stupid question time February 15, 2006, 02:14:19 AM ok just a dumb question in some catalogs Ive noticed the older engines are 302 but the newer ones are 5.0 other then fuel injection whats the difference? Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #1 – February 15, 2006, 02:20:28 AM pretty much nothing, the bore and stroke is all the same, be it 67, 77 or an 87...You're right, they usually call it 5.0 if it's injected, and 302 for the carbonater thing..lol Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #2 – February 15, 2006, 02:22:36 AM :D ohh well that makes sense.so basically they make it fuel injected and call it something different so the parts cost more then? Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #4 – February 15, 2006, 02:51:37 AM talk about real men of genious lol Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #5 – February 15, 2006, 07:23:42 AM Yea bore and stroke are the same BUT there are lots of minor/major differences..#1... Late 5.0 blocks are lighter(and weaker) than the older 302s#2... The later 5.0s do not have the boss on the LR of the block to mount the '60s/'70s clutch linkage "Z" bar.#3... Rocker arms went from stud mount to boltdown. OK this was a year before the first 302 badged as a 5.0 appeared(1979).#4... Crankshaft ballance changed from 28 oz to 50 oz imballance(1981).#5... Rear seals changed from 2 piece to the one piece(1982... revised block)#6... Begnning with the '85 HO, and all from '86 blocks are redesigned for roller lifters(revised block)I'm sure there are more but you get the idea.... Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #6 – February 15, 2006, 06:33:59 PM QuoteLate 5.0 blocks are lighter(and weaker) than the older 302sTom, when you say late what are we talking? 1982? 1992? Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #7 – February 15, 2006, 06:53:42 PM The differences Tom mentioned notwithstanding, the 5.0 designation was likely more to do with the push to "metric-ize" America in the 70's. Most (if not all) imported vehicles used metric designations even dating back into the 60's, but American manufacturers started using them in earnest in the mid to late 70's. F'rinstance, Pontiac installed "6.6 litre" engines in Trans Ams (some 6.6's were Pontiac 400's, some were Olds 403's) and I believe Ford used the "7.0 litre" designation on some 427 cars in the 60's. Strangely, even though the rest of USA has pretty much abandoned metric, the auto industry has completely adopted it. Just about every fastener on a late model US car is metric, as is the engine displacement.Even more strangely is that even though Canada adopted metric in the 70's, many Canadians still use Imperial. For instance, a grocery store ad will list a steak at $6.99 a pound in big letters, and in little tiny letters the ad will say $15.38/kg just to remain legal. We follow metric speed limits and buy metric gasoline but still talk MPG when we discuss economy, weigh ourselves on imperial scales, and measure our height (and indeed build our houses) with imperial measuring tapes (and imperial 2"X4"X8' studs, 4'X8' plywood, etc). Hell, even the property I just bought, with a brand new survey, is described as "Starting from a point in the center line of Cooks Brook and heading 450 feet West along highway 236, etc)If no other good came of this mess, it has at least made Canadians very good at making metric-imperial conversions "on the fly"... Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #8 – February 15, 2006, 08:06:17 PM Quote from: Paul FlockhartTom, when you say late what are we talking? 1982? 1992?Don't know the actual date(s) they started cutting the amount of iron in the castings, but it includes all the roller blocks for sure... At 126 lbs the roller 5.0s are the flyweights of V8 engine blocks... I believe the older blocks tip the scales in the 140-145 lb range. All of the beefed aftermarket blocks weigh 35-40 lbs more... High boost and or rpms cause them to go BOOM.... Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #10 – February 15, 2006, 09:18:10 PM Is that block blown in half ??:wtf: Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #11 – February 15, 2006, 09:49:06 PM Quote from: TurboCoupe50.the first 302 badged as a 5.0 appeared(1979).....the 78 mustang 2 king cobra was the first 302 badged as a 5.0 iirc Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #12 – February 15, 2006, 10:21:08 PM Quote from: LSXIs that block blown in half ??:wtf:NOT QUITE !!! There's a little more on the left(driver side)...Quote from: fordguythe 78 mustang 2 king cobra was the first 302 badged as a 5.0 iircThat's correct.... Wonder how I could forget that hideous thing???? Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #13 – February 15, 2006, 10:29:49 PM Quote from: TurboCoupe50That's correct.... Wonder how I could forget that hideous thing????i like mustang 2's . guess i'm a little :screwy: Quote Selected
stupid question time Reply #14 – February 16, 2006, 01:49:46 AM I bet that made a nifty noise when it split if it was running I hope no one was standing within shrapnel distance Quote Selected
Topic: stupid question time (Read 1220 times)
previous topic - next topic
