Tigers,
Jim Barrett wisely cautions care in a 302 crank swap in a 260, and from what
I've
heard, he is correct.
In fact, the same thing can apply to the 289 use.
As a matter of interest, I have heard that Ford had a problem in the 302 itself.
The longer rod apparently allowed piston slap at the bottom of the bore, but was
OK until about 4,000 rpm. At this point, I am told, the pistons were getting
slapped pretty hard, and brushed by the counterweights. Couldn't do much higher
rpms with the early smog versions, like my Mustang II.
When Ford came out with their Hi Po 302 version, they got special pistons from
TRW
that had shorter reinforced skirts and perhaps re-located pins to allow higher
revs, and reduce crank contact.
Before the flames come, recall that I said "I have heard". I believe the source
to be reliable, but have absolutely NO personal knowledge. BUT, I am certain
that
there are others on the list who have had direct experience with early and late
302's and this issue, which would apply to the use of a 302 crank in a 260, 289,
and even 302 without the piston fix. If high rpm's are intended.
I really don't know of anyone who does NOT intend high rpms. Since my valves
float at about 5,000 rpm, I would probably be safe {9->.
Does anyone have validated information on this, or I am just repeating an urban
legend?
Steve - (trying to be cautious for a change.)
--
Steve Laifman < Find out what is most >
B9472289 < important in your life >
< and don't let it get away!>
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/_/_/_/__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/
_/_/_/
|