snake95

You "bet"? That's supposed to hold some weight?

R6cowboy

iTrader: (3)

Because stupid lazy engine of mismatched parts. Ford already proved that, where do you think they came up with that? By copying what Chevy did with their 302. Now quite asking questions you already know the answer to.

Heater

Way back before aftermarket 8.2 deck height blocks, guys used the 302 Boss block, I've seen them run in the 7's and had never heard a issue of them cracking. The regular 302 blocks, yeah they have a issue with cracking.

They are bad *** blocks, probably a little heavier than what most guys would use now for racing, since aftermarket blocks are readily available and lighter.

zz4camaro1980

I should have been more clear, I agree with you but thought it was a bad analogy/way to prove the point.

Good luck to both of you, curious to see how this turns out. Can easily go either way.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

I already stated the differences in the cam. Which one is better?? Who the **** knows..... The cam is what the manufacturers choose and I would assume they both thought theirs was the best for the application intended.
You don't like the facts. It's why you will try to continue say the boss is better when the facts are they were within spitting distance of each other. The facts are Chevy's 302 won back to back championships and ruled 1969 trans am series. The following year there was very limited support from gm to compete in that series. And having a new car means having a new development cycle.

R6cowboy

iTrader: (3)

I was just messing around with the cam question btw. No worries though man, just between me and you, deep down the Chevy 302 really is the better 302. Don't tell snake that though, he can't handle the troofs.

snake95

R6 knows the only way to shut Hio up is to stroke his ego

ZNix

iTrader: (1)

I'm having dirty thoughts about a 3" stroke 4" bore LQ based motor with ls3 heads... just saying.

big hammer

you can pretty nearly do it by boring out a 4.8

R6cowboy

iTrader: (3)

Too bad the shortest stroke for a LS based motor was 3.27"
How aboot 3.27" stroke 4" bore . Is that still grounds for said dirty thoughts?

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

I never really said which one was better. But if you let the head to head racing results speak for them then its easy to see. If that is how you determine which one is better, then fine. Those are simply the facts.

You're right about snake not handling the troofs.

so how do you determine which one is better?

Guitar

iTrader: (9)

Let the boy be, he's used to 3".

R6cowboy

iTrader: (3)

Honestly, between those two engines, hard to tell. Each has their own pros in a different way, which made them too evenly matched for myself to claim in my opinion which was better.

snake95

The GM 302 fell off the face of the earth after 1969, that's how you tell.

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

I agree. But like said..... if you look at the racing end.....well... it speaks for itself
Lol at snake reaching.

snake95

Hio no likey the facts.

big hammer

And the Cleveland headed 302?

HioSSilver

iTrader: (8)

snakey no likey the facts.

snake95

Throws head specifics on it to detract from the truth, if the motor was worth a **** why did they scrap it altogether?

Ford still produced a 4x3 302. Where's GM's?

You tried, anyway.

codyvette

iTrader: (24)

Y'all will debate for days over **** that should be over in a matter of minutes. They were a great stepping stone for there time but they are both pieces of **** in comparison to what we have today. That's why they stopped making them. You people do realize that these engineers jump ship on regular basis and steal **** from one another constantly, right? The actual companies just pay them. Y'all act like mister Ford and mister Chevrolet are in some great challenge together. They are dead.