know didn't happen ). Team Shelby and Team Bud Moore were not allowed to build or modify the 302TP. Even engine was shipped back to Ford to be examined. Shelby did build its own 302TP once and won the race, they were told to never do that agian.
The DZ 302 was running heads that were nearly 10 years old by that time. Bean counters wouldn't let them develop a new small block head as focus was placed on Big block hp wars by 69. A DZ 302 with good heads would have been scary.
This is exactly right. The Flint circle track scene back then was absolutely dominated by SBCs with custom ported heads made by guys at the proving grounds in Milford MI.
@@oddmanout7755 The reason the Chevy dominated Oval racing was, all race circuits ban the canted valve Ford engine, because Chevy was to slow to keep up!
@@edmoates2000 you are so full of BS it is not funny , the big block Chevys couldn't even come close to a ford 429 look at NASCAR Winston cup Chevy never won a race in 1969.
The SB in the chevy Z28 was a pooch out of the hole, it only made high hp at around 7000 rpm. The ford on the other hand had good hp and torque off the line and pretty much throughout the powerband up to 6500 rpms where it made 375 hp , Impressive for a solid lifter SB considering the 70 440 magnum was only making a little more with a lot more cubic inches.
Drove a factory flat topish piston, 71 model 2v Cleveland 4door Torino. Bone stock in the 80's, that thing ran hard! Made me a big Cleveland fan and still love them. Add compression, fuel and cam, those things will make you hate on all other older engine formats.
great job, cool to see the little differences on them. Did you ever hear of Pontiac's effort with their Trans am engine? I read a story about how Herb Adams and a couple of other guys built a 303 cu. in. a destroked 400 block it was supposed to have made some great power.
Absolutely! Poncho Power. That 303 was supposed to be good for 500hp. Watching John Wayne in McQ right now. Beautiful Brewster Green '73 T/A. I had a Black on Black Velour "Bandit" '78. W-72 400 4 speed. Good times.
I remember the "461" casting Double Hump fuelie heads being the closed chamber casting, and the "462" being the same thing except with flat machined ends and bolt holes for accessories to bolt to. I remember the "186" casting heads being open chamber, but it's been over 30 years since I was in that business.
I had some 462;s way back in 83-84..64cc with 1.94" intake valves..after I did all kinds of work on them for my 327 they worked very good considering the smaller 1.94" intake valve and a big Sig Erson cam.
Dig this channel more and more each episode 🤘🏻 love the change up from all the LS stuff at times too. Heard it explained before not sure if you did a video. Not to familiar with Ford. What's the story of the 351 Windsor and Cleveland, what's the benefits of one to the other. Lastly cle-sor?
Nice work. It's so hard to find people testing actual stock or very-near stock performance from that era. Regardless of which cars were superior from the factory, NHRA stock classes allow tons of mods the winner in any comparison you find on RUclips is simply the one that is the most modified.
Awesome video! In the future, how about a 350 chevy vs a 351 Cleveland vs a 340 mopar vs a 360 AMC, just a build of each to show HP Potential for each, Thanks.
The Ford FE engine family is a family full of Icons. The 352,361 edsel , 390, 406, 427 top oiler, 427 side oiler , 427 cammer, 428 thunderjet, 428 police interceptor, 428 cobra jet and 428 super cobra jet were and still are excellent engines with a reputation for being excellent reiable performers. Their exspensive to purchase and build but well worth the money in my opinion
Back in 1969 you didn't order parts, you ordered the whole engine from the dealer. We ordered 3 of the BOSS 302's and before we took them apart to change cams, rods, pistons, etc, we took one of them to the dyno and put a Holly 750 on it. We were shocked when it made 355 HP right out of the crate from the dealer with the timing at a total of 36 degrees. We just started it up and ran it in and then pulled power. Odds are when these were put together you probably did more care than an assembly line would. But the 290 HP was a joke, and only here for insurance. FYI, when we were done with them our BOSS 302's back then made about 525 HP @ 7,000 RPM
Add a little more compression, a cam, a 850 carb, and the Boss 302 came head came alive. My dad had 4 of them, 2 of which were Holman Moody. They had some funky splined rod bolt nuts on those 2. We roller cammed one and his driver turned it 10k. It ran a 7.74 in the 1/8th on motor in the late 70s early 80s in an otherwise stock Boss 302 Mustang. The only thing else it had was 4.56 gears, some homemade ladder bars that didn't require cutting to be added and some slicks.
Those 302s were really good engines back in the day. How about a comparison with modern aftermarket parts (generally really cheap in the case of the SBC)? Can the old design come close to what the modern engines make, using AFR or Trick Flow heads and an appropriate cam, for instance? Performer RPM Air Gap for the SBC? I’ve seen a few builds that come close in peak power, but usually require more cam to get there, and lose in the average power/torque comparison...
There is a naturally Aspirated Fox Mustang with a347 that runs in the High 8 second range, called Quarter Horse 2! It is proof the old engine can compete with the new ones. He runs faster than most Boosted!
Here's an idea modern Vs muscle. Build a small block 427 clevor and a 427 ls. Equal sizing solid roller cams, compression and intake. Stay with factory style casting heads no after market big dollar cnc stuff. Run with efi. This has been done before but the bias has always been to the ls with bigger Cam higher compression and after market heads
See the engine masters magazine at around 2010. the ls is slightly better but the cleveland for a traditional motor makes all of them pale in comparison.
@@francisstone8221 See Nascar then, the cleveland ford lived a long time in unlimited trim, see the t-birds of bill elliot setting the talledega record and stuff and billy glidden basically making a mockery of small block racing.
@@Scootermagoo Nascar only ran the Cleveland or boss motors as long as ford produced a homligation car with them in it. It's always been based around production models. Prostock is a total different ball game, Bob Glidden was the ford man but not always with a Cleveland.. Displacement rules change so that motor disappeared. People really don't realise how much control GM has over motor sport in general. Like when a famous Canadian born Aussie racer turned up with a rotary at Nascar and it got banned after its first race. My whole idea behind this shoot out is to show the antiquated ford on a equal footing to the modern Chev. No one I can find has done such a thing, even with the modern motors ford racers still have to use a antiquated all though well developed Windsor based motor in all but some road racing classes, even the the Aussie supercars still uses Windsor power against the ls.
Francis Stone I’ve never seen this Clevor that some refer to. The Cleveland and Windsor blocks are completely different. The heads of a Cleveland will not bolt to a Windsor no matter what unicorn kit some guy says will match up the water jackets. There were two styles of head available to the Cleveland separate from the Boss 351. They were either open chamber (lower compression) or quench(higher compression and considered the most desirable). These also benefited from 2.19 intake valves. The Achilles is the pedestal style torque down rocker arms. Ford remedied that in the Boss heads with adjustable rockers. If you’re interested in reading on this engine series Ford called it the 385 series.
My uncle Sal has an original 69 DZ302 Z/28 4 speed, he bought it new in Niagara Falls Ontario Canada in the spring of 70 its a dark olive green with black stripes and interior, it has over 100,000 kilometers on it and never been apart.
Back in the day around 1976 my brother had a DZ302 with a big holley double pumper carb sitting on a high rise edelbrock intake, it had corvette heads, corvette cam and crank, 12:1 popped up pistons, and a magneto distributor and a 221 Muncie trans hooked up to a shortened 12 bolt posi with 411 gears, huge Mickey Thompson tires in back with cragers, this drive train was in a 1971 single cab shortbed Datsun pick up. It was street legal and his daily driver right out of high school. It was cool looking and a real beast!!
Nice shout out to the Honda B16 heads. People make fun of them, especially old timers, but they were great factory pieces with lots of tech from racing and F1 built in. Goes to show that racing development trickles down to the everyday stuff.
Love the comparison test. We all know you're the man when it comes to dyno testing factory and aftermarket engine combo's that keep you glued to our phones! And I always learn something new or get an idea to try it out myself (on LS engines mostly). But always maintain a professional point of view without being biased. As soon as I heard in the video using a cheaper, non-factory carburetor, I knew you were going to dial in the carb vs throwing it on out of the box. But I'd love to see a follow up with you opening up the fuelie heads on the Chevy dz since the cam has more degrees and swap to 1.6 rocker arm. I think it'll close the HP gap at 6700 RPM's while still being a smaller rocker arm ratio and cylinder heads ( depending on how much grinding you do to the heads). We all know ( well most) that cam lift isn't everything. Again, awesome comparison Richard Holdener !!!
I'm really interested in what the factories did back in the day to get the horsepower up. Camshaft, compression ratio that sort of thing. There was also the AMC 304 in those races as well.
Strating in 1970 the Javelins used a Special Service Block. Basically a 360 with 390/401 lower ends that allowed for 4 bolt mains with a destroked crank. The 290/304 never had the meat in the casting for 4 bolt caps. At the same time Dodge and Plymouth were using destroked 340s. Pontiac did offer a Short Deck 303 in the first edition of the Trans Am to get around the displacement limit.
@@richardholdener1727 well, you do a lot for us here on your channel, but even if you went in different directions, what you done and the results would still be cool to see of each engine. I love the channel!!!
AMC got into TransAm racing with their 304 Javelin and with Mark Donahue driving, did remarkably well. I'm curious as to what type of heads were on the AMC engine and how much power it put out. Was the Javelin really that competitive by itself or was it Donahue's driving skills which made the difference?
The Javelin had a 304 but it was not the 304 that was sold to joe public. it was a de-stroked 360 with heads from a 390 super stock. The reason AMC won in 1971 was because all the other factory teams had quit backing race teams. AMC was the only team with Factory money behind them.
I just recently purchased an original 1970 Boss 302 from California to restore. While the body and interior are in great shape the motor definitely needs rebuilding. I will share this video with the fellow who is rebuilding the engine.
I don't know what the factory backed 1970 Mustang Trans Am cars such as Parnelli Jones made for horse power, but a Boss 302 motor producing 475 horsepower usually had problems with piston cracking after several Trans Am road races on the motor.
That was because of a poor design by TRW, these pistons were replaced by ford on Warranty! I had two buddy's had Boss 302's both engine had piston Crack and replaced on Warranty.
I've been 235mph in a 1980 Camaro with a destroked DZ... (large journal offset ground to small ).. 2.9" stroke 4.030 bore... ( 305 limit at Bville )... ( ran 250 Nitrous shot for 70 seconds ) Nothing sounds like a 302 at Full song for miles and miles... just freaking Music!!!
Keith Turk : Wow.Saw a write up of your Maxton cement trip. What an insane ride..Love your.dedication to the SBC. And the BOP 215! Both you and Richard have seen the 227 mph plus end of the Curved Horizon. Thanks for being on line and sharing the shear fun of Detriot Vee Eights. Dancin' Knitting Kneedles for.Eva guys. 200 Clubers!
@@richardholdener1727 Best part of this is the question of which is best stock is answered with factual data. I love these video's... can't tell you how much I've learned... keep it up
@@keithturk104 so obviously you like ford doesn't matter that the numbers from 67 to 1969 were totally dominant in Chevys favor!! Team Penske quit using Chevrolet in 1970 or It would have been the same story!! Still they got their asses kicked bye the javelin and AMC in 1970 show who's the real boss ?it wasn't the 302 ford!!!or they would have won a championship in any of those years??? I guess you guys haven't been to a drag strip and watched pro stock racing Ford hadn't done s*** in 30 years 😢 I believe it was Bob Gliddendon't like the same story in NASCAR I don't know how many championships Chevrolet has compared to Ford but the numbers are staggering
Richard, really good video! I'd like to see a similar video on the Boss 429 (guess you'll be testing it by itself). Most people realize that it wasn't the beast on the street that they thought it would have been, but learning WHY would be interesting, and what should have been done to that beast to howl!
The 428 SCJ would outrun a Boss 9 on the drag strip any day of the week. The Boss 9 had way too much head for it. It took forever to get it wound up. It is very lazy out the gate due to the fist size intake ports. A Boss 460 would have been a different story though. The extra displacement would have been very beneficial to the head design and flow characteristics.
Beast on the streets that's a good one, the 1970 Buick GSX STAGEII Baddest MUSCLE CAR EVER BUILT and hit the streets!! My brother had one, Would eat my 68 Chevelle SS396 L78 Convertble 4spd up like I was standing still. read up on these beasts pure race cars with class.
Amazing how the large port 4V head can still work well with small Ci motors. Yes you need some rpm for it, but that last 1500rpm is where everyone really wants right? lol Also 350-375hp range for back in the day is no slouch , especially outta small Ci.
@69JANKS - The '65 Cobra Daytona coupe with a small block 289 and 4 Webers cranked out 390 Hp - enough to propel that car to 197 mph down the Mulsanne Straight!
The Chevy had more torque it would have bust that mustang all day long and on top of that Ford mustang was known to break the piston every time they were junk
@@DWO619 you must have just ignored the Dyno results of both engines in this comparison. The Chevy had slightly better torque down low but the Ford more than made it up mid range to red line.
Back in the day like 1977 or so my brother had a DZ302 with a big Holley double pumper carb, high rise edlebrock intake, it had a corvette cam and crank with corvette heads and a magnetto if that’s how you spell it, and of course headers and a 221 muncie trans. Had a shorten 12 bolt posi with Big mickey thompson tires in the back on cragers rims and a pair of slicks for the strip. Oh btw that engine and drive train was in a single cab 1971 Datsun pick up. It was street legal and his daily driver in the hot rod area out of high school. I don’t think he ever lost a race to my knowledge. That thing looked super cool and It was a beast!!!
Yep my 302 heads back in the day were angle port with titanium valves and the ports were mostly devcon . They were the key to making hp . I bought them off a G gas car that a fellow sold the Monza and I would up with the heads and tunnel ram and the 660 carbs . I remember reading the info about the big port heads off a 302 Ford and how they were to big and I just never saw a down side from superior head flow . I remember Pete told me that he got 98 and 99 percent ring seal and when the motor got to 92 the motor got pulled down . Lot of times it was the valves . When I bought the heads he removed the hemi valve springs as I only spun it to 7800 as I used a dirt track bottom end
Well I was right. But it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be for the little chevy. Now I'd love to see that same DZ 302 with a good set of Darts or Brodix heads on the dyno.
the shift points for the chevy was higher in torque so cornering was probably its strong point. were as, the higher horsepower for the ford probably help in the straight aways.
For some reason my dad knew Ford's made crazy horsepower.well back in the 50s my dad was a kid and he and his brothers experienced with Ford's and Chrysler's and Chevy's. But some reason Ford made him a believer when he bought his first 63 Ford galaxies 500 he knew exactly what to do to beat all the guys in town.the dealer didn't like it but he made history. Peace
Interesting comparison of big head and moderate cam vs moderate head and bigger cam. I suspected the Cleveland heads would kill low end torque in comparison but it didn't.
It would be interesting to see these engines in some Era correct cars with a factory drive train and see who is more efficient over all with power to the wheels
We sort of know that from the magazine test from the day. Sure there are the suspect outliers, but most will give you a close idea who was able to put the power down better or rather utilized the power curve better. Just comparing GM cars you can see the power curve was the biggest factor. The limited gear ratios favored a broad power band, which is why it's viewed that torque is king.
@@cuzz63 and the 12 bolt Chevy couldn't hold anywhere near the power the 9" Fords could. Hence the reason why most serious race cars are running a 9" 😉
@@chasesierra2162 because they couldn't find a GM body worth putting their sbc, or bbc in. And I assume you are talking about late model Mustangs, so they would be running the 8.8 rear. Which alot of GM guys also run in their chebbies.
Great video. You should show the difference between chevy 350 and ford 351 Cleveland. And also the difference between ford and chevys 427 motors. Probably would hurt alot of feelings lol
My first car was a '69 Z/28, from back in '77 and I still have it. I had it B&B'd by a guy who built circle-track engines, and he recommended not doing any headwork because he said the valves (2.02) were really too big for the street, and low-end would suffer with more flow. After discovering a cracked head we put another set on that had been ported and polished. I wonder what it would pull on the dyno
Back in the day, 1971, I knew these two guys that liked to race for money on Friday and Saturday nights but they had never raced each other. One had a Boss 302 and the other had a 427 Corvette. One Friday at work my friend with the Vet said him and the Boss guy were going to race just see who was really fastest. Well Monday morning my Ford buddy and I couldn’t wait to hear the out come . When our corvette friend came through the shop door we just said “well ?” He just hung his head .....I think he had few excuses too.
![Quando Rondo - Grow Up [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8zFnCg3BO4Q/mqdefault.jpg)
I own a 1970 Mustang Boss 302 since May of 1970 and broke a piston skirt on 2 of the original Fomoco pistons. Had Arbor Garage in Omaha, NE. repair my engine installing new TRW High Domed 13.5-1 pistons and doing a .030 over bore on the cylinder walls due to the damage of the broken piston skirts. They dyno'd it at 608 H.P. and with a Holley 1050 Dominator Carb, it ran a 10.33. Keeping with NHRA rules, I ran it in "B" Stock and put on my original Holley 780 carb, it ran a 10.88. For a stock engine, this is one of the fastest Boss 302's I've ever rode in or seen. The photo to the left is my car. Race 'em if you got 'em racers!
LOL...
friend of mine had one back when , it broke the piston skirts twice. He built a hi performance 289 and declared it a better street engine.
Boy does this video bring back memories.... High school parking lot filled with SS Chevelle’s, Camero’s, GTO’s, Mustangs, various Mopars, just to name a few....
My high school over in Downey CA, was a car show also in 1971 .
Class of 86 way out in the country, zero import “fast” & futless junk, whole lotta lead sleds in various conditions 90% fast as hell, remember tossing the biggest engines we could fit in gremlins, pintos & vegas, chopping firewalls to cram big blocks in em, racing for pink slips the first Friday every month on our deserted state highway, didn’t get to see em new but was cheap & easy...ish & everywhere, good good times
@@patrickancona1193 There was some of that it 71 too. I bought a 340 Dodge that had lots of work done to it. Came out of a totaled Challenger. No idea how much HP it had but it was strong for a small block .
Don't forget the Olds 442 and Buick GS Stage 1's...crushed many of the ones you mentioned with my plain Jane 442. Beive it or not the one car that was a real match was a 383 magnum Charger...a bug fart would determine who won...THOSE WERE THE DAYS!!!
Same here, we had in school auto shop where the kids would build their car's we had two Chevelle's a 70 and my friends 71. Another buddy had a 71 Camaro RS SS i believe a few there was a 69 mach 1 with a 351 Cleveland and 69 mach 1 427 dcj mustangs a 67 charger the 70 383 super Bee, and a 69 440 road runners started as a 383. And my 64 Impala. We would Cruise brookside and memorial in Tulsa before hitting the midnight drags at Tulsa dragstrip where it's run what you bring, and put up or shut up. It's mainly grudge matches and running the cop's in the quarter mile. But some of those cop's could twist a wrench and it wasn't easy to beat them but there were usually a few cars that would get the better of the cops. If you won again them you got 50 bucks and a certificate with the name car and time slips for both car's stating you stomped Johnny law and took them for fifty bucks.
A retired master mechanic I know had built a DZ302 back in the day and put it in a base model '72 Nova with a 4-speed and a 3.08 rear-end. He said it was slow off the line, but he'd usually pass people halfway down the 1/4 mile and win. He said that car worked best on the highway where he had enough top-end to leave Corvettes in the dust. Oddly enough, he got most of his speeding tickets in town because the speed limit was 25 mph and the car couldn't maintain 25 mph in 1st gear without bucking.
3.73 gears ,but loose some top end , but omg what they do in front of a Doug nash .
I owned both a 1969 Z28 and a 1970 Boss 302. To me, the Z28 had the toughest motor, and the Boss 302 had some problems with piston skirts cracking. I also prefer the rear sump of the Z28 to the front sump of the Boss 302. The engineering of the body and suspension of the Boss 302 I thought was superior to the Z28. These are just my observations. Ken
it was a better block...Better than the ford...
The Boss did have piston skirt issues.
As I remember, there was occasion with that - no doubt in part due to piston rock from large piston to wall clearances.
The other was the OEM valve springs - they were more than a bit soft for the intended engine speed of the Boss (7000+), it's been said that was done as a backup to the factory rev-limiter to help reduce warranty claims from blown up engines.
@@everettamador9870 The Ford block was no slouch. It had 4 bolt mains and could take over 500hp at 10k RPM for drag racing when it was equipped with a roller cam and balanced correctly with upgraded pistons. It would live all day at 7k. Might spin a rod bearing with reapeated use at 10k but any engine might at that RPM.
The Ford 302 needs .200+ Longer Rods ..
@@Motor-City-Mike The Short Rod was the Problem with the Ford .
I'm a huge FORD fan and particularly Clevelands or Clevors. Down her in Australia we didn't have any Windsor's past 1969. We only had 302 and 351 Clevo's. My next engine build will be a 4.125 bore 351 Windsor with CHI 3V Alloy clevo heads. Only thing stopping me atm is a car to put it in. Lovin this stuff thanks Richard.
My first car cougar witch I still own has a 351 cleveland in it 4bbl carb headers and 4.11 gears ⚙️ drove it all through high-school in the 2000s lol there wasn't a Honda Civic Camaro or anything my buddies had that I couldn't bust in the quarter mile
We still had the 302 Windsor until
1971 in the xy falcons after that it was all cleveland 302 and 351.
It's so nice and refreshing to see someone who loves all kinds of engines. I came here for the awesome shootout between really close sbc and sbf because I understand and appreciate both, and at the end you mentioned the B16 honda cylinder head flow as an example. I just today put together my forged CSS b18c1 bottom end with b16a3 top end turbo engine in my del sol so as an enthusiast of all kinds of stuff I appreciate what you're doing here. Keep up the awesome videos
thnx-I love them all
Wow! Half the alphabet and numbers from 1-10!! And here I thought keeping track of camel hump vs non camel hump Chevy heads was complicated!! LOL!!
Suck squish bang blow
Yup, I’m a mustang guy and never really been a Honda fan but I’ve been a Richard fan forever soooo.... I can’t hate on Honda’s like I used. Or chevys for that matter. They all rip,just different flavors
@@richardholdener1727 dont forget the cobra was alot lighter that the l-88 corvette
My dad had a 70 Boss 302. He had 4 Boss motors setting on the floor. 2 of them were from Holman and Moody. He and his twin brother would go up there often and buy stuff they used on the track that didn't work for them in sustained RPM racing but would work very well in drag racing. The Boss had just 15k miles on it. Most were put on it 1/8th mile at a time. It ran a 7.74 in the 1/8th the early 80s with full interior and nothing removed. It was a stock car except the slicks and some homemade ladder bars. No one knew they were going to be worth what they are now so it was a street race car most of it's life. My uncle bought the car new and my dad bought it from him in 1972 when he got back from Vietnam. He had a solid roller cam motor in it once and it would turn 10k. I dont know how it stayed together at that RPM. I guess Jack Biggerstaff and Pat Pendleton at Carolina Crankshaft had the balance spot on. It had 427 FE with Holman and Moody stuff swapped in it for the longest time. It ran a 7.07 with it with the same suspension setup. Sadly he got hooked on pills about 5 years for he died and sold the car for $68k and sold the rest of the Boss motors and all the spare parts for another $25k. I worked on that car with him my entire life and was repeatedly promised it when he passed. Then he up and sold it for dope money. I would have paid him for the car but my wife had just had our second child and I was still recovering from the doctor bills from that. It's all I wanted in his will but the power of drugs proved to be to strong. My cousin has the car now and told me he would sell it back to me for what he paid but I don't know if my heart is into paying for something that I was promised my entire life.
My experience with classic Mustangs ended up poisoned as well.
As much as I try to like the modern hotrods, my mind automatically compares or converts any connection I make with the old Cars.
I’d give anything to have the memories you and your father had, as mine died in 69, at 22 years old.
I know my father would have been all about racing, as there was a hi-po Falcon, a 58 Chrysler 300(donor car), and a pale yellow 67 z28 with black stripes parked in the driveway when he passed. I didn’t realize how fast time goes by as my time as a young man with motor mania came and went.
You have a golden opportunity to make better memories with your kids as this time too will pass before you know it…
Best regards…
I promise you’ll regret not taking the chance to own a car that you love, I know.
Sad story. There are too many sad stories.
I have one, but it won't bring the car back, my sister in law destroyed it.
Hurts to hear man. You may never get your dad's 70 back but that doesn't mean you shouldn't go out and buy one of your own and build with your kids. Recently bought a 64 1/2 D code after going 14 years without a Mustang. Couple weekends ago my 14-year-old daughter (what a coincidence 14 years) comes out in the garage pulls up a stool and helps me rebuild a Edelbrock. I was in shock. Kind of like when you see a deer really close and you don't want to spook it so you don't move too quick. Yeah that's how I was with her lol.
People make promises. People lie. People are garbage
67 mustang when I was 17 was supposed to be mine and ended up lied to.
Excellent video. No excuses or blaming or finger pointing, just the truth. Both cars are something we will never see again in that form.
Thats the reason behind Bob Glidden kickin ass in a 351 Cleveland! Those high flowing heads!
Hi flowing heads along w hi velocity swirl and tight squish goes along way in performance
a feller could stick his fist in them they were so big. lol. (okay maybe I'm exaggerating a wee bit)
A great starting off point for sure but his dedication to experimenting was hard to match not to mention his work ethic, course we all knew that . tires me out just to imagine it .
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link and the Cleveland exhaust ports don’t flow exceptionally well. Cleveland heads look impressive but they aren’t very good without a lot of reworking. When NASCAR mandated factory castings the Small Block Chevys clobbered the Clevelands so bad Ford dropped out of the series for a decade.
@@timsharpe3498 exactly...Glidden was way ahead of his time. The r&d he did was amazing! The things he did back then was pretty much the technology we have today. He dominated so much with the 351 cleveland that gm started cryin, nhra came up with the 500” rule. They also pretty much had a engine program ready for them, they made Glidden start all over and he still came back and dominated again! 351 stop light to stop light was known as the “big block killer” back in the day
In 1979 I had 69 Z28 with the DZ 302 4speed and 410 gears. It was fast. I never raced a Boss 302 but I bet it would have been good. Keep up the great content. ✌
I had a restored 69 z . I could hang with my buddies 67 427 435 h.p. vette and a host of other cars . I had a general kenetics cam . Same spec as the offroad cam and had it balanced. 780 holley and factory headers . 410 gears .
I don't think a lot of people know what a beast the DZ 302 was.
@@charleshenshaw9099Pooch more like it. Dead off the line and didnt have anything unless you were shifting around 7000 rpm,s.
@@twolak1972 - It was never designed to run at low RPM’s. It was designed as a trans am engine and ran like hell above 4000 rpm.
I have to admit I'm a die-hard Chevy man but I knew in my heart the Chevy small-block lacked in the cylinder head Department show enough you showed us that is true my hat's off to you Richard!
Manny R. : As an endurance engine, the DZ 302 always had a better rod ratio, better block with thicker walls and better rods, deeper pistons which were very strong and the CrossRam intake...a much better design. Remember...it was a Ford guy who told you that. Its not all head flow, its about the whole combination. Chevies can handle lots of detonation without killing parts...a wedge has a wide range before incipient detonation becomes "oh sh1+ that sounds like heavy det.." bang...
Chevy guys never can handle the truth that's why I love Ford and Ford guys not to mention dodge guys always ready to give credit where credit is due.
Victor Sanchez : Ford had to save money in plant costs and that happened with a reduction of wall thickness from about 240 thou to an average of 187 thou according to Ak Miller. The bore thickness eventually got taken down to 130 thou, not in the Boss engines but certainly the common Cleveland 351s and the Windsor 351s. Bulkhead thickness and low Brinell numbers below 249 is why the Boss 302 had to have blocks thrown in to make it win. All the other automakers never went as close to the thinwall concept as the Bill Gay iron foundary rationalisation of 69. The crank unbalance was another factor. So sacrificing peak cfm on the LA's, AMC's, ĎZ's and Trans Ams wasnt an issue. Ford even epoxied the lower intake floors of those 2.7 sq inch intake ports. Chevy added extra carburation and got better reliabilty, but missed out on peak power. The Trans Am results prove that fact beyond reasonable doubt. Credit where credit is due to the Chevrolet and Mopar and AMC engineers for not penny pinching grey iron from race V8 blocks. Ford kept the 289 strength, but it wasny quite enough because the valve gear and springs in Boss engines is way overworked compared to the 1.5 ratio Chevy. Point after point. Ford guy admitting the weaknesses of the FoMoCo Boss 3 0h 2.
@@deanstevenson6527 thank you for the feedback, but you should know I'm a 55 year old man I've been tinkering with small block Chevys for quite a long time now and yes hands-down the small block Chevrolet makes a pretty tough little engine among other things, but I moved along I no longer Tinker with a small block Chevrolets I'm all about the LS stuff now, but perhaps you can shed some light on y GM never did anything about those Niemiec cylinder heads!...
Nobody takes into account the test was done with 30 CFM smaller opening on the carburetor and not a dual cross ram DZ 302 would rap 7000+ RPMs where the hell's your ford in a million pieces cuz you're going rap 4500-5500 max
Despite being a Ford guy and the comments about its superiority here, these engines are more or less the same in terms of power. They’re almost in lockstep with each other in this graph outside of the extreme high RPM range one should rarely, if ever, live in. I do see some divergence on the low end, and would appreciate seeing the curves from 800 - 3000 RPM, which is where street engines spend 75% of their time. In the end, I’m impressed by both the Boss and DZ 302 motors, and didn’t expect them to be as similar as they are
LOVE this ole school stuff!... yeah yeah, I know your turbo and LS videos have great contents. But, like the Pontiac stuff, THIS is the stuff I DIG. As I mentioned in previous comments, I ran the 327 fuelly engine for years on the drag strip.. always the underdog, and struggled to keep up with everyone's big inch engines, but everyone still appreciated it. For whatever reason I don't see enough modern information about these old setups. Maybe everyone writes them off as too Antiquated to care about. But YOU ARE the man Richard. Thx
These two engines made Trans Am the best racing series back in the 60s 70s. Even better than NASCAR.
Next up. Chevy L-88 427 versus Ford 427 🤞
Which Ford 427. There is an assortment of them to choose from.
There is a reason tractor pull guys in the seventies and eighties nearly ALL used rat motors.
@@chrismontreuil2206 side oiler 😆
@@cosmicraysshotsintothelight Funny, I have seen alot use the Boss429 aka "Shotgun" motors..
An L-88 is not even close to the 427 side oiler Ford that ruled Lemans in 1966 67 and 68. Not even close
Really cool seeing this test. I had both of those motors back in the 70's. The 69 DZ 302 was ordered as a factory crate motor about 1971, cost like $600 if I remember. It was left stock but we balanced it and added a tunnel ram and two 600 Holleys. Had it in several cars, 60 Corvette, 70 Nova SS, 65 Chevelle. Ran great. Sure could wind high. It usually saw 8500 everytime I left the driveway.
The Boss 302 was also stock, except for the Holley 850 DP I put on. It was in the factory 69 Mustang fastback it came in. Both good runners. Sure wish I still had them....lol
Traded the DZ for a new L78 396 for my Nova. Sold the Mustang for like $1500.
Hey thanks Richard, I watch all your videos. Especially the LS comparisons. Just built a new 408 with good flowing heads. Can't wait to see what triple digit turbo horsepower feels like compared to a DZ.....lol
Richard. If you doing trans am 302 you have to put the. 140. Trans am cam shaft. On ford they had a trans am cam too but I don't have. The numbers. But I know the Chevy cam number. It made a lot of power. In small block Chevy. Ok. If you can get one. Maby a 800 holey. Would work better on both motors. You know the race teams modified carbs ? I believe both 302 made over 500 HP ? Way over okay ?
Weird standered valvetrain fails at 7500
Not enough to matter. Both are awesome!
You have the price right. I bought DZ's and L88's back in the day, lot of HP for the $$$.
@@rodneygodin7773 not the chevy 302
I enjoyed this video, you got down to some of the technical part which is the "good stuff" for me. This was a no BS review of two racing engines from what I also believe to be the best racing series in modern automotive racing history. The Trans-Am Series was responsible for a lot of car sales and a lot of dreams for those who desired a car just like the one that they saw on race day or maybe in a magazine. Having been alive and a Trans-Am fan during that era of factory participation, it was difficult to find a source which allowed us to watch the races and newspaper coverage was scant if anything at all. A subscription to a weekly publication like the "National Speed Sport News" was about the best way to keep track of the events, a magazine sometimes was another source, but without the internet, the latest info was scarce. In short, racing coverage sucked back then.
The final years of the intense, factory sponsorship got really exciting when Chrysler decided to join in and GM's Pontiac Division, (using Pontiac engines), also joined the fun. Then there was Roger Penske's championship winning Chevy team with driver Mark Donohue deciding to go with American Motors in 1970. Talk about a shock to the racing world! Mark Donohue would find enough victories driving the Javelin to create two manufacturers championships, (almost three, but for lacking of one point in 1970) for American Motors. Just imagine, damned fast cars from the manufacturer who used to build slow, clunky, old people's Ramblers. This was great stuff!
There's so much interesting info that surrounds the early years of the American Trans-Am Series; the politics, the exciting racing and the innovation are all great stuff.
Richard, many thanks for sharing what you have accomplished here. Even though this video is a year old, it still remains of great interest in regards to what was happening in automotive history 50 years ago. Keep up the good work, a subscription is well deserved.
Gotta love the AMC's
You got your wires crossed it was 1971 that Penske won by one point to a not factory team Bud Moore team that only Raced 5 races.
Ford Engineers understood the relationship with the Boss heads and cam timing. If they had used a camshaft with a ton of duration, the overlap combined with the huge heads ports would have really killed the low-end torque for a tiny rise in peak power. Besides, they didn't need it. They knew NOBODY had a head like this at the time.
This is back when they put BOSS on something, it really was the BOSS.
still is
The newer boss engine runs circles around this engine. It is an extremely capable engine capable of spinning to 8k plus with the stock engine and can take 800+ rwhp with forced induction. Id say it is well deserving of the boss name even if it didn't come from 1969.
It has been said in the past that Ford did a lot of testing in the cams they choose for that era of engines. Well modern day dyno results are plentiful and show how good Ford did with cams they ran in their engines. Especially compensating for some of Ford's so called bad exhaust ports. Well just bump up the lift and duration on that side of the cam. Take for example lift and duration of a stock 1969 351 windsor. In the day this was a go between engine, semi performance, many a cougar and mustang had a 2.75 rear end with this engine. But the cam worked well for its designed application. Street driving.
@@michaelharris748 when motors pull like that, its a whole different experience. I have a 347 in my 67 fastback with a billet crank. Redline is also 8k. Anyone whom hasn't experienced that usually shit a brick. There are 10k motors around here also though. So I dont race...
Michael. The new Boss is a Windsor not a Cleveland head.... But with 2018 technology.
Great comparison. The factories needed to keep the listed power under 300hp for insurance purposes. The SS Camaro had a higher premium than the 69 Z/28 I once owned from 70-74. In stock form, it had a lot of power. That car was fast. The air pump on it for emissions was horrible... it never seemed to work well. So, off it came. Power went up and so did fuel mileage. Eventually, I modified the car a tad. It had a 3.73:1 posi rear end, Lakewood bell housing, a 50lb flywheel with a clutch package that took a lot of experimenting. I used the Hurst Comp Plus shifter as well. Eventually, I found an air hood for it, had it painted to match (dusk blue with white stripes) and it looked great. It had 1 5/8 Hooker long tube headers, a mechanical advance distributor, Accel coil, and worked on the 780DP to provide the proper amount of fuel. That work on the Holley came after a major valve and head job. Everything from screw-in studs, double roller timing chain, to everything being ported & polished and CC'd the combustion chambers. They also used stronger springs, push rods, and a special angle on the valves. In the end, it was seeing over 410hp. I had also used Koni adjustable shocks on it and was planning on getting these over-the-counter parts: rear discs; stronger sway bars; and maybe the cross-ram dual 780 manifold. That car was fast and handled very well. Of course, it's gone now, as I sold it to return to school and never wanted another money pit. 🙂 It was great fun, though, and I learned a lot.
No cars were ever under rated for insurance--total myth. They were all over rated by 20% by using the overblown GROSS bare engine dyno numbers which dropped 20% once all the accessories like air filter, belts, and muffler were put back on which was the real NET hp.
Gross was banned after 1971. Your 410 hp motor was only doing 325 net horsepower in the car.
I must admit that a Ford 302 / 5.0 has a fantastic sound. I dunno what makes them sound so good but they definitely have a unique unmistakable sound
The firing order. I believe gives it the sound
@@codyramos3200 and it's a Ford.
@@codyramos3200 firing order port size could be plenty of factors
Finally, someone else acknowledges this fact.
@@codyramos3200 That's the best guess I've ever come up with. 351 can sound nice, but it ain't no 302.
I had a 70 Boss 302. It had been rebuilt with a hydraulic cam for driveability after piston skirt broke. It was a awesome motor.
I've been waiting a long time for this comparison. These engines came about when I was in my early 20's. Unfortunately, I lost friends to both of the engines when they underrated what these engines would do. The engines got quite a ways ahead of the chassis during that time frame. The "tunnel port" 427 heads had to be seen to be believed in those days. You could throw a cat down those storm drains. The port was actually too large and one of the problems with it was to keep up the velocity thru the ports. More ain't always better......I keep telling my wife that, but she's not convinced..... I loved the 30-30 Duntov cam.....tighten up the last for more lift/duration.....loosen it up and let it clatter for less of both....depended on the traction of the track that day.
for sure. i'm lucky enough to have some pics of one. holy crap no joking on those ports.
Tunnel Ports were serious business-even more so on FEs
@@richardholdener1727 Yep, 427 tunnel-port built for NASCAR
Geez. I saw tunnel port heads 2 days ago. I wont tell where.
I think your wife mite prefer a big block Ford😜
I love that comparison. I am surprised the Ford didn't win by more but then the cam was considerably smaller.
The lift was multiplied by 1.73 rockers. Chevy had 1.5 rockers. That's more lift at the valve. Ford camshaft have a larger base circle and larger lifter contact area on the cam. This gives more duration. It's not about the size of the cam but how long the valve stays open.
What about the AMC 304 that raced SCCA, I'd like to see the actual specs on it
The 304 that AMC used in A/T Racing was a one off engine made up of specials parts.
The rule change for 1970 stopped the Homologations rule so any high bred engine could be run. This made for more competition but there were no rules for production like there was before 1970. The sad part of this was the exotic parts couldn't be purchased by the average joe! The manufacturers told us the parts were available right up to the time we tried to buy them!
@@mylanmiller9656 the stock 304 made like 150hp(in the jeep)....race cars had nothing todo with the stock engine
Not a production engine
@@darrellsomers5427 lets see, I had a 304 in a '75 Jeep, '73 Gremlin & a '71 Javelin & were great for not being a production engine that came from the factory that way
Now ya went and done did it! There's gonna be millions of people screaming "Chivy is the best, no, Ferd is the best"! This is the best content testing legendary muscle car engines. Can't wait for more!
In the end, all those cars are getting turbo junkyard LS motors anyway! 😃
NOW people will be screaming which is best? It's been going on since Chevy and Ford were invented over 100 years ago.....
@@bthllp your dizzy AF. No one is going to ls swap a Boss 302 Mustang genius...
@@robinesavage404 I've seen crazier things happen, so it's possible. Does it make sense if you wanted a keeper, perhaps not, but some person who might be interested in cheap fast mods might, would I or others with brain cells? But more than likely not no matter what. But I have seen crazier things happen. Best wishes.
All three US Manufacturers had there good points, Chevy were real good at getting low cost Horse power to the masses, They made good high performance car s for the street! Mopar and Ford liked to do there winning on the Race tracks! If you were a Mopar guy and wanted to spend the money, the Hemi was installed in many a street car1 Ford on the other hand never offered real race engines to the public but serious racers could get them! Ford proved they could win in every kind of racing in the World!
The fact that you went from competing domestic straight to the b16 was great. True tech and no stomping on one verses the other.
I started with a 72 impala at 15 and into Toyota and Honda's by 19 and have expensive with most anything driven....
It's just nuts and bolts in different designs so whatever works, i make it work better
Finally, something empirical. Back in late 1971/early 1972, one of the major car magazines (e.g., Car Craft) took bone a stock '69 Z28 and '70 Boss 302 - '69 Boss wasn't available - and did a side-by-side comparison making incremental upgrades like timing, advancing the curve, headers, traction bars, rejetting, and maybe a couple of other things. These were all relatively cheap upgrades commonly made to muscle cars back then that did not involve opening the engine itself. Both cars started off with runs in the mid-to-high 14s stock and ended up in the high 12s, with the Boss being a little quicker. As I recall, no single upgrade made a huge difference by itself, but each actually solved issues that the cars had coming from the factory (e.g., axel hop, non-optimal timing, allowing the heads to breathe). I don't recall the axel ratios but it's probably safe to assume the Z28 had the standard 3:73 and the Boss a 3:91. I also can't recall the tires but I think it's also safe to say they were OEM type (e.g., no 50 series Mickey Thompson's). More than anything, I believe this shows how muscle cars coming from the showroom were easily and relative cheaply pushed into 1/4 times we see with today's Mustangs, Camaros, et al. I myself put a 800 Holley spreadbore on my '69 SS Chevelle along with a distributor kit. Made a decent difference but the biggest performance difference came from just finding a decent mechanic that knew how to tune the car. Amoco Super Premium didn't hurt either.
These two, along with the T/A Challenger/AAR 'cuda 340 are my all-time favorite muscle car engines, bar none. Sure, the big crazy big-blocks were the dragstrip kings, but these motors sounded SO GOOD, revved to the moon, and were light enough that the cars they were in could actually handle. Love them, if I had the money, I'd have one.
It's mind-blowing that the factory 5.3l LS in my Colorados (a 4WD Z71 and a ZQ8) made right around those power levels, and considerably more in the mildly tuned condition they're in now.
Your Colorado doesn't have 350 to 375 hp.
Don't Kid your self there were plenty of well tuned small blocks running at the Drag strip!
I can remember My buddy's boss 302 running 13.86 and putting a 14.2 second 440 Charger on the trailer.
@@mylanmiller9656 Oh, I’m not, I’m well aware of what small blocks can do and prefer them. There’s really no arguing, though, that the gnarliest (L88/LS6 Chevies, Hemi/440-6 Mopars, and 428/429 Fords) big-block cars were kings of the dragstrip hill. The 340 Dusters/Darts/Demons were probably the fastest car per cubic dollar ever made, and regularly outran fairly healthy big-block cars. Same with 327/350 Novas to a slightly lesser degree. I’m sure small-block Fords have a similar example (Falcon? Comet? Not really a Ford dude, so I dunno, but I imagine a good 289, 302, or 351W would’ve made those move just as well for just as cheap.
@@kkoch666 Neither do these engines, but my 2WD makes about 350/350 at the tire. My 4WD might make that at the crank. Factory, they were 300/325 at the crank. Also remember, post ‘71(? Maybe ‘72?), automotive horsepower and torque started being measured via net rating, not gross. That means accessories, full exhaust, etc, so probably a nearly 10% difference. A factory 5.3l actually probably makes a smidgeon more power than a factory DZ302.
@@The_sinner_Jim_Whitney
I bought a 1966 271 hp 289 Mustang, My best friend had a 1968 Mustang GT with a 390. My car was stock but the guy that had it had it well tuned. My car had 3.89 gears his had 3.91 gears. When ask him if he wanted to race he said, are you kidding I have 40 more HP than you. We would pull side by side until 4th gear then the 289 would pull ahead!
I had a ‘66 Mustang we rebuild the engine to K specs, then added an edelbrock performer intake. It ran pretty strong, but the shop teacher at school had a set of 351w heads he gave me. We milled the water ports and did a little matching and it made a huge difference in performance. Head flow is everything!
There's a video on RUclips showing the founder of the SAMTECH school(in Texas,if my memory serves me correctly)putting his stock DZ 302 on the dyno and it made 365 hp,proving those engines made about 360 in stock form.Great video,by the way.
This is a great video and even though I've had a couple of mustangs over the years , the 1969 Z28 is the Camaro I would love to own. You can really appreciate both of these engines and the cars they were designed for.
Glad you enjoyed it!
This is what we're talking about. Good job. I'm still pushing a small big block shoot out.
Great test Richard! As a Ford guy, this Chevy vs Ford 302 dyno test was more about the differences of the engine builds;
Pistons- flat top vs domed
Rod length- Short (1.7) vs Long (1.9)
camshafts-duration vs lift
Heads-port size & airflow at different lifts
It's interesting how the longer rod engine did not compensate for a weaker flowing head (@ .500 lift, about 40cfm I&E). Did the short rod help low end torque, even with the large ports? Was the flat top piston worth more power than the 1/2 point in CR? What was the 'area under the curve' between the two camshafts-did the shorter duration/more lift prove more beneficial than more duration/lower lift?
Please more testing of this nature-rod lengths, compression, camshafts, intakes, header, boost vs back pressure, intake air temps & boost.....Thank you Richard!
The Chevy has more torque
The Chevy had more torque if you would have erased them the Chevy would have busted that mustang all day long
@@DWO619 YUP I SAW RODGER PENSKES CAMARO BEAT THE MUSTANGS ALL DAY LONG.. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY IT WAS RONNIE BUCKMAN THAT WON OVER PARNELLI JONES IN 1968 AT KENT RACEWAY IN WASHINGTON… I BELIEVE MARK DONOHUE WON IN 1969 …THOSE WERE THE DAYS..! THE REASON THAT RODGER LEFT THE BOWTIE BOYS WAS THE SAME STORY… CHEVROLET BEAN COUNTERS WOULD NEVER GIVE ANY SUPPORT SO HE SWITCHED TO AMC…😫
@@Naoj2024 yeah I believe you're right and those were the good old days
Can't believe how similar the two engines were all things considered
It’s also been noted several times that one of the better engines from back in the day that gets very little recognition is actually the Boss 351. That same set of Boss heads on the 351 proved to make a really nice torque curve and some pretty good power.
On YT channel -340 vs the world, the Boss 351 was tested and was the small block that made the most HP and torque of all the small blocks from the late 60's and early 70's.
@@thomasblankinship98 Yes it did and very impressive for stock. Alot more potential with just the stock block and heads.
And sort of oddly, powered the fastest production Mustang in the 71’ Boss Mustang
It would be interesting to see testing focused on the bottom end of the curve, especially one investigating how changes in duration of the valve opening event affects torque when all other cam specs are equal (i.e. a "factory spec" cam with duration/LSA of the factory hydraulic stick, but in solid roller with the most aggressive possible ramp profile). Maybe the torquey Ford 460 you showcased a while back? It would make a great starting point. Slam the valves open and closed as quickly as possible, but with the duration, lift, and LSA of a stock bumpstick. Will the quicker event opening equate to better low-rpm cylinder fill? Will it result in any changes in dynamic compression? Will it help? Will it hurt? Will it do nothing? Are the trade-offs in valve train stresses worth any potential gains? I ask because there are a lot of us out here who appreciate that throttle response and off-idle torque are more important than overall HP for everyday driveability and enjoyment. It's also a nod to those who might be building a motor for actual work use versus a weekend toy which will never see a trailer hitch.
Keep up the good work. Vids are supremely interesting and the info is great.
The Boss 302 used a 4 bolt main, screw-in freeze plug block. The intake valves in '69 were 2.23" and 2.19" in '70.
Great video! You've resurrected 50 years of contest....
Shows why the 302 Cleveland in Australia was such a popular motor up to end of production 1982,
You know it's not the same thing right? Different block. The 302 cleveland was the same block as the 351c. The Boss 302 had a block based on the 302 Windsor. Much smaller engine, and 4 bolt mains. And the the 302 clev run 2v heads.
Aussie Closed chamber small port heads.
andrew jolley
Same deck height.
I have 351 ‘d a few 302 Cleveland here in Australia
@@andrewjolley3620 The Australian 302c is exactly the same block as a 351 c,Just different crank and rods.
@@ibast1 oh really 😏 gee I'd never have noticed if you hadn't pointed it out.
The reference was to 302 cubes and Cleveland heads as a production motor but without the extravagant cost, how many boss 302s did you ever see back in the day let alone nowadays, the 302 was a popular choice cheaper to license, slightly better fuel economy cheaper insurance, way less carb issues ( until they did 4bbl automated 302 later) and guys could push it past the wifey in a lot of cases, the 4V heads were not a big asset, don't know about you but I've done and seen a lot more successful 2V heads with 4V valves in my time than 4V stuff, the only 4V deal I was truly impressed with was a genuine ph3 motor with 13:1 pistons and ported heads running on Avgas or acetone as a street motor that my mate still has, there are others I know but the old 302 Cleveland was a winner and I'm a chevy guy but I did a lot of Cleveland's for people and mates, I also did a lot of F truck Cleveland stuff ad no one wanted to touch them back then
Haha I remember reading this story when it came out and yelling at the magazine for not using the cross ram intake on the dz ... always wanted to see a Smokey 302 dyno’d 👍🏻
I heard that the smokey engine with the cross ram manifold made well over 400hp and close to 500hp with racing fuel.
These numbers came out of one of his how to build small block Chevy books by the master
just like this dumbass Bob that keeps talking s*** about the 302 Ford they didn't even make a 302 Chevy in 1970he thinks I need help you bobby needs to do some research if there' was a 302 Chevy in 70it would have kick the s*** out of it just like you didn't 67 68 69 where as did win title I 70 parnelli Jones driving but they lost it again and 71 to a javelin that's got to hurt couch
@@vulcan-900bobber7I know they should have used a 780 Holly just to do it with the the original carb was a 780 but the two cross riam carburetors were 600 CFM a piece that motor would kick the s*** out of a Ford 302 BS my dad worked for Ford and sold 19000 Ford motors and it wasn't because they were built good it's called job security and a piece of s*** crank. You can have can have all the head flow jn the world if your motor doesn't stay together ain't gonna do shit 👍
@Jeremy Thompson Well, at the same time, the 409 was being limited by what plagued them in NASCAR. The bottom end wasn't stout enough to turn the high RPMs, that the short stroke was willing to produce. That was the main limitation to that series of engine... I guess if they had good rev limiters back then, they could have aimed for higher peak numbers.
@@mikegimple4725 Dude you do know Chevy recalled all the 454's in 1970 right...
It’s always been impressive to look at Cleveland heads, intake ports you can put your fist in.
Yeah, huge bloody holes with no velocity. Maybe ok @ 8000 rpm but you ran over the crank at 7000.
@@ldnwholesale8552 Facts
supposedly boss 429 heads can pass a tennis ball !!
@@ldnwholesale8552 Ever think about 13:1 compression....
@@ldnwholesale8552 I owned a 1971 Boss 351 back in the early 1970s. My favorite Sport was hunting down Z/28 LT1 Camaro's. I owned that car for 12 years and was never beaten by a 350 Chevy of any type! if My engine had low end power the Chevy had less because they always got beat!
I'd be curious how the 70 340 six barrel does in comparison. They didn't have the greatest flowing heads and had to be de-stroked to compete, but they were kind of a neat package.... I've got a couple 2bbl Clevelands and the heads are impressive even on the 2bbl engine...
I bow to both the Boss 302 and the '69 Z-28 302; never driven either but did get a ride in a '69 Z-28...………….Wow! (College days back when they were new.)
My foster dad had one in cherry red with the black stripes.. I've never been in something so loud in my life. The smell, the sound, the feeling... It was just awesome. I just felt badass in it. 😎
Had friends with and drove both cars back in the day. The Z28 was a more street-able car with slightly better low end. The higher top end power of the Boss 302 was never realized in factory stock cars due to the rev limiter Ford installed on the cars. And if you disconnected the limiter you lost your warranty.
Great comparison. The different engineering philosophies are crystal clear here. Chevy guy here but total respect for the Fords and Chryslers of the day. I am getting ready to revive my 67 327. The engine came in a 1968 Chevelle. It had a factory 4-speed. It was a stripped down car with no power options. It didn’t even have a console. Oddly, it had 462 2.02 heads on it. Unfortunately, I sent the engine to an engine builder many years ago and never knew what camshaft it had originally installed. It might have helped solve the puzzle. It did have a cast iron, square bore 4 barrel intake. Nothing really spelled L79.
Richard, I love your videos. They are concise and you don’t have brand blindness. Thanks again.
I had a 69 Z/28 and street raced many a 69 & 70 Boss 302. It was always a toss up, depending on gearing and tires. It was the same for other 69 Z/28s too. I remember back in the day Sports Car Graphic (Could've been R&T, or MT?) had a head to head test with both cars, and it was basically a dead heat. Still have the magazine someplace too.
I had, and still do my 69Z. It was an enigma then, meaning it ran very well for what it was, with either the DZ or the 70 LT1 I put in it later. I made lots of money with that car. I didn't have toss ups with the Bosses. But again, other Zs did from time to time, but those didn't run like mine either. Not sure why mine was faster. It was an awesome time. But in mags it was so close and some tests were better than others. We even had a local 70 Z-28 that ran LOTS faster than all the others, not sure why on that but it did have 4.10 gears for some of that time. I have some other cars too, but that Z will be with me until my death and I hope that's still 20 or more years out, but I still love it, it kept me out of a lot of issues other kids had time for that got them into trouble. Best wishes.
The Boss 302 had bigger heads and valves than the Ford 428 and Ford 429, that were available around the same time.
Which tells you that it wasn't built the way it was intended to run, in stock trim.
The Boss 302 had Cleveland heads with Bigger valves ,your comparing apples to oranges! There were versions of the 428 and 429 FORD that would blow away cars with Boss 302s ! . The 428 FORD and 429 were 2 altogether Separate BLOCKS! ,428 FE series 429s were Lima BLOCKS! .
Sad when NHRA decided to add weight to all the Boss 302 and Cleveland combinations. Great test thank you.
Tom Hamilton - All sanctioning bodies punish Ford so the other guys can compete. Always have, always will.
@@cavscout62 , well explain NASCAR and Mopar for us . . . . . . I mean really ? ? ? ? I do like Ford engines though , used to play around with them years ago . The BOSS 302 would run d stay together ( actually we never did blow it up ) in excess of 10,000 rpm stock ..We just improved the ignition and put more carb on it . Used to be the formula for horsepower was the three C's . Can , Carb and compression . All sorts of ways to ' cheat ' that formula to get more and more on up into the thousands when it comes to horsepower and torque of an engine..Trick is to keep them together . Why now the ' techie ' engines or the new generation engines operate primarily below 7000 rpm . Me ? I like to near the power band between 12000 to 15000 rpm . . . .But that's just me . Speaking of Fords , the ' Clevor ' was popular back in the day at the dirt tracks a was fun on the street . Cleveland heads on a Windsor block a they worked well . It'd be fun to do this combo and then throw a stroked rotating assembly in the mix and toss it on a dyno . . . . . There were several 351 Cleveland heads back in the day . Yeeeaaars back a friend of mine put together a Merc outboard engine in a outlaw dirt track car . . . . . .Flipped it so it actually was ass backwards as far as exhaust and intake or carbs . Whipped everything until it was banned . Some of you ole guys might remember this running at tracks in Wisconsin . . . For a short time anyway . Thing being we were worried about low rpm torque . Found that wasn't a problem as you could push start it by hand . Get it rolling engage the ' box ' and as soon as it fired it'd just take off . The fella he built it for had some yahoo tell him it fuel injection was the way to go . . . . .They put it into a small Triumph a TR3 ? ? Can't recall except it was a Triumph small and light . The fuel injection was all screwed up and the owner with his fuel injection ' hero ' brought it to my buddy d her an them off. Sorry about the book but you got me remembering . . . . .LOL ! Down here in Florida a few years back at the swamp buggy races there was an old boy who cut a BBC in half for the 4 cyl class . Was long before the Chevy V4 . . .It was a winner but the chain drive system wasn't up to the challenge. Be well .
BOB GLIDDEN still managed to put lots of competition away in pro stock back in the day when guy s were still using factory block s an heads no matter how much weight they threw at him . gotta love the clevland style heads
cavscout62 It went both ways and still does today. If one becomes dominant, they start to handicap them. Chevy throughout history is handicapped time and time again. Dodge has been handicapped, and Ford has been handicapped. Would love to just get the politics out of racing and let them all just have at it.
Back in 1989 I was trying to build a street car on a college kid budget. I had a buddy working at a local speed shop so I used his discount to buy a Crane Blueprint DZ302 camshaft and dropped it in my 030 over 350 sbc shortblock, with a pair of old school hand ported double hump heads. These weren't no race heads, just 1.94 / 1.5 valved heads with a rookie port job. I topped it off with a 2x4 tunnel ram with 2-600 holley vacuum secondary carb's. This is all not matched parts but this car pulled like a mad man to about 1000 ft with a turbo 350 auto, 488 gears in a 1976 camaro. This video sure brought back memories of how I used to plan a build, budget first, never put much into parts matching. lol
The same buddy from the speed shop had a old Chevy II with 307 shortblock, doublehump heads and DZ302 camshaft that was a screamer to about 7500 rpms daily and never had any issues with too many rev's. Funny how now we just spin the LS motors and don't worry about the pistons anymore either.
Why am I just now getting your channel recommendation? You should have a million subscribers.
Back in the day, it was reported that the Australian Cleveland 4v heads could flow more air, out of the box, than stock open chamber Big Block Chevy heads.
4Vs were never cast in Australia. We only did blocks and 2V heads in either closed (302) or open (351). Blocks were all based on the square (not D) D2AE casting. The only way you could tell that it was Aussie was from the Geelong Foundry casting logo (GF) as opposed to the Cleveland Foundry (Cf). The iron used in our castings was much harder too, to the point of needing new tooling to cope with the increased wear rate.
By the middle of the XB Falcon model run, the 4V was dropped altogether and all Clevelands were cast and assembled locally. To retain a performance variant, a 4-barrel square bore manifold was first introduced to go with the 2v head, identified by an Aussie part number that resembled the US original equivalent but had "AR" in front of it. So that part would be something like AR D2AE with the AR standing for "Australian Revision".
From XC onwards, another 4 barrel manifold was created, this time with a universal Ford Australia part number that used the year number followed by "DA". So that part number would start with "76 DA".
The reason why the Aussie 4V may have flowed well is possibly due to some blueprinting done by the performance division during the GTHO program. Those engines were effectively Boss 351s but locally developed. Many reported to have 370-380 HP despite an advertised 300.
Thats why the 351 cleveland was called “the big block killer”
@@Joetrout LOL, big block copycat?
@@BuzzLOLOL perfected by ford! BIG BLOCK KILLER! Had my ass handed to me couple of times street light to light. Once in my 66 chevelle with a 396 and my dads with a 454! Made me a believer
Interesting video. Back in late 70 or 71 Hot Rod magazine took a stock 1970 Z28 and Boss 302 and tested both engines with several common modifications. They did identical modifications to both cars, headers, carb tweaks, traction bars, etc. Each time the Boss did just a little bit better than the Z28. You would never have known that from the action on the street. Plus there are tons of affordable parts for small block Chevys, but very few parts for Boss 302s. I had a 70 Boss 302. 0f02g125461
I didn't have trouble with the Bosses but my Z was an enigma too. Something special, not sure what, it just ran better. Made lots of money with it because of that. But I'm sure there were some good running Bosses out there too.
@@kenblack4802 I had two Friends that had Boss 302 Cars back in 1970. One was close ratio 4 speed and 3.50 gear. the other had wide ratio and 4.30 gears. the one with the Close ratio and 3.50 gears was a stone that run high 14 second runs the one that had 4.30 gears and wide ration would run in the height 13 second range ! Ford sold a bunch of cars that were not driver friendly!
@@mylanmiller9656 Those numbers match what we saw at the track also. That wide ratio made a HUGE difference in getting them going. It saved mine but it made me win a LOT of races too with them. Best wishes.
Awesome test! Would love to see the same engine comparisons tweaked out with more cam and heads.
The Ford motor will go over 500 hp with a big cam and lots of RPM. Slap a solid roller in it, some higher compression, and top it with an 850 Holley. If you're machinist and balance guy are really good, it will take 10k for short drag racing bursts. My dad had one and it would make me cringe every time he would launch it at the track or on the street. I just knew I would be putting sleeves or a spare motor in after the rods broke. It never happened though. It spun some rod bearings once but he had a supply of cranks and blocks and an additional 4 complete Boss motors "just in case." He got 2 of them from Holman and Moody. I have no clue how he kept finding Boss 302 parts but people would come by and buy or trade stuff all the time.
@@joeydover
Yup, that's before there were companies like ARP that produced fasteners that could hold the rod (and main) caps in place instead of them distorting and letting the bearings spin.
That Boss was one Bad A$$ character, no doubt about it!
@@joeydover yeah right put over 500hp too a 302 block good chance it will split down the lifter valley seen many Chevy block made tougher than a ford Block
Yeah man..that Trans Am series was epic.
We can thank Richard Nixon for that one, He Forced the manufacturers to stop spending money on racing and start. building crappy American Cars So the Japanese Cars could take over!
Read up on Roger Penske and TransAm.
With regard to my original comment, I have the article right here: 1971 Popular Hot Rodding Engine Annual. Both the Chevy and Boss were purchased over the counter, received at the Autolite dynomometer facility in Long Beach, CA, removed from their respective shipping crates and given a 6 hour run in on the dyno. Both were setup with headers. With both engines stabilized and in top trim with respect to ignition and carburetion settings, the results were as follows: the Boss 302 put out 327 HP @ 6600 rpm and 290 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm. The Chevy Z/28 302 recorded 325 HP @ 6800 rpm and 289 ft-lbs @ 5200 rpm. I thought it was important to get this right for historical significance.
i did get it right-by testing them
The 1968 Tunnel Port 302 :
Ford was using racing as a way to battle test this engine to check for weak points prior to making mass producing the engine ( as we know didn't happen ). Team Shelby and Team Bud Moore were not allowed to build or modify the 302TP. Even engine was shipped back to Ford to be examined. Shelby did build its own 302TP once and won the race, they were told to never do that agian.
The DZ 302 was running heads that were nearly 10 years old by that time. Bean counters wouldn't let them develop a new small block head as focus was placed on Big block hp wars by 69. A DZ 302 with good heads would have been scary.
This is exactly right. The Flint circle track scene back then was absolutely dominated by SBCs with custom ported heads made by guys at the proving grounds in Milford MI.
@@oddmanout7755 The reason the Chevy dominated Oval racing was, all race circuits ban the canted valve Ford engine, because Chevy was to slow to keep up!
@@edmoates2000 you are so full of BS it is not funny , the big block Chevys couldn't even come close to a ford 429 look at NASCAR Winston cup Chevy never won a race in 1969.
If you had a comparable grind to the duntov from the dz302 in a boss it would have been an animal as well. I wonder what a dz with afr heads does
The SB in the chevy Z28 was a pooch out of the hole, it only made high hp at around 7000 rpm. The ford on the other hand had good hp and torque off the line and pretty much throughout the powerband up to 6500 rpms where it made 375 hp , Impressive for a solid lifter SB considering the 70 440 magnum was only making a little more with a lot more cubic inches.
I had a buddy that had the 69 z28 with a 302 and factory cross ram with 2 carbs.How did that compare with the single carb Boss302?
Nowhere near as good as a set of Weber Carbs.
Drove a factory flat topish piston, 71 model 2v Cleveland 4door Torino. Bone stock in the 80's, that thing ran hard! Made me a big Cleveland fan and still love them. Add compression, fuel and cam, those things will make you hate on all other older engine formats.
great job, cool to see the little differences on them. Did you ever hear of Pontiac's effort with their Trans am engine? I read a story about how Herb Adams and a couple of other guys built a 303 cu. in. a destroked 400 block it was supposed to have made some great power.
Absolutely! Poncho Power. That 303 was supposed to be good for 500hp. Watching John Wayne in McQ right now. Beautiful Brewster Green '73 T/A. I had a Black on Black Velour "Bandit" '78. W-72 400 4 speed. Good times.
I remember the "461" casting Double Hump fuelie heads being the closed chamber casting, and the "462" being the same thing except with flat machined ends and bolt holes for accessories to bolt to. I remember the "186" casting heads being open chamber, but it's been over 30 years since I was in that business.
I remember every trick flow or afr head beats all those old heads now. So who cares
I had some 462;s way back in 83-84..64cc with 1.94" intake valves..after I did all kinds of work on them for my 327 they worked very good considering the smaller 1.94" intake valve and a big Sig Erson cam.
@@tedbundy2797 Wow no duh.
Good work!!! Thanks!!! Let us know how else we can support you and keep this great stuff coming!
Dig this channel more and more each episode 🤘🏻 love the change up from all the LS stuff at times too. Heard it explained before not sure if you did a video. Not to familiar with Ford. What's the story of the 351 Windsor and Cleveland, what's the benefits of one to the other. Lastly cle-sor?
Drill 2 water jacket hole in right place and put Cleveland heads on 351 Windsor block big cam and 750 double pumper and u got a screaming windsor
Nice work. It's so hard to find people testing actual stock or very-near stock performance from that era. Regardless of which cars were superior from the factory, NHRA stock classes allow tons of mods the winner in any comparison you find on RUclips is simply the one that is the most modified.
Awesome cars
Can we see a DZ style 302 SBC with Vortec heads and roller cam combination ? That’s what I want to build.
A ford man!😃 finally... nice job. But I would love to hear them on the dyno
we did not do video on these motors
Awesome video! In the future, how about a 350 chevy vs a 351 Cleveland vs a 340 mopar vs a 360 AMC, just a build of each to show HP Potential for each, Thanks.
Might do the 1970 LT1 vs 1971 Boss 351-tested both of those
Please do it!
AMC 360 oh yes! Or even better the AMC T/A 304 engine.
I also think a boss 302 roller cam vs a 5.0 coyote to see how close it can get.
We already know which engine is the boss on that.
The Ford FE engine family is a family full of Icons. The 352,361 edsel , 390, 406, 427 top oiler, 427 side oiler , 427 cammer, 428 thunderjet, 428 police interceptor, 428 cobra jet and 428 super cobra jet were and still are excellent engines with a reputation for being excellent reiable performers. Their exspensive to purchase and build but well worth the money in my opinion
Forgot the 410.
You know your Ford engine's!
GG+GSC?
Great comparison video. Glad to see you guys are still using the Adjust-A-Jets i sent out to Steve years ago.
Back in 1969 you didn't order parts, you ordered the whole engine from the dealer. We ordered 3 of the BOSS 302's and before we took them apart to change cams, rods, pistons, etc, we took one of them to the dyno and put a Holly 750 on it. We were shocked when it made 355 HP right out of the crate from the dealer with the timing at a total of 36 degrees. We just started it up and ran it in and then pulled power. Odds are when these were put together you probably did more care than an assembly line would. But the 290 HP was a joke, and only here for insurance. FYI, when we were done with them our BOSS 302's back then made about 525 HP @ 7,000 RPM
Add a little more compression, a cam, a 850 carb, and the Boss 302 came head came alive. My dad had 4 of them, 2 of which were Holman Moody. They had some funky splined rod bolt nuts on those 2. We roller cammed one and his driver turned it 10k. It ran a 7.74 in the 1/8th on motor in the late 70s early 80s in an otherwise stock Boss 302 Mustang. The only thing else it had was 4.56 gears, some homemade ladder bars that didn't require cutting to be added and some slicks.
Those 302s were really good engines back in the day. How about a comparison with modern aftermarket parts (generally really cheap in the case of the SBC)? Can the old design come close to what the modern engines make, using AFR or Trick Flow heads and an appropriate cam, for instance? Performer RPM Air Gap for the SBC? I’ve seen a few builds that come close in peak power, but usually require more cam to get there, and lose in the average power/torque comparison...
There is a naturally Aspirated Fox Mustang with a347 that runs in the High 8 second range, called Quarter Horse 2! It is proof the old engine can compete with the new ones. He runs faster than most Boosted!
Ford kept Improving the 302 through the years! , not to mention the Boss, with Roller rockers and Roller lifters and more , from the original Version!
I have wanted this for so long. Thank you richard!
Here's an idea modern Vs muscle.
Build a small block 427 clevor and a 427 ls. Equal sizing solid roller cams, compression and intake. Stay with factory style casting heads no after market big dollar cnc stuff.
Run with efi. This has been done before but the bias has always been to the ls with bigger Cam higher compression and after market heads
See the engine masters magazine at around 2010. the ls is slightly better but the cleveland for a traditional motor makes all of them pale in comparison.
@@Scootermagoo check the mag again, compression was low on the ford and the Cam was smaller all round . I'm look for complete un biased options.
@@francisstone8221 See Nascar then, the cleveland ford lived a long time in unlimited trim, see the t-birds of bill elliot setting the talledega record and stuff and billy glidden basically making a mockery of small block racing.
@@Scootermagoo Nascar only ran the Cleveland or boss motors as long as ford produced a homligation car with them in it. It's always been based around production models.
Prostock is a total different ball game, Bob Glidden was the ford man but not always with a Cleveland.. Displacement rules change so that motor disappeared.
People really don't realise how much control GM has over motor sport in general. Like when a famous Canadian born Aussie racer turned up with a rotary at Nascar and it got banned after its first race. My whole idea behind this shoot out is to show the antiquated ford on a equal footing to the modern Chev. No one I can find has done such a thing, even with the modern motors ford racers still have to use a antiquated all though well developed Windsor based motor in all but some road racing classes, even the the Aussie supercars still uses Windsor power against the ls.
Francis Stone I’ve never seen this Clevor that some refer to. The Cleveland and Windsor blocks are completely different. The heads of a Cleveland will not bolt to a Windsor no matter what unicorn kit some guy says will match up the water jackets. There were two styles of head available to the Cleveland separate from the Boss 351. They were either open chamber (lower compression) or quench(higher compression and considered the most desirable). These also benefited from 2.19 intake valves. The Achilles is the pedestal style torque down rocker arms. Ford remedied that in the Boss heads with adjustable rockers. If you’re interested in reading on this engine series Ford called it the 385 series.
My uncle Sal has an original 69 DZ302 Z/28 4 speed, he bought it new in Niagara Falls Ontario Canada in the spring of 70 its a dark olive green with black stripes and interior, it has over 100,000 kilometers on it and never been apart.
Back in the day around 1976 my brother had a DZ302 with a big holley double pumper carb sitting on a high rise edelbrock intake, it had corvette heads, corvette cam and crank, 12:1 popped up pistons, and a magneto distributor and a 221 Muncie trans hooked up to a shortened 12 bolt posi with 411 gears, huge Mickey Thompson tires in back with cragers, this drive train was in a 1971 single cab shortbed Datsun pick up. It was street legal and his daily driver right out of high school. It was cool looking and a real beast!!
Wow that is a great comparison, the Boss 302 was fantastic but so was the 302 Chevy.
Son, you are gonna drive me to drinkin'
If you don't stop driving that
Hot...rod .... Lincoln.
Imagine what a ‘69 Chevy 396 with fuelie heads (and a Hurst on the floor) makes for horsepower!
@@brianc9642 imagine with cleveland heads on it ooof would be a sick build
👍. Great song
@@davidlefranc6240
Hey! Why not? They have an equal chance of fitting (as long as there is a welder nearby) and the flow could make killer numbers!
@@brianc9642 you mean the one that's waiting for me tonight behind the 7-11 store?
Never bet against any flavor of Cleveland.
I would. I beat my share back in the day.
Even the Browns ?
I would!...I never saw a Cleveland beat any SBC...plus fords are notoriously unreliable!
@@nathanielbolden5053 I guess you're unfamiliar with the engine masters challenge.
Nathaniel Bolden your just the kinda guy I went looking for on Friday night.
Nice shout out to the Honda B16 heads. People make fun of them, especially old timers, but they were great factory pieces with lots of tech from racing and F1 built in. Goes to show that racing development trickles down to the everyday stuff.
Love the comparison test. We all know you're the man when it comes to dyno testing factory and aftermarket engine combo's that keep you glued to our phones! And I always learn something new or get an idea to try it out myself (on LS engines mostly). But always maintain a professional point of view without being biased. As soon as I heard in the video using a cheaper, non-factory carburetor, I knew you were going to dial in the carb vs throwing it on out of the box. But I'd love to see a follow up with you opening up the fuelie heads on the Chevy dz since the cam has more degrees and swap to 1.6 rocker arm. I think it'll close the HP gap at 6700 RPM's while still being a smaller rocker arm ratio and cylinder heads ( depending on how much grinding you do to the heads). We all know ( well most) that cam lift isn't everything.
Again, awesome comparison Richard Holdener !!!
WHY WOULD I MODIFY THE DZ302?
I'm really interested in what the factories did back in the day to get the horsepower up. Camshaft, compression ratio that sort of thing. There was also the AMC 304 in those races as well.
74' TransAm champions, AMC, Behind Roger Penske's leadership.
Strating in 1970 the Javelins used a Special Service Block. Basically a 360 with 390/401 lower ends that allowed for 4 bolt mains with a destroked crank. The 290/304 never had the meat in the casting for 4 bolt caps. At the same time Dodge and Plymouth were using destroked 340s. Pontiac did offer a Short Deck 303 in the first edition of the Trans Am to get around the displacement limit.
Richard, I'd really like to see the Ford take advantage of a larger cam. Maybe sometime you can put a beefier cam in there for us?
I did modify both after running them stock
@@richardholdener1727 well, you do a lot for us here on your channel, but even if you went in different directions, what you done and the results would still be cool to see of each engine. I love the channel!!!
AMC got into TransAm racing with their 304 Javelin and with Mark Donahue driving, did remarkably well. I'm curious as to what type of heads were on the AMC engine and how much power it put out. Was the Javelin really that competitive by itself or was it Donahue's driving skills which made the difference?
The Javelin had a 304 but it was not the 304 that was sold to joe public. it was a de-stroked 360 with heads from a 390 super stock. The reason AMC won in 1971 was because all the other factory teams had quit backing race teams. AMC was the only team with Factory money behind them.
I just recently purchased an original 1970 Boss 302 from California to restore. While the body and interior are in great shape the motor definitely needs rebuilding. I will share this video
with the fellow who is rebuilding the engine.
Change to a 5.4 rod.
I don't know what the factory backed 1970 Mustang Trans Am cars such as Parnelli Jones made for horse power, but a Boss 302 motor producing 475 horsepower usually had problems with piston cracking after several Trans Am road races on the motor.
That was because of a poor design by TRW, these pistons were replaced by ford on Warranty!
I had two buddy's had Boss 302's both engine had piston Crack and replaced on Warranty.
I've been 235mph in a 1980 Camaro with a destroked DZ... (large journal offset ground to small ).. 2.9" stroke 4.030 bore... ( 305 limit at Bville )... ( ran 250 Nitrous shot for 70 seconds )
Nothing sounds like a 302 at Full song for miles and miles... just freaking Music!!!
Yep Turk-modified ones work well
Keith Turk : Wow.Saw a write up of your Maxton cement trip. What an insane ride..Love your.dedication to the SBC. And the BOP 215! Both you and Richard have seen the 227 mph plus end of the Curved Horizon. Thanks for being on line and sharing the shear fun of Detriot Vee Eights. Dancin' Knitting Kneedles for.Eva guys. 200 Clubers!
Nobody mentioned airflow at high RPM if they don't know s*** about it cudos2u we know the Dz will destroy it!
@@richardholdener1727 Best part of this is the question of which is best stock is answered with factual data. I love these video's... can't tell you how much I've learned... keep it up
@@keithturk104 so obviously you like ford doesn't matter that the numbers from 67 to 1969 were totally dominant in Chevys favor!! Team Penske quit using Chevrolet in 1970 or It would have been the same story!! Still they got their asses kicked bye the javelin and AMC in 1970 show who's the real boss ?it wasn't the 302 ford!!!or they would have won a championship in any of those years??? I guess you guys haven't been to a drag strip and watched pro stock racing Ford hadn't done s*** in 30 years 😢 I believe it was Bob Gliddendon't like the same story in NASCAR I don't know how many championships Chevrolet has compared to Ford but the numbers are staggering
Richard, really good video! I'd like to see a similar video on the Boss 429 (guess you'll be testing it by itself). Most people realize that it wasn't the beast on the street that they thought it would have been, but learning WHY would be interesting, and what should have been done to that beast to howl!
The 428 SCJ would outrun a Boss 9 on the drag strip any day of the week. The Boss 9 had way too much head for it. It took forever to get it wound up. It is very lazy out the gate due to the fist size intake ports. A Boss 460 would have been a different story though. The extra displacement would have been very beneficial to the head design and flow characteristics.
Beast on the streets that's a good one, the 1970 Buick GSX STAGEII Baddest MUSCLE CAR EVER BUILT and hit the streets!! My brother had one, Would eat my 68 Chevelle SS396 L78 Convertble 4spd up like I was standing still. read up on these beasts pure race cars with class.
@@erichb4021 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 A Freakin' Buick LMAO! - I guess you never drove any REALLY FAST CARS!
@@misters2837Just that comment alone tells us you don't know much about fast "muscle cars" lol
@joddaley6510 Never in my LIFE saw or drove any really fast "Buicks" of any decade...they were cars for "old men" that's a fact.
Amazing how the large port 4V head can still work well with small Ci motors. Yes you need some rpm for it, but that last 1500rpm is where everyone really wants right? lol
Also 350-375hp range for back in the day is no slouch , especially outta small Ci.
@69JANKS - The '65 Cobra Daytona coupe with a small block 289 and 4 Webers cranked out 390 Hp - enough to propel that car to 197 mph down the Mulsanne Straight!
The Chevy had more torque it would have bust that mustang all day long and on top of that Ford mustang was known to break the piston every time they were junk
@@DWO619 you must have just ignored the Dyno results of both engines in this comparison. The Chevy had slightly better torque down low but the Ford more than made it up mid range to red line.
Back in the day like 1977 or so my brother had a DZ302 with a big Holley double pumper carb, high rise edlebrock intake, it had a corvette cam and crank with corvette heads and a magnetto if that’s how you spell it, and of course headers and a 221 muncie trans. Had a shorten 12 bolt posi with Big mickey thompson tires in the back on cragers rims and a pair of slicks for the strip. Oh btw that engine and drive train was in a single cab 1971 Datsun pick up. It was street legal and his daily driver in the hot rod area out of high school. I don’t think he ever lost a race to my knowledge. That thing looked super cool and It was a beast!!!
Yep my 302 heads back in the day were angle port with titanium valves and the ports were mostly devcon . They were the key to making hp . I bought them off a G gas car that a fellow sold the Monza and I would up with the heads and tunnel ram and the 660 carbs . I remember reading the info about the big port heads off a 302 Ford and how they were to big and I just never saw a down side from superior head flow . I remember Pete told me that he got 98 and 99 percent ring seal and when the motor got to 92 the motor got pulled down . Lot of times it was the valves . When I bought the heads he removed the hemi valve springs as I only spun it to 7800 as I used a dirt track bottom end
Well I was right. But it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be for the little chevy.
Now I'd love to see that same
DZ 302 with a good set of Darts or Brodix heads on the dyno.
we modified both of these motors later
@@richardholdener1727 awesome.
Keep up the good work.
the shift points for the chevy was higher in torque so cornering was probably its strong point. were as, the higher horsepower for the ford probably help in the straight aways.
Darth Giggity in your dreams. in reality it’s those chevys doing the oil burning rod nock dance lol.
@@coyote5.02 and your coyote is probably going to brake the oil pump gears soon with its plastic oil pan. ford over priced plastic junk
chase sierra knock knock whose there. Chevy. Chevy who. Chevy knock. Whose Chevy knock. Chevy about to knock a rod through the oil pan lol.
For some reason my dad knew Ford's made crazy horsepower.well back in the 50s my dad was a kid and he and his brothers experienced with Ford's and Chrysler's and Chevy's. But some reason Ford made him a believer when he bought his first 63 Ford galaxies 500 he knew exactly what to do to beat all the guys in town.the dealer didn't like it but he made history. Peace
Interesting comparison of big head and moderate cam vs moderate head and bigger cam. I suspected the Cleveland heads would kill low end torque in comparison but it didn't.
PERFECT SYNOPSIS...TY...And mentioning Honda...icing on that cake man!!!
It would be interesting to see these engines in some Era correct cars with a factory drive train and see who is more efficient over all with power to the wheels
The 9in rear lost more HP than Chevys.
We sort of know that from the magazine test from the day. Sure there are the suspect outliers, but most will give you a close idea who was able to put the power down better or rather utilized the power curve better. Just comparing GM cars you can see the power curve was the biggest factor. The limited gear ratios favored a broad power band, which is why it's viewed that torque is king.
@@cuzz63 and the 12 bolt Chevy couldn't hold anywhere near the power the 9" Fords could. Hence the reason why most serious race cars are running a 9" 😉
@@robinesavage404 thier running a 9" in thier mustang with a sbc or bbc with a glide😉
@@chasesierra2162 because they couldn't find a GM body worth putting their sbc, or bbc in. And I assume you are talking about late model Mustangs, so they would be running the 8.8 rear. Which alot of GM guys also run in their chebbies.
Love the videos! This one was great. I have a 69 Z with the factory crosram.
those R cool
Great video. You should show the difference between chevy 350 and ford 351 Cleveland. And also the difference between ford and chevys 427 motors. Probably would hurt alot of feelings lol
The cleveland would smoke a 350!
the 427 ford would embarrass the 427 chevy.especially the 427 sohc cammer...at least a 100-150 horsepower difference..
My first car was a '69 Z/28, from back in '77 and I still have it. I had it B&B'd by a guy who built circle-track engines, and he recommended not doing any headwork because he said the valves (2.02) were really too big for the street, and low-end would suffer with more flow. After discovering a cracked head we put another set on that had been ported and polished. I wonder what it would pull on the dyno
those valves and not too big and that motor really needs porting
Back in the day, 1971, I knew these two guys that liked to race for money on Friday and Saturday nights but they had never raced each other. One had a Boss 302 and the other had a 427 Corvette. One Friday at work my friend with the Vet said him and the Boss guy were going to race just see who was really fastest. Well Monday morning my Ford buddy and I couldn’t wait to hear the out come . When our corvette friend came through the shop door we just said “well ?” He just hung his head .....I think he had few excuses too.