289 and 302 heads, are they similar or more different than you think

[mummert]

https://youtu.be/Ov0TsDSrRnE

[pbf777]

         Yes, very informative video, particularly to aid those not so familiar. 

         But I do feel that the generalization that the inlet port on "all 302 ("base") heads are the same" isn't really correct.  For the most part "very similar", yes, and I suppose as in any form of communication perspective and relativity is crucial, but if you've ported enough of them you'll realize the "same" might not be the best representation.   

         Scott.

[mummert]

 Be more specific about 302 heads if you can.  Your response is very vague, you gave no casting numbers no specifics, nothing that could be helpful.

Example (The E5TE heads have a more layed back short turn than the E7TE).

[pbf777]

        My intent was not to be at odds with anyone, rather perhaps to add to the discussion in the sense that there are "some" differences in the inlet ports, yes perhaps only mildly, but still "some" differences; as you apparently also understand as you presented your observation of the difference in the short-turn of the two examples you mentioned. 

         As far as being "helpful", beyond the demeanor you seem to be putting forth, I'm not sure that many care anymore of these old cast iron examples for the S.B.F. as today one can just order a new aluminum cylinder head that will out-flow anything anyone could create out of the O.E.M. cast iron stuff, weight fifty (+/-) pounds less and spend less money doing it!

         But yes, there are exceptions where this stuff is (still) desired, and in these instances, if you really want the "good" O.E.M. cast iron head example, if there are rules and its' legal, and you can find a (good) set, it's the "C6FE" casting; which presents what I would label as "quite" different inlet and discharge porting, and based on my flow-bench seems to be the better example!   

          Scott.

[mummert]

 
 I'm sure someone can chime in but I don't think the C6fe was sold on any base model production vehicles. Sold as an over the counter race part.  I think in the video we're talking about readily available "base" model port differences between 289 and 302's.
 As far as demeanor, you spoke about generalities and replied giving no specifics.
 I was actually hoping you would give specifics on the differences of 302 ports based on your knowledge of porting many 302 heads.
 Base model stuff, not late model 90's GT40 i.e. Cobra, Lightning or 60's factory race parts. This is a friendly response.
 

[frnkeore]

Geoff, I've owned 3 different K code engines. A '64 Fairlane, 65 1/2 Mustang and a 3rd that I got at work with 2 AFB's and headers that I put in the Mustang. I didn't port any of them.

My question is what might be the port difference between the small valve (1.67 '63-'64) head and 1.78 '65 and later heads? I know the 1.78 heads basically flow ~165 but, what did the 1.67 head flow?

Ford claimed 271 hp, even with the small valve but, I think that rating with be really hard to get with the small valve.

I did port a C6 head, a few years ago and got 196 cfm out of it, using a 1.90 valve, w/o touching the short turn or any of the port, back of the bowl, mostly widening the bowl and working on the valve guild boss. It quit flowing above .500 lift, too. A lot of work for someone that isn't a porter!

[mummert]

  I'm not sure to be honest. The sources for casting numbers and oem valve specs out there aren't very good. I've looked at a couple of references lately that were totally false. One stated that the only 289 heads that had 1.78 valves was the HiPo , and it didn't list the C5ae as as 289 head at all.  I've never seen a 289 head that wasn't C5AE in 1965.  I know some things are regional  so different parts of the country get different things.
 What I'm getting at is that I'm not sure that some of the C3aE heads didn't have 1.78 valves. One of the parts catalogues we have around here said they did.  You can't believe any of the trusty old books out there, you can only believe whats in front of you.

 If the port is the same and the valve is the same you should be close.  THe C3ae might need a little unshrouding if you go bigger than 1.78

[frnkeore]

In my case, I bought the K code, '64 Fairlane in 1967, in Orange Co and had it for about 4 years. So, it would probably have been built in LA. I pulled the engine and tore it down, before getting rid of the car. It diffidently had 1.67 intakes.

Later I sold it and the original K code '65 1/2 engines to a guy in Sacramento that rebuilt Cobra's.