Fulla bull?

***okie*** · 10-12-2012, 06:57

This guy at work told me he used to own a 1966 Ford Mustang that had a 302 plant under the hood, he also said that motor came from GM. I'm no Ford or GM expert, is this true or an extreme load of bull ****

Dennis in MA · 10-12-2012, 07:02

Body by Plymouth?

I wanna say 302 is STILL a Ford motor. 307 is GM, right?

Quick interwebs check - stock largest motor in the '66 was a 289, but a 302 WILL barely fit, but wasn't there/available (was it even in existence?) in 66.

skinny99 · 10-12-2012, 07:03

302 started in 1968. It was the same size as a 289 and an easy swap. Not factory for 1966.

GM also made a 302. Started in 1967, it was designed to run in the Trans Am series.

It would be possible to put a GM motor in a Mustang but makes no real sense. So your friend is either confused, full of bull or someone did an engine swap at some point.

BEANCOUNTER · 10-12-2012, 07:05

The Camaro Z-28's of the late 1960's (1967-1969 I think) had a 302 that produced ~300 hp.

***okie*** · 10-12-2012, 07:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinny99

302 started in 1968. It was the same size as a 289 and an easy swap. Not factory for 1966.

GM also made a 302. Started in 1967, it was designed to run in the Trans Am series.

It would be possible to put a GM motor in a Mustang but makes no real sense. So your friend is either confused, full of bull or someone did an engine swap at some point.

He said this motor was factory. Skinny is right the 302 started in 68, that much I do know

BuckeyePPC · 10-12-2012, 08:15

A friend used to have a Sunbeam Alpine ? with a factory Ford 289 V8. Fast little car with an overheating problem.

slick64 · 10-12-2012, 08:17

The 302 Boss Mustang did exist and so did a Camaro 302 as previously stated.

**kirgi08** · 10-12-2012, 08:22

You could also get a 302 in a Monte Carlo.'08.

CanMan · 10-12-2012, 08:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckeyePPC

A friend used to have a Sunbeam Alpine ? with a factory Ford 289 V8. Fast little car with an overheating problem.

Yep, I rember them there cars. Had to run 'em with the heater on full bore to mitigate the overheating problem. Really.

***jlprtr*** · 10-12-2012, 08:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckeyePPC

A friend used to have a Sunbeam Alpine ? with a factory Ford 289 V8. Fast little car with an overheating problem.

That was the Sunbeam Tiger.

***okie*** · 10-12-2012, 08:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by slick64

The 302 Boss Mustang did exist and so did a Camaro 302 as previously stated.

That is indeed correct my friend, but was the 302 GM motor an option in the 66 Stang

SC Tiger · 10-12-2012, 08:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinny99

302 started in 1968. It was the same size as a 289 and an easy swap. Not factory for 1966.

GM also made a 302. Started in 1967, it was designed to run in the Trans Am series.

It would be possible to put a GM motor in a Mustang but makes no real sense. So your friend is either confused, full of bull or someone did an engine swap at some point.

Some people used to put GM small-block V8s in Mustangs because parts (especially high-performance parts) were easier to get for the GM. This was primarily done with the 350 I believe. The 350 and 305 are the same external dimensions so I guess a 305 would fit.

I don't know if the GM 302 and the 305/350 have enough interchangability among parts to make it worth putting a GM 302 in a Ford Mustang though.

In all likelihood the person you spoke to was as full of ### as a christmas goose.

RenoF250 · 10-12-2012, 08:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by okie

That is indeed correct my friend, but was the 302 GM motor an option in the 66 Stang

I would say no. I have never heard of GM and Ford working together on anything. The closest they get is to use some of the same transmissions and axles but even those are not directly interchangeable.

***okie*** · 10-12-2012, 08:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirgi08

You could also get a 302 in a Monte Carlo.'08.

I don't think I would want that small a plant in that big a car, Roger

***okie*** · 10-12-2012, 08:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by SC Tiger

In all likelihood the person you spoke to was as full of ### as a christmas goose.

That's what I'm kinda thinkin my friend

***Geko45*** · 10-12-2012, 08:50

"No, it is a trick question! 'Cause Chevy didn't make a 327 in '55, the 327 didn't come out till '62. And it wasn't offered in the Bel Air with a four-barrel carb till '64. However, in 1964, the correct ignition timing would be four degrees before top-dead-center."

slick64 · 10-12-2012, 08:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by okie

That is indeed correct my friend, but was the 302 GM motor an option in the 66 Stang

Of course not, but the 426 Hemi was.

**aircarver** · 10-12-2012, 09:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by SC Tiger

...
In all likelihood the person you spoke to was as full of ### as a christmas goose.

I'd go with this one, too ...

.

SC Tiger · 10-12-2012, 09:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by RenoF250

I would say no. I have never heard of GM and Ford working together on anything. The closest they get is to use some of the same transmissions and axles but even those are not directly interchangeable.

Even then I doubt they are 100% interchangable without changing the bellhousing or something. Usually if that happens it is because both are buying the part complete from a supplier who owns the design (ie not a GM or Ford design that was subcontracted).

The Mustang 5-speed and the Firebird/Camaro 6-speed manual transmissions were both Borg Warner units for a while and were very similar in design but the ratios were different (plus the Firebird/Camaro had one more gear obviously).

***okie*** · 10-12-2012, 09:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by slick64

Of course not, but the 426 Hemi was.

I think not

Batesmotel · 10-12-2012, 10:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geko45

"No, it is a trick question! 'Cause Chevy didn't make a 327 in '55, the 327 didn't come out till '62. And it wasn't offered in the Bel Air with a four-barrel carb till '64. However, in 1964, the correct ignition timing would be four degrees before top-dead-center."

For the win!

Hauptmann6 · 10-12-2012, 11:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by okie

That is indeed correct my friend, but was the 302 GM motor an option in the 66 Stang

Ford had a 302. They wouldn't need to use a GM 302.

It was probably swapped for the next year's 302 or somehow Ford let a pre-production slip. Or it was a 67 built in 66.

dre23 · 10-12-2012, 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geko45

"No, it is a trick question! 'Cause Chevy didn't make a 327 in '55, the 327 didn't come out till '62. And it wasn't offered in the Bel Air with a four-barrel carb till '64. However, in 1964, the correct ignition timing would be four degrees before top-dead-center."

I love "My cousin Vinny" thats some funny s**t!

jfost11 · 10-12-2012, 12:03

I worked at a Mustang performance shop for years. I could go on for hours with tales of misinformed idiots or just plain liars that have told me complete BS. Some folks think the one car they've owned makes them an expert on that model. I've perfected my "mmm hmm, and walk away" routine. The last idiot at a car show told me his run of the mill, factory '02 Mustang GT, with an Automatic was a special edition supercharged Roush that was 1 of 50.

BTW, the hood was up and I have to assume the supercharger ran away, along with the body kit, Roush wheels and interior.

dan1488 · 10-12-2012, 16:02

I can tell you GM did make a Hemi back in the day. I seen it in Iowa. It was years ago went to see a guys collection of Yenko's and he had a GM car with a hemi in it I can't tell you much about it but I know it was not a Mopar product and was stock.