always wanted to do this build just haven't had time yet. I'm currently doing a stage 1 upgrade on my 71 buick 455 in my burnout car over on my channel! like the chevy 302 the buick 455 is an absolute monster that isn't well known. I'm excited to follow the build!
Hey young man, I can give you some unbiased advice if you would like any. You remind me of myself in a way, you like to do things different because you are interested in the history of certain things. Building a mock 302 is not hard. Don’t listen to everyone who follows the crowd and tells you to build more cubic inches. The reality of road racing dictates that you keep your rpm’s up and keep tire spinning torque down. Sure, a 383 will be dangerous near as cheap to build as a high revving 302 Sbc but I can tell you from experience that the fun factor is not anywhere close to a high revving short stroke sbc or sbf. I understand the cubic inch argument but you are not driving a 3500 pound chevelle. Lighten the car as much as possible and with that 302 screamer, you will beat the fenders off the same car with a 383 stroker. On a road course you want to stay in your “power band”. Some will say the torquey engine will always be in that range, and they are right. But when you are going around a corner/curve, you want to have your rpm’s up, and keep your traction. Getting on the gas with too much torque makes you lose traction. Not good. 😂 I’ve driven big block 427 Bette’s on road courses and while I couldn’t stop smiling 😅 you could beat my time with a stock 327 vette/289 mustang (we are talking cars from the 60’s here) with ease. If you are on a road course with long freaking straights…not as many corners/curves, the torque would definitely be what you want. So people telling you to do something different is really being selfish. They don’t understand what you want or what you are going to do with it. If you want a 350/355/383 etc..to run the rpm’s that short stroke 302 will, you can definitely do that. BUT, be prepared to spend big money on your short block. Spinning heavier parts at high rpm’s is gonna cost you big time. Even then, you won’t get to 😊those rpm’s without spending big on top end components. Think of it this way, try pouring a pitcher of water into a garden hose. You can do that. Then, try pouring a 5 gallon bucket of water down the same hose. Doesn’t work, the reason most people don’t “get it” is because they don’t know the math behind how an engine works. This is much more important than “kind of” understanding. If you can’t do the calculations of air flow, cam specs and how/why they work with the volume/head flow, intake, carb, exhaust, bore size, stroke…see where I’m going with this? Having a basic understanding versus actually being able to calculate how each little change changes everything for better or worse, makes all the difference. Simply put, you can’t put in what you can’t get out. Short stroke/small bore, good factory 2.02’s (think double humps here) good cam/springs/rockers (nothing fancy/expensive), cast pop up aluminum z28 spec pistons, arp hardware…7000 plus rpm’s all day long. I’m building one myself right now. I’m also doing a 331 Sbc the same way. That little bit of air volume I’m adding is changing the budget quickly! Remember this, 350 hp in a 2400 lb car is way more fun than 450 hp in a 3600 lb car. Trust me on this. To each their own though. I just hate seeing people always trying to get someone to change what they want to do instead of actually listening and giving advice/feedback that they are actually looking for. We can get you to 8000 rpm’s with just a few attention to details types of tricks for a couple hundred bucks more. Let me know and yes, like some have said, that block has some shady bores. Better have the worst hole bored to see if it’s even possible to use. Blocks are cheap. Finding an earlier small journal block would be even better. Bearing/surface speed will be much slower….think friction/heat/power robbing….
Thank you sir! I appreciate the comment! This is what I’ve been trying to tell people and not just on here about why I’m building the 302. It’s not just about building this to have the most power and torque. I want to build this to handle the abuse on the road course. And be able to continue to handle the high rpm’s with the least amount of stress possible on the engine and its components. If I wanted a torque monster I’d build a 383/396 small block, but that’s not what I’m going for.
If it was a 350 block that means it was a large journal because there was no small journal 350s ever built therefore no it would never have been nor could never have been a factory 302 all factory 302‘s were small Journals there were small and large journal 327’s but there were no large journal 302s
I am afraid you are wrong. The 1969 DZ 302 was a large journal small block with a one year only 3" stroke forged crank. The '67 and '68 MO & MP 302's were small journal small blocks, utilizing a 327 block and 283 crank.
Was just reading latest issue (Feb 24) of Hemmings Muscle Machines and it says 67's were small journal 2 bolts and in 68 went to large journal 4 bolt ,same for 69.
And for anyone wanting to build a poor man’s 302 with much easier to find parts go to your local junkyard and find a 1994 through 1996 Caprice with a 4.3 take the crankshaft and rods out of it, find yourself a Vortech 350 block, put the 4.3 crankshaft and connecting rods in the 350 block with whatever choice of off-the-shelf 350 piston you want and now you have a 5.94 inch long Rod 302 with a factory roller cam block
The L99 was a 4.3. Also known as the “baby LT1”. It rocked a 3.000 in crank and a 3.736 bore same as a 305. Had reverse flow cooling, fuel injection, and front mounted ignition. But to further confirm a previous comment, the first Chevy small block the 265 is also a 4.3 v8. I also had a 4.4 liter 267v8 in my el Camino. It was a dog lol
As a machinist i've seen all this before. Probably not going to cleanup at .040 much less .030. Rust on cast iron isn't like rust on steel. You might not even make .060. Once it's bore it looks good many times then a little wd40 on the bores and magically black spots show up and if you probe with a pick they will leave a void. Sometimes if your lucky it will still be solid even tho it's a rust spot. Good luck.
Hey thanks for the comment. Yeah I’m worried about it. After the cam lobes wore out they just pulled it and i think it sat outside for a couple years then put in a barn. Since it is a true 69 block I hope I can save it but we’ll see
I don’t really get the point you are trying to make. 1: I don’t have a stock 302, so I would be buying all the parts anyways, such as the 30-30 cam, the double hump heads with the 2.02 valves (which will probably need worked over), all the forged internals. I’m “building” one anyways at that point. 2: if I’m doing all that I might as well put a roller cam in it, better flowing heads, a bit more compression, and push it to its max. I mean I am building this to be a road course engine and I’m not looking for insane power but something with a bit more umpf
@@brandt_murphy_garage cubic inches give umpf, you're going to spend a lot of time and money to make less power than a 350. The only reason he did a 302 was to meet class racing rules. Build a 350
why mess with a little 350? why not build a 496 or a 572? Just let the guy build what he wants to build. I'm building a fuel injected 283 because I want to.
always wanted to do this build just haven't had time yet. I'm currently doing a stage 1 upgrade on my 71 buick 455 in my burnout car over on my channel! like the chevy 302 the buick 455 is an absolute monster that isn't well known. I'm excited to follow the build!
Hey young man, I can give you some unbiased advice if you would like any. You remind me of myself in a way, you like to do things different because you are interested in the history of certain things. Building a mock 302 is not hard. Don’t listen to everyone who follows the crowd and tells you to build more cubic inches. The reality of road racing dictates that you keep your rpm’s up and keep tire spinning torque down. Sure, a 383 will be dangerous near as cheap to build as a high revving 302 Sbc but I can tell you from experience that the fun factor is not anywhere close to a high revving short stroke sbc or sbf. I understand the cubic inch argument but you are not driving a 3500 pound chevelle. Lighten the car as much as possible and with that 302 screamer, you will beat the fenders off the same car with a 383 stroker. On a road course you want to stay in your “power band”. Some will say the torquey engine will always be in that range, and they are right. But when you are going around a corner/curve, you want to have your rpm’s up, and keep your traction. Getting on the gas with too much torque makes you lose traction. Not good. 😂 I’ve driven big block 427 Bette’s on road courses and while I couldn’t stop smiling 😅 you could beat my time with a stock 327 vette/289 mustang (we are talking cars from the 60’s here) with ease. If you are on a road course with long freaking straights…not as many corners/curves, the torque would definitely be what you want. So people telling you to do something different is really being selfish. They don’t understand what you want or what you are going to do with it. If you want a 350/355/383 etc..to run the rpm’s that short stroke 302 will, you can definitely do that. BUT, be prepared to spend big money on your short block. Spinning heavier parts at high rpm’s is gonna cost you big time. Even then, you won’t get to 😊those rpm’s without spending big on top end components. Think of it this way, try pouring a pitcher of water into a garden hose. You can do that. Then, try pouring a 5 gallon bucket of water down the same hose. Doesn’t work, the reason most people don’t “get it” is because they don’t know the math behind how an engine works. This is much more important than “kind of” understanding. If you can’t do the calculations of air flow, cam specs and how/why they work with the volume/head flow, intake, carb, exhaust, bore size, stroke…see where I’m going with this? Having a basic understanding versus actually being able to calculate how each little change changes everything for better or worse, makes all the difference. Simply put, you can’t put in what you can’t get out. Short stroke/small bore, good factory 2.02’s (think double humps here) good cam/springs/rockers (nothing fancy/expensive), cast pop up aluminum z28 spec pistons, arp hardware…7000 plus rpm’s all day long. I’m building one myself right now. I’m also doing a 331 Sbc the same way. That little bit of air volume I’m adding is changing the budget quickly! Remember this, 350 hp in a 2400 lb car is way more fun than 450 hp in a 3600 lb car. Trust me on this. To each their own though. I just hate seeing people always trying to get someone to change what they want to do instead of actually listening and giving advice/feedback that they are actually looking for. We can get you to 8000 rpm’s with just a few attention to details types of tricks for a couple hundred bucks more. Let me know and yes, like some have said, that block has some shady bores. Better have the worst hole bored to see if it’s even possible to use. Blocks are cheap. Finding an earlier small journal block would be even better. Bearing/surface speed will be much slower….think friction/heat/power robbing….
Thank you sir! I appreciate the comment! This is what I’ve been trying to tell people and not just on here about why I’m building the 302. It’s not just about building this to have the most power and torque. I want to build this to handle the abuse on the road course. And be able to continue to handle the high rpm’s with the least amount of stress possible on the engine and its components. If I wanted a torque monster I’d build a 383/396 small block, but that’s not what I’m going for.
Looking forward to these updates
Sleeve it. Or better still get a good 350 block and build a 355. Forged crank, H beams rods. Rev it like a chain saw.
👍
You should have pulled the cam bearings and the oil gallery plugs
If it was a 350 block that means it was a large journal because there was no small journal 350s ever built therefore no it would never have been nor could never have been a factory 302 all factory 302‘s were small Journals there were small and large journal 327’s but there were no large journal 302s
69 302s were large journal 4 bolt mains. 68s were 2 bolt large journals when Chevy swapped over. 67 were two bolt small journals
I am afraid you are wrong. The 1969 DZ 302 was a large journal small block with a one year only 3" stroke forged crank. The '67 and '68 MO & MP 302's were small journal small blocks, utilizing a 327 block and 283 crank.
Was just reading latest issue (Feb 24) of Hemmings Muscle Machines and it says 67's were small journal 2 bolts and in 68 went to large journal 4 bolt ,same for 69.
And for anyone wanting to build a poor man’s 302 with much easier to find parts go to your local junkyard and find a 1994 through 1996 Caprice with a 4.3 take the crankshaft and rods out of it, find yourself a Vortech 350 block, put the 4.3 crankshaft and connecting rods in the 350 block with whatever choice of off-the-shelf 350 piston you want and now you have a 5.94 inch long Rod 302 with a factory roller cam block
If I am not mistaken the 4.3 is a V6 not a V8
It's a V6. I ran one in my 97 s10.
@@williamdillingham5781 yes you are mistaken
@@henrysmith8012 yes there is a 4.3 v6 but there is a 4.3 v8 as well the very first sbc was a 4.3
The L99 was a 4.3. Also known as the “baby LT1”. It rocked a 3.000 in crank and a 3.736 bore same as a 305. Had reverse flow cooling, fuel injection, and front mounted ignition. But to further confirm a previous comment, the first Chevy small block the 265 is also a 4.3 v8. I also had a 4.4 liter 267v8 in my el Camino. It was a dog lol
As a machinist i've seen all this before. Probably not going to cleanup at .040 much less .030. Rust on cast iron isn't like rust on steel. You might not even make .060. Once it's bore it looks good many times then a little wd40 on the bores and magically black spots show up and if you probe with a pick they will leave a void. Sometimes if your lucky it will still be solid even tho it's a rust spot. Good luck.
Hey thanks for the comment. Yeah I’m worried about it. After the cam lobes wore out they just pulled it and i think it sat outside for a couple years then put in a barn. Since it is a true 69 block I hope I can save it but we’ll see
@@brandt_murphy_garageMelling sleeves?
Does it have the DZ code in the front pad numbers?
No, it’s a WK block. So it was a 350 255hp for a c-10. But I’m turning it into a 302 for road course racing
Got it thanks for getting back with me. Good luck,!
@brandt_murphy_garage just get another 350 block. There's alot of 2/4 bolt main 2 peice cranks out there. Same with the 1 peice rear main.
Absolutely no reason to build a 302 Chevy unless you want to just say you did. A good stock headed 302 will make 400-420hp
I don’t really get the point you are trying to make.
1: I don’t have a stock 302, so I would be buying all the parts anyways, such as the 30-30 cam, the double hump heads with the 2.02 valves (which will probably need worked over), all the forged internals. I’m “building” one anyways at that point.
2: if I’m doing all that I might as well put a roller cam in it, better flowing heads, a bit more compression, and push it to its max. I mean I am building this to be a road course engine and I’m not looking for insane power but something with a bit more umpf
@@brandt_murphy_garage cubic inches give umpf, you're going to spend a lot of time and money to make less power than a 350. The only reason he did a 302 was to meet class racing rules. Build a 350
why mess with a little 350? why not build a 496 or a 572? Just let the guy build what he wants to build. I'm building a fuel injected 283 because I want to.