Yeah. At one time I too lusted for one of those.I’ll take the Chevy 302 installed in a 69 Z-28 thank you…
You picked a bad example for SB chevies. The 305 and 307 were fine engines in your grandmas Impala…. And that was pretty much it. I had the 305 in my 77 Monza. It was ok…. But was never intended to be a go fast engine.Ford all day long! 302s never gave me a bit of trouble, but the one and only Chevy I've ever owned had a 305 in it that I had nothing but problems with.
I worked with a guy years ago who used to work for Ford back in the 60s and 70s. He told me that the only reason Ford came out with the 302 was because the 289 wasn't breaking down enough so they changed up and came out with the 302.
I didn't pick the 305. It was 305 vs 302 in the OP. I only gave my 2 cents on the 305 vs 302.You picked a bad example for SB chevies. The 305 and 307 were fine engines in your grandmas Impala…. And that was pretty much it. I had the 305 in my 77 Monza. It was ok…. But was never intended to be a go fast engine.
I like the Ford 302.
Best show ever!
Well then, since the 69 Z28 is taken, I'll have 70 AAR Cuda with a 305 and a 70 Challenger T/A with a 305 on the side please.I’ll take the Chevy 302 installed in a 69 Z-28 thank you…
Yes they did. And not the same engine. The 302s were a 4” bore same as the 350 but with a 3” stroke. The later 305s came with a 3.73” bore and a 3.48 stroke like the 350. And if memory serves. There wasn’t enough cylinder wall to poke out the 305 to a 4” bore.Chevy had a 302 before the 305 I think.
DZ 302 motor built to fall into Trans-AM engine size spec size limits.. Its a high winding nasty monster of a motorChevy had a 302 before the 305 I think.
I didn't pick the 305. It was 305 vs 302 in the OP. I only gave my 2 cents on the 305 vs 302.
If the question was 350 vs 351W I'd still choose the Ford.