Ford 302 RR roller cam
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: Repairs and Maintenance
Forum Name: Boat Maintenance
Forum Discription: Discuss maintenance of your Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=31232
Printed Date: November-18-2024 at 1:38am
Topic: Ford 302 RR roller cam
Posted By: john b
Subject: Ford 302 RR roller cam
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 5:54pm
|
Is anyone familiar with a source for a RR ford 302 roller cam retrofit for a 60s/70s 302? I am curious. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Replies:
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 6:38pm
|
That would be Tim or Joe for sure John. I think the answer is no. You could also call http://www.camresearchcorp.com/" rel="nofollow - these guy's and see what they think ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: gun-driver
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 10:33pm
| Yes you can get one made...$800 each three piece minimum order |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: August-17-2013 at 11:07pm
|
Thank you Paul. It was an impulse and the $800 X 3 put it to bed quickly. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: workky
Date Posted: August-18-2013 at 11:14am
| I had competition cams make me one for my 302 in my 1982 ski tique, but I don't know if it was a roller cam, cant remember. But it was RR. cost 200 bucks |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 12:39pm
|
Workky, that would have been a flat tappet, not a roller. A RH roller for a 351w does not exist- its a custom piece. To get a custom blank made, youre talking in the $750 or so range like Paul said- and the only 2 places I can think of that do that type of work are LSM Engineering and Cam Motion. We put a custom RH roller from Cam Motion (sourced through Marine Kinetics) in our BFN (454). Not only does it make big power, but I no longer worry about wiping out a cam lobe... heck, the peace of mind alone is worth the cost! The $750 price tag is a bit misleading- because it does not include the roller lifters ($400-500), and theres a good chance you'll need to change your valvesprings to handle the steeper ramp rates. Of course, you save $250 by not having to buy a flat tappet cam and lifter set... so factor that in if youre considering a cam swap. Total upgrade cost is in the $1200-1500 range. ------------- |
Posted By: Tim D
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 2:18pm
I put this Clevite RH cam in my 302. It's hotter than stock. Made a big difference over the worn out stock cam and it changed the firing order to that of a 351 which is better. Cost about $170. ------------- Tim D |
Posted By: phatsat67
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 2:35pm
|
Tim's BFN carries a big stick. ------------- |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 4:15pm
|
Thanks for the info, Tim. I am curious as to whether some PO has put a different cam in mine. I have never heard a stock H/M 302, but I have been told by some they are relatively mild, aside from the 10.5:1 CR. I can tell that the heads have been off sometime in the past and the idle is not what I expect from a stock engine. It has a very pronounced lope at idle. I want the original engine to have factory components if possible. I believe I could get a good gain with a roller and have an idle that is much smoother with the steeper profile. Give a listen and tell me what you think. I believe this is a 600-700rpm idle if I remember correctly. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpXd1hLJMQ0" rel="nofollow - engine at idle ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 4:21pm
|
I'd say its stock, John... those H-M's sounded great right from the factory. Thats exactly how the '70 H-M 2bbl Stang on our lake always sounded. ------------- |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 4:30pm
|
I did a quick Youtube search and found a fresh H/M in a Donzi idling. You're right Tim, it does sound just like mine. I thought at 235hp it would purr not snarl. I wonder if my 2V 210HP model had the same cam http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF5hT8lvMbA" rel="nofollow - Donzi with fresh H/M ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 5:00pm
|
I doubt that the 2bbl and 4bbl boats shared cams... that and the intake manifold (and carb, obviously) are probably what separated the 2 versions. The one that was on my lake growing up was a 2bbl as well and it sounded excellent. ------------- |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 5:14pm
And that is why I asked about the roller cam. The spare 210 HP 2V H/M I have has been converted to a 4V with the proper iron manifold according to the casting #, but without other changes I doubt it really accomplished anything except losing a little bottom end. I'm just thinking..... ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
TRBenj wrote:Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 5:35pm
|
Ahh, I see. I would ask Reid what he thinks would be best. He built a pretty hot Interceptor 302 (~275hp) and put a 500cfm 2bbl carb on it- and wasnt crazy about it. He said the holeshot was a little lacking and would bog if you went WOT from idle. Probably because youve got a full 500cfm capable of flowing on those 2 front barrels as opposed to the 225-300cfm on the front 2 barrels of a 4bbl carb. I guess what Im trying to say is that the 2bbl H-M long block is already a decent starting point (since its rated at the same 210hp as the 4bbl Interceptor) and may perform nicely with just that 4bbl intake and carb swapped on. ------------- |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: August-19-2013 at 6:16pm
|
The 210 is a core, but is complete. It would be easy to lose 70-100# and bump it up with some "stuff". Just thinking out loud. That ride at GL was a life altering experience. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: August-25-2013 at 2:46pm
|
Other than the driver's weight offsetting the engine torque, is there any other really important reason the Ford 302 (along with others) is a reverse rotation engine. I understand from research here that the BW 1:1 can be made to turn either direction. Just thinkin. Oh, and Tim, your tag says 60MPH. when we came back to the cove after my ride my IPhone gps said 63MPH. I'm just sayin. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: August-25-2013 at 3:35pm
|
John do you happen to know the firing order of yours? You do know that a RR 289-302 had a different firing order than a RR 351. All the new grinds have the 351 order,I wonder if that changes the sound. There was also different c/r ratios too,my tag states a 2v with 9.3 to 1 but now also has the new firing order ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: August-25-2013 at 4:14pm
|
I think it is a 351 firing order, but I'm not really sure. I don't think that the firing order would change the sound since it is still hitting at 90*. The roller cam would probably change the sound significantly though. The profile of moderate roller cams cures the lope at idle and still makes more power. Both of my engines are 10.5:1 CR I don't want to change the rotation of mine, but I want to understand the reasoning of placing a RR engine in a single screw boat.   ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: August-25-2013 at 5:41pm
Best picture I have at this time ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: August-26-2013 at 12:27pm
|
John, dont discount the RH prop offsetting the driver's weight... its a pretty significant detail. If you were to drive an older (narrow) CC with a LH prop, you'd understand pretty quick. With the proper RH powertrain (and thus, prop), the boats will go from leaning starboard at lower speeds (due to driver weight) to running at or near level at skiing speeds (high 20's and up). With a LH prop, those same boats go from a starboard lean to a more pronounced starboard lean- which can make turning and high speed running just a little dicier. Easier to catch the forward starboard chine- which can be a little disconcerting. The BFN ran pretty good this weekend- a good 1.5mph faster with Joe's borrowed 750cfm Barry Grant installed. Just gotta get it idling and running at lower RPM better. 60mph is a nice round number- but maybe I'll post a new video once its running over 65mph consistently.  ------------- |
Posted By: gun-driver
Date Posted: August-27-2013 at 2:23am
|
Tim you need one of these http://s256.photobucket.com/user/gun-driver/media/T700_GE_701C_side_view_by_Naiyion_zps37d6cdc1.jpg.html" rel="nofollow"> 
|