DCStory@aol.com wrote:
> I've been told more than once that if I take my 260 engine and replace the
> crankshaft with a 302 crankshaft and the 302 rods .. But keep my 260 pistons
> that I will pick up about 12 cubic inches and about 12 more horsepower ....
> Any truth to that rumor ??
>
> Or is that just another Urban Legend
>
> >^,,^<
> DON in San Dimas
Don,
221/260/289 stroke = 2.87 inches
302 stroke = 3.00 inches
221/260/289/302 rod and crank journals the same 2.1232 rod, 2.4286 main.
221/260/289 rods center-to-center distance 5.155 with 5/16 bolts/nuts
Boss 302 and 289 HiPo use 5.155 rods, but 3/8 bolts, and the HP 289 rod is very
special, costly, and hardly available. C3OZ-6200-C was replaced by C9ZZ-6200-B
and
very expensive.
But, the quoted numbers (from "how to rebuild your SMALL-BLOCK FORD", by Tom
Monroe) specifically cautions ---221, 260, 289 CID can interchange---"Not so
with
the 302, Boss 302 or 351W engines. A 302 crank has to be replaced by another
302
crank. Likewise with the 351W."
Now, he does NOT say a 302 can't be used in a 289, but deck clearances and deck
height are different after the '72 302, which is block related, and not all due
to
the change in rod length AFTER the '72 302. But he does caution that the sum of
the crank throw, rod length, piston compression height, and deck clearance must
not exceed the block's deck height.
Buy the book. It's worth every penny. Likewise- "Performance Tuning the
Tiger",
Chittenden -Repro's at Sunbeam Specialties.
Steve
--
Steve Laifman < Find out what is most >
B9472289 < important in your life >
< and don't let it get away!>
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/_/_/_/__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/
_/_/_/
|