Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Nees
We have, ancient history. Three were built(that I can recall) and all three were really fast and got the HP factor hit by the AHFS(as it should be). But it was a one body style combo not dozens of different combos spread out over 10 years differentiated by one digit in a casting number or a tenth of a point in compression or .010 valve lift.
|
Just to set the record straight if you are refering the the 2 barrel Ford 302 Billy, over the years there was considerable differances, flat top pistons with bigger combustion chambers on the 78 & newer 302s, dished pistons with smaller chamber heads on earlier engines, different deck heights,14 vs 18 mm spark plugs, stud mount cast iron rockers on 77 and earlier, stamped rockers with "bolt down" pedestal rockers 78 onward, small carb boosters on earlier engines vs large clunky annular boosters on later engines, differences in number of crankshaft counterweights and external balancing (28 vs 50 OZ imbalance .muliple different intake manifolds, , with or without EGR provisions etc. Not "all the same" stuff by any means.I am NOT saying the 2 barrel 302 is not rated soft, I just have to wonder if there would be so much uproar if somebody dug thru the GM classification guide and found some obscure combo with a low HP rating or factor, or if that racer would have "just done his detective work and was a smart cookie for using the guide to his advantage." Maybe the whole thing is a diversion to draw attention away from all the factory built and available new "Big 3" factory race cars, you know, like the Powerglide and Ford 9" equipped Camaro, Challenger and Mustangs that bear little resembalance to the actual street cars they supposedly represent, in equipment, weight, or HP ratings.