Bob,

I'm getting the feeling "Qwik 1" better watch out this year. Bob's a bruuin something down there in Fall Riv. What's up? Haven't the blonds been keepin you busy enuf. Might have too send you another one to distract ya.

 

I just ordered the 165's because their web site states no modifications are required. I did need to order new rockers, but I was told nothing else needs to change - jeez, I hope the website is accurate.

 

Bob, what is your motor setup? Most guys, including myself have gone the route of the 185's. The 205's are generally race application only or for large stroker kits. The 165's are generally for stock motors. But the 185's are good for modified plants with middle of the road displacement. So again I ask the question: Why the 165's?

 

I will state this again in this thread for the record:

I have yet to find a set of aluminum heads that worked correctly with the stock length pushrods. Do a search of other threads on checking your pushrod length. I have installed AFR heads with both roller and flat tappet cams - each took custom length pushrods. Not the end of the world, but an added expense. The heads did perform well.

 

Randy, it is funny you should say that. My engine builder had a small delay because they neded to make custom push rods for my application.

 

I believe it is AFRs contention that if you order the 165cc PEDESTAL mount heads, STOCK cam and use the STOCK rockers, the pushrods should be fine.

 

Bob,

If your picture of the head is accurate, you'll definately need to look into pushrods. The stock setup is for rail type rockers and that head is set up for guide plates. The guide plates require hardened rods. The nice thing about the 165's is that the small valve reduces the need to fly cut the pistons.

Follow Randy's advice on checking the pushrods and I recommend checking the valve to piston clearance as well. You didn't say you were changing the cam but now is a good time to find out where your combination is.

As for performance, from the magazine tests I've read, the 165's are capable of more than 400 HP on a 302.

 

The pic is of the stud version, they have a pedestal as well which in theory would use stock pushrods.

 

Brian I seriously doubt you’re trembling at the prospect of my little project with a Snake capable of the mid 10’s... in street trim yet... and pulling that front end off the ground in second... with those ground shaking 7 grand shifts. But you brought a smile to my face.

I’ve always known a good set of heads could produce decent street power for the amount of dollars invested. I just didn’t know which set of heads from all of the good ones out there would be the best set for my SB application. And I was looking for bolt-on power with as few extra mods as necessary. It was this Car Craft Tech Article 400 Horsepower With A Stock Cam! By M. King that got me to thinking about the best heads for my application. I found the info I was looking for. CC obtained 400 HP from a bone stock short block with as few extra mods they could get away with... without even a cam or pushrod change! That article made my eyes pop out.

My setup consists of an Explorer GT40 replacement block with unmodified iron GT40 heads. The only mods on it were the addition of Ford’s E-303 cam, Crane 1.6 Rollers and HD Valve Springs and Guides. An Edelbrock F28 and two Edelbrock 1404 Manual Choke Quads were recently bolted on to the upper end. Period. We figure we’ve got about 325 HP right now... the same figure we used before the upper end addition. I know the Ford “E” cam isn’t the best available but I’m going to try to get away with leaving her in.

The results in this article in FordMuscle AFR's 165cc SBF Head Flow Testing by C. Asaravala leaves little doubt at how well they perform. This is also a head that it seems one could get away with without having to notch the pistons as opposed to the 185’s leaving the 165’s looking like a true safe bolt on proposition.

Randy, Jerry Comp Cams adds a little “Pearl in the Oyster”. The CC Tech guys didn’t even have to change the pushrods probably because Comp Cams offers the perfect product for this application with its aluminum adjustable 1.7:1 roller rockers (PN 1054), which bolt onto the stock cylinder-head pedestals and allow easy valve adjustment with a pushrod-cup adjuster nut. They had the valve gear swapped in about 15 minutes (they didn't even have to change the pushrods). Jerry, “...the 165's are capable of more than 400 HP on a 302.” That’s what I’m hoping for!

CompCams® Adjustable Aluminum Pedestal Mount 1.7 Roller Rockers PN: 1054-16

Save for the addition of Comp Cams 1.7 adjustable rollers and maybe better flowing headers I hope to escape having to mod the block too much further with the end result of an additional 100 HP at the crank! At least that is what I’m hoping for finished up with a little fine-tuning on the local dyno.

Phil that sounds like a decent deal for someone who would want to use their stock cam to really keep expenses down.

So Dan you see... my motor is essentially pretty close to stock. That is why the 165’s look so good. With flow performance like that why go to the 185’s if I’d have to have the pistons notched or replaced adding further expense? Did you have to notch your pistons with the 185’s? And what are your other engine specs?

Anyone running the AFR 165’s and if you’re running the 185’s did you have to notch your pistons? Anyone get away without having to notch ‘em?

Edited for grammar... and photo addition.

[ February 05, 2004, 04:02 AM: Message edited by: BobAruba ]

 

Just thought I'd use a generic AFR Head photo. The plan is to use their pedestal mount heads.

 

I used the AFR 165's with the 58cc non emission stud mount. Spend the little extra money and get the upgraded springs they offer. These heads are the best.

 

Bob,

A couple of things to watch here. The 165s have the smaller valves so you don’t need to recut the pistons to clear the larger 2.02” valve heads. However, if you haven’t flycut the pistons for extra clearance, check for piston interference if you go to 1.7 rockers. The lift on an E-303 is considerably greater than a stock cam and you might run into interference problems with the 1.7s.

As for pushrods, did you buy the heads with ARFs # 8032 Hydraulic Roller Spring upgrade package? If you did, it includes .050” longer valves and will definitely require new pushrods. New pushrods are a very good idea in any case. The stock pushrods may not take a permanent bend but they are not very rigid and will flex a lot with more aggressive cams. This will result in very unpredictable valvetrain behavior, including causing you to get less valve lift than the cam is supposed to have among other things.

Over all it sounds like a good engine package for a street driven car.

Have Fun,

Kevin

 

Kevin agreed HD Springs should be considered a must have item. You used the AFR 1399’s? If you did you’ve got some serious street/strip heads there. Do you mind sharing your engine specs?

KevinM I haven’t bought the heads yet but they will be AFR’s. Do you think I might be able to get away with the Crane 1.6 rollers and “E” cam I have now… probably requiring a pushrod change? We’re just trying to change as little as possible maintaining reliability… but now you’ve got me thinking about the possibilities maybe requiring a pushrod change. I never thought I might also be considering reinstalling the stock cam... along with a new set of pushrods.

Any thoughts on the best least expensive reliable solution using at least the “E” cam and the HD Valve Springs and Guides already installed with the addition of the AFR 165cc Heads on my 302? The plan includes the eventual purchase of the AFR 165’s (60cc PN:1472). Thanks for any more feedback.

Edited to reflect the correct intended part number.

[ February 04, 2004, 10:35 PM: Message edited by: BobAruba ]

 

Hi Bob
I have a set of 165's(PN 1472)on now.I went with the large camber..trying to keep the door open for a blower in the future and wanted to stay around 9.0 to 1.I'm very happy with them.Right now I have a "X" cam and am looking for even more.My bottom end is not stock.The 165's are a sweet head for you application.The "E" cam just aint gonna cut it though...you will need a new cam.Fast Fords and Muscle Mustangs recently finished a several month series of articles documenting many different heads on several different shortblock combo's.The smaller Comp Cams Xtreme energy Hyduralic roller cams with AFR 165's produced the HP you are looking for.I believe the cam they used is Comp Cams PN XE264HR the specs are 264/270 212/218 .512 lift on both sides with a 114 degree centerline.You will have to check clearances but this cam should easily fit
with no piston mods.In the past I have run a "E" cam with 1.7 rockers (which comes to a lift of about .528) on a stock shortblock with no clearance issuses.The XE264HR should fit no problem.BTW if get a chnce you should read the first couple of installments of the MM and FF articles.These cover the smaller heads on a near stock configuration shortblock.The amount of info avalible from the articles is huge.Pay particluar attention not only to peak flow #'s but to the overall average flow.You will see that the highest peak flow did'nt always make the most power,and that the AFR's cosistently produce the highest average flow and the best HP.

 

I edited my above post to reflect the correct intended head part number that’s in my plan... the AFR 165cc Street Head, Pedestal, 60cc PN: 1472. I tried to post too quickly before I left for work.

Smitty did you have the 1472’s installed when you ran the “E” Cam and the 1.7 Rollers? Were the 1.7’s CompCams adjustable rollers? I’ll have to check out those articles from FF and MM. Much thanks for the info and your feedback.

[ February 04, 2004, 11:05 PM: Message edited by: BobAruba ]

 

Bob,

The AFR 165 heads, in my opinion, are one of the best “bolt on” items you can add to a stock 302 motor, efi or carb. Have you ever heard anything bad about them??? A little more money than the other alum heads but they come CNC ported from the factory and flow better than most. They also should be o.k. for a 331 or 347 stroker if you are thinking of going that route later on. Combine them with the Edelbrock RPM Air Gap manifold, Ford Motorsport F cam, and the FFR 4 into 4 headers and you will have a motor that can put out some honest HP. The stock bottom end and forged pistons are fine to handle the HP you will generate. The standard valve springs are o.k. for .550 total lift and up to 6000 rpm. If you want to spin your motor higher or change your cam choice to something larger than the F, get the spring upgrade. I wish I had upgraded the springs, but will do that later on. Right now I’m very happy with the power produced with this setup.

 

Bob...No I did'nt have the AFR's on then.I Had a set of GT40P heads on when I was running the "E" cam and 1.7's.

 

Bob,

You have a number of choices here. The standard spring set on the AFRs should work fine with an E-303 and Crane 1.6 rockers as long as you don’t go over 6,000 RPM.

You can probably run the stock AFR heads with the E-303 and 1.7 rockers and have no problems. (Even with 1.7s the lift profile is less aggressive than a Comp Cams XE hydraulic roller with 1.6s).

If it were me, I would change the heads to AFR 165s (stud mount, not pedestal), use the E-303 cam and spend the extra $100.00 or so for better pushrods of the proper length. If the stock pushrods turn out to be the right length you could keep them at this stage. (Pushrods are easy to change later). If you are pretty sure you will build the motor further at some time in future, get the 8032 spring upgrade now. (Remember, you get better, longer valves with it as well). It will cost more and be a lot more work to change it later.

First build the engine like that and try it. These are light cars and you may decide you don’t want any more power. You haven’t mentioned which rear end (3-Link, 4-Link) you are using and what rear tires you plan to use. If you are going with 15” wheels and BFG Radial TA tires, this engine will have you spinning the tires all over the place, more would do you no good. If you are thinking 275/40-17 Michelin Pilot Sports or Nitto Drag Radials, then you may want a little more power down the road, but you can get that with a cam change later without having to pull the engine so you don’t need to do it yet.

Kevin

[ February 06, 2004, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: KevinM ]

 

Smitty your SB sounds like a winner and I’ve yet to find those FF & MM articles you mentioned... but I’ll find ‘em. I hope I’m not making a mistake by trying to get by with the “E” Cam that’s already installed with the new planned setup. Most impressive in the above-mentioned Car Craft article was... they used the stock cam!

KevinC I haven’t planned on stroking now or in the future. The immediate goal is to obtain at least 400 honest HP at the crank... without stroking... without using power adders... naturally aspirated... maintaining a stock bottom end... with a reliable 6K-RPM Limit.

“The AFR heads have CNC-machined 60cc chambers with oversized 1.90/1.60-inch stainless steel valves, which are the largest that will generally clear the valve reliefs in the stock pistons and a mild camshaft without modification. These heads should be good for a camshaft up to about 220 degrees of duration at 0.050-inch lift without any piston-to-valve clearance issues, but it's always a good idea to double-check.” –M. King

AFR 165cc Heads’ CNC-Machined 60cc Chambers

KevinM my IRS rear end consists of a caged Ford MKVIII (aluminum carrier) 8.8' rear end with a fresh Traction-LOK and gear changes of 2.73, 3.08, 3.27, 3.55, 3.73:1 available (3.27:1 presently installed and I like ‘em), high strength, high horsepower pre-shortened axles, custom designed rear adjustable anti-sway bar and ProShock Coil-Overs. My rear street rubber consists of the BFG T/A Radials in 295/50SRX15’s and another set of Halibrands with Goodyear Eagle Sports Car Special Slicks LWL in 26.5-10.5-15 for the rear.

I already have Crane HD Valve Springs and Retainers installed but as you stated AFR’s spring upgrade sounds more complete. I’m going to check with AFR’s Tech Support to ask them for their opinion as to whether or not I might have to have the stock pistons notched (which I would prefer not to do) using the presently installed “E” Cam with a new set of 1.7 Rollers... remembering we’ll still double check the clearance. And if newer and better pushrods will add to reliability... so be it. I don’t want to have to cross my fingers every time I shift at 6 grand. But tell me KevinM why might the stud mount be more advantageous as opposed to the pedestal mount heads for my application?

Thanks guys for your feedback... it is appreciated...

 

Bob,
Stud mount rocker arrangement is simply stronger and much more adjustable. It's also more stable, and rigid than pedestal mount, especially if you add a stud girdle.

Since you already have the Crane roller rockers in a 1.6 ratio, I'd stick with that setup and the E303. You'll find out if you need to add shims to adjust for preload when you put it all together. That's your means of adjustment vs the adjustable pushrod cups on those Comp rockers in the picture.
Check with AFR, but I also bet you'll be able keep your stock pushrods. You should check the wear pattern to be sure.

If Car Craft can get 400hp with stock cam and 1.7 rockers, you should be able get that with E303 and 1.6. I wouldn't change to 1.7's if you already have the 1.6's - I'd change the camshaft before I did that and with your dual quad setup, I'd consider a custom camshaft.

There is some power left on the proverbial table with a different camshaft, but don't expect a ton more. Most of it would be upwards of 4500rpm and the torque peak would follow.

 

What Wurf said...

 

Hey Randy, How's the build coming? Need to get over again soon.
Alan

 

Bob,

You need stud mount for the adjustability. Pedestal is the factory system and it works fine with carefully engineered parts in a production environment where everything is designed to matching sizes. The minute you start changing things you need to be able to make adjustments. You also need stud mounts to mount the roller rockers you want to run.

Beyond that, I would say that Wurf has covered it; with the exception that because the #8032 spring package comes with .050” longer valves, I think you may find you need longer pushrods with that combination.

Good Luck,

Kevin

 

Bob,

As a suggestion, I would recommend that you go to AFRs website: http://www.airflowresearch.com/ and read three articles in the Ford part of the articles section.

5 Will Get Ya 4, Part 2

Pulse Width -vs- Power Valve

Sibling Rivalry

These should give you a good overview of what is possible with your engine and what to expect from various changes.

Kevin

 

Thanks for the info Wurf. Your input is very much appreciated. I’m gaining confidence for this project to include the “E” and 1.6’s already installed... without having to have the pistons notched. Now it would be easier on the budget that could maybe include a stud girdle and new stronger set of pushrods, which might not be such a bad idea... to handle the added stress that’ll be placed in that area. But if I do go the stud as opposed to the pedestal mount heads wouldn’t the roller rockers I now have installed have to be changed too? My 1.6’s are pedestal mounted. Sorry for the lack of my mechanical knowledge.

I found their Web Site but I couldn’t find the head articles mentioned above in MM & FF posted online. I have emailed Air Flow Research, Car Craft and Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords Tech Editors with a couple of questions about my project looking for a little feedback and corroboration. I hope they can find the time to respond with their thoughts. If they do I’ll post their feedback here. But I won’t be able to check my email until I return after spending the weekend at my girl’s house.

Thanks guys I value your input.

[ February 07, 2004, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: BobAruba ]