Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

1971 302 engine intake and carb question

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 23, 2008 | 12:28 PM
  #1  
71mustang's Avatar
71mustang
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 19
From: nebraska
Default 1971 302 engine intake and carb question

I am redoing my 302 engine out of my 1971 mustang and i want to switch from the 2bbrl carb and intak to a 4bbrl carb and intake, but i need some suggestions on which ones will work the best, I am looking for more power out of this, any suggestions would be great.
thanks
Old Oct 23, 2008 | 01:40 PM
  #2  
kalli's Avatar
kalli
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,417
From: Cork, Ireland
Default

if it's a street driven car then any combination opf those will be good:
Holley street avenger carb or edelbrocks carb no more than 600cfm
edelbrock perfomer intake (pn 2121) or weiand action+ intake (pn 8124)
supposedly for a stret driven engine with automatic you'd prefer a vacuum secondary carb and for a manual with extreme gearing rather a double pumper

there might be better options but this seems to be working great on otherwise stock 302s


kalli
Old Oct 29, 2008 | 12:58 AM
  #3  
bmaytum's Avatar
bmaytum
1st Gear Member
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 66
From: Colorado
Default

I agree. I just built a 302 with an Edelbrock performer and a Holley Street Avenger It starts and runs well, though it hasn't been in use enough to judge things like economy, cold-start capabilities, etc.

bmaytum
Old Oct 29, 2008 | 07:03 AM
  #4  
MBDiagMan's Avatar
MBDiagMan
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 886
From: North East Texas on the Red River
Default

Yes, for street use with a short cam, I would go no further than a Performer or the Weiand equivalent. What would be better yet would be an old Performer 289. It has smaller runners and less volume giving you a little better low RPM response. I have one on my 289 and will reuse it when I build my 302.

I saw a Performer 289 on ebay the other day.
Old Oct 29, 2008 | 07:33 AM
  #5  
lunarweasel's Avatar
lunarweasel
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,282
From: TX
Default

Originally Posted by MBDiagMan
Yes, for street use with a short cam, I would go no further than a Performer or the Weiand equivalent. What would be better yet would be an old Performer 289. It has smaller runners and less volume giving you a little better low RPM response. I have one on my 289 and will reuse it when I build my 302.

I saw a Performer 289 on ebay the other day.
Interesting to hear. When start making the Perf 289 and when did they stop? That's what I have on my car.
Old Oct 29, 2008 | 08:40 AM
  #6  
MBDiagMan's Avatar
MBDiagMan
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 886
From: North East Texas on the Red River
Default

I have no idea of the dates. I have one that was on my car when I bought it. If you have a mild cammed 289 or 302, or even a 347 for that matter, it is a good piece to have.

In the 347 it will help build lots of off idle torque at the expense of the high end. On the smaller engines, however, it will not hurt the high end a measurable amount.
Old Oct 29, 2008 | 09:02 AM
  #7  
lunarweasel's Avatar
lunarweasel
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,282
From: TX
Default

Thanks
Old Oct 29, 2008 | 09:02 AM
  #8  
lunarweasel's Avatar
lunarweasel
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,282
From: TX
Default

BTW, my car has been off the road since 90, so they were at least made in the mid to late 80s.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mtxplod
Speed Density/Carb/SSP section
8
Aug 29, 2015 01:43 AM
prophotog
Classic Mustangs (Tech)
10
Aug 26, 2015 11:55 AM
Philhampton1
Classic Mustangs (Tech)
3
Aug 21, 2015 12:04 PM
classic69FB
Motor Swap Section
1
Aug 12, 2015 11:58 PM
mustangfan305
5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang
3
Aug 7, 2015 11:09 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:05 PM.