Jeep Enthusiast Forums banner

302 or 305?

6K views 60 replies 16 participants last post by  jp360cj 
#1 · (Edited)
I just bought a 1987 Jeep Wrangler a couple days ago and want to swap for a V8. Looking for opinions as to which setup I should go with as far as engine, tranny, tcase and diffs to handle 35" tires.

Or maybe a 318?
 
#2 ·
Ford302 parts are SUPER CHEAP and easy to find. Plus a 302 can make great torque with little mods.

If you have the cash, 5.3L L33 is a great idea too. The T56 transmission would run a pretty penny though.
 
#3 ·
of the three you listed. the 302 is the better choice. it's also a smaller motor than the others. the 305 is a boat anchor. the amc 318 blows goats, the dodge carb 318 isn't far behind, and i doubt you want to go fuel injection based upon your other choices so the magnum is probably out.

just be sure to buy an offroad carb if you want to be able to do anything more challenging than a flat field. regular carbs don't like off camber or hilly situations.
 
#4 ·
i would say either a 302 or a 350. generally ford engines are more expensive to build but if ur looking for just a standard rebuild, they would be about the same price. keep searching craigslist for engines. i picked mine up for $500 bored .030 over with a few thousand miles on the rebuild. also transmission choices is a reason i went chevy. ford has the c4 and 4 speed. i think thats about it that is a relatively small size for a jeep. the e4od is a big trans that i donot think will fit well. the chevy has th350, th400, 700r4, nv3500, nv4500, etc. then to t cases. the chevy np231 can be split and made a hybrid with the jeep or go up to the np241. ford has big and heavy cases like the dana 20 and 205 which for strength is great but they weigh like a hundred lbs a piece. on to axles. the front 30 can live if ur not real hard on it ( mine is still together) but the rear is going to need upgraded. best axle is the 8.8
 
#5 ·
I found a 1985 Ram charger that I can buy for $750. Has 318 and 360 blocks. Automatic transmission, transfer case and both differentials with lockers. If I go with that, I will have to decide 318 with more rpm or 360 for more HP.

Any thoughts on this? Thanks for all the input.
 
#8 ·
If you were going to go this way, always go for the bigger engine, if they're both stock.
 
#7 ·
The Chevy engine is always the better choice. A 305 has the same crank as a 350. It'd be a better torque engine than a 302.

Personally, there are plenty of 350's out there, so why so small?

But there is nothing wrong with a 305. It's not a popular choice, but there's nothing wrong with it.

Yeah, you can do all sorts of stuff to a 302. Once the aftermarket started basically making Small Block Chevy stuff that fit a Ford, the 302's became a viable performance option.

Or you can just put what the 302 wishes it was in it to start with. You'll have even more options in your build, can find more parts for it at more places, and it's the most successful race engine of all time. What's not to love?
 
#11 ·
The Chevy engine is always the better choice. A 305 has the same crank as a 350. It'd be a better torque engine than a 302.

Personally, there are plenty of 350's out there, so why so small?

But there is nothing wrong with a 305. It's not a popular choice, but there's nothing wrong with it.

Yeah, you can do all sorts of stuff to a 302. Once the aftermarket started basically making Small Block Chevy stuff that fit a Ford, the 302's became a viable performance option.

Or you can just put what the 302 wishes it was in it to start with. You'll have even more options in your build, can find more parts for it at more places, and it's the most successful race engine of all time. What's not to love?
Back in the late 80s/early 90s, stock 305 Camaros were running 15-16 second 1/4 miles.

Stock 302 Mustangs were running 14s.
 
#12 ·
Yeah ford has always done more with less. 302s compared to 350s, 351s compared to 400s. Old 429s compared to 454s until ford said screw it were done here with a 460 as far as trucks go in the 70s crunch.

As for comparing a 305 to a 302 your average 305 wasrated at 170 hp in 89. And from 85 up all 302s had 215,225 hp. Only rarely did 305 break 200. On top of that several years had oil issues.

302s also mount to the t18/t19 with dana 20(drivers side drop) which is just about the most solid factory combo you can put in a jeep.

And really a ford HP dana 44 front is a great axle option along with a 9"rear. If you can find a complete donor. However a 302 at that year will likely be 70s f@#$%^ so you would be well off to find a 70s ford 4spd 4x4 with a bad motor (maybe $500) and a find a crown vic 302(maybe $200-300) from the late 80s. Take or leave the fuel injection doesnt matter just your preferance.

And you will have every drivetrain part necessary to run 35-38 inch tires, and a engine lazily making 200+ hp with 275hp a couple bolt ons away. While parts are generaly 5-10% more expensive than chevys they(302) are more compact and have a huge aftermarket.
 
#14 ·
Yeah ford has always done more with less. 302s compared to 350s, 351s compared to 400s. Old 429s compared to 454s until ford said screw it were done here with a 460 as far as trucks go in the 70s crunch.

As for comparing a 305 to a 302 your average 305 wasrated at 170 hp in 89. And from 85 up all 302s had 215,225 hp. Only rarely did 305 break 200. On top of that several years had oil issues.
Um, in 1989 the Z-28's top 305 had 225hp. So they were always neck-and-neck with the 302's. Always. And they cars ran about the same times, too....really depended on the driver, but the Mustang's real advantage was less weight....it sure as hell wasn't the motor.

Also, those late-80's 302's had a horrible problem burning oil. Ford put low-tension rings in them for more power, and they actually had us telling people that using 1 quart in 500 miles was acceptable, and considered "normal".

302's in trucks had 185 HP in the late 80's, btw.

And the 460 came out about the same time, if not sooner, than the 454's and 455's did, which was 1970. They never could compete, because they were simply inferior designs...even though the 429/460 and 351 Clevelands were copied from the Big Block Chevy's. Even the vaunted Boss 429 engine was a turd....those cars couldn't go under 14 seconds in the 1/4.

The aftermarket for the 302 is vast now. Basically, they tried the make the head designs as much like the Small Block Chevy as possible, and they were successful, so you can now build a lot of power from them. But not more than you can from a Small Block Chevy. Best you could hope for is to equal one, and even that will cost you more.

But back to the topic...a 302 or a 305 in a basically stock Jeep is going to be about the same. The potential of either is based on your wallet.
 
#13 ·
Being a completely unbiased person, there is only one appropriate engine swap for an older Jeep.









Old school (or semi old school-Vortec heads work great for stockers) small block Chevy. It will give you the most options and the most torque for the buck. As noted above, nothing wrong with a 305 and an FI version would work very well in a lighter flatty. A 307 is also relatively small bore, long stroke, or if you are into tinkering, put a 350 crank in the 307 block and you get a bigger version of the 305 at 328 ci. Again, as with the other posts-a 305 takes the exact same space and is the same weight as a 350 and I suspect a 350 rebuild kit would be even less than one for a 305-no reason not to go with a 350, or better yet, a 383. In my experience, there isn't much difference in the mileage if all are set up well.

I would be using a stock aluminum bell, 11" clutch with a steel flywheel, SM465, and the Dana 300. The older Mopar's may be a better choice than the AMC's for no other reason than parts availability but personally, a Ford or Chevy small block is the way to go-and my preference is noted.
 
#31 ·
^ Good point, I think that is what I was trying to say before I busted out the 1990 magazine article. :laugh:

A common Ford 302 is better than a common Chevy 305, at least in my opinion.
Everyone's entitled to an opinion, certainly, but I just don't see how the 'average 302' is better than the 'average 305'.

The truck 302's and 305's had about the same power. The car versions had the same power. And the sports car (Mustang/Camaro) had about the same power, year-to-year.

Some years one might have had the advantage over the other, but they were always close. Either one would do fine in a Jeep. If you put a truck 305 or truck 302 from the same year in a Jeep, you're going to have basically the same performance. Same thing if you put a Mustang 302 or a Z-28's 305. 225 HP is 225 HP. 170 is 170. And so on. One would not be better than the other, if you consider what it might have come out of.

Yeah, if you compare a Mustang 5.0 to a C-1500's 305, it's going to run better. But if that 5.0 came out of an F-150, then whichever one is newer will likely have the most power. As I said before several times, apples to apples. Don't know why that's so hard to understand.
 
#17 ·
A buddy of mines stock (minus intake exhaust And gears 4.10) ran a 12.6 with slicks. 89 mustang LX hatchback. Stock my car when it was an auto ran a 15.1, swapped in a 5 speed and my first pass was a 14.5 but I couldn't get off he line without spinning like crazy, through the beams I was 100mph so I know I could be in the low 14-13.9 range with nothing more than intake and exhaust on my car.
 
#18 ·
Okay, stock "minus intake/exhaust/gears" isn't stock. And I'd even then, I seriously doubt a 12.6, even with slicks, but regardless, it wasn't stock.

And no way an 89-ish STOCK GT hits 100 in the lights, sorry.

Keep in mind, what passes for "stock" these days for those cars is NEVER actually "showroom" stock. Those cars just don't exist, and if they do, they aren't being driven around by kids who just go their licenses and being taken to the drags. They've already been through the ringer, and most are far from "factory" anymore.

What I'm telling you is, no late 80's factory stock Mustang was that fast. I was there, I drove every version available, hundreds of times. They just weren't. And the archival times you can find will back that up. Mid-14's to low-15's, low-to-mid-90's.

If you ran across any that were faster, like the spinning, mid-14 pass you claim at 100mph, then I can assure you, if that's a late 80's GT, there's no way in hell it's "stock".
 
#19 ·
Pacfanweb said:
Okay, stock "minus intake/exhaust/gears" isn't stock. And I'd even then, I seriously doubt a 12.6, even with slicks, but regardless, it wasn't stock.

And no way an 89-ish STOCK GT hits 100 in the lights, sorry.

Keep in mind, what passes for "stock" these days for those cars is NEVER actually "showroom" stock. Those cars just don't exist, and if they do, they aren't being driven around by kids who just go their licenses and being taken to the drags. They've already been through the ringer, and most are far from "factory" anymore.

What I'm telling you is, no late 80's factory stock Mustang was that fast. I was there, I drove every version available, hundreds of times. They just weren't. And the archival times you can find will back that up. Mid-14's to low-15's, low-to-mid-90's.

If you ran across any that were faster, like the spinning, mid-14 pass you claim at 100mph, then I can assure you, if that's a late 80's GT, there's no way in hell it's "stock".
My car is a 90 mustang LX hatchback, stock 1990 engine besides intake and exhaust. Still running the factory 3.27 gearing. I have slips to show my mph and the 14.5 pass(have to look for them, can't remember if they are in my glove box or in the house somewhere), my fastest mph with the aod was 94 mph, with the 5 speed in it it was 98-99 through the traps.

Still have the full factory red interior, but yes I would agree that a factory gt car, for instance, a 87 gt convertible(which are the heaviest fox bodies)a friend of mine used to own ran a
15.6 with nothing done to it. 5 speeds are much quicker than the automatic ones stock to stock, you lose alot of power through the auto
 
#20 ·
My car is a 90 mustang LX hatchback, stock 1990 engine besides intake and exhaust. Still running the factory 3.27 gearing. I have slips to show my mph and the 14.5 pass(have to look for them, can't remember if they are in my glove box or in the house somewhere), my fastest mph with the aod was 94 mph, with the 5 speed in it it was 98-99 through the traps.

Still have the full factory red interior, but yes I would agree that a factory gt car, for instance, a 87 gt convertible(which are the heaviest fox bodies)a friend of mine used to own ran a
15.6 with nothing done to it. 5 speeds are much quicker than the automatic ones stock to stock, you lose alot of power through the auto
So that confirms what I said, thanks. Intake and exhaust add some HP, and I can understand picking up a few MPH from that.
 
#23 ·
My brothers Completely stock one owner 87 Convertible( heaviest) GT 5spd ran 14.86 on stock tires with 55,000 miles on it. He was a novice driver at the time. a lighter notch or even hatchback would do better, especially with a seasoned driver. Ford have ALWAYS been meaner except fo a couple times in history that for smartly waited for chevy to show its hand.

Time and time again ford have done more with less.

Also of note to the guy talking about z28 so you seem to be forgetting that most 305s were in RS camaros, with 170 hp.
Speaking of lesser models say the gt and z28 were apples to apples. take a step "down" and a lx 5.0 surpasses a gt, while a rs 5.0(camaros) struggles to break the tires free.

Iknow these points as a fact while as im only 29 and not of age at the time my brothers each bought a brand new 5spd one the 87 vert gt, one an 89 rs 5.0. They raced the mustang won 10 years later the paint peeled off of the camaro and my brother sold it for 1,700 in 1999. My other brother still has his gt, with 129,000 on it, we freshened up the motor (it has been sitting undriven since 2005). And it is in near original shape, save for some blemishes.

But all this mustang talk doesnt matter, the fact is that the OP can pull a 5.0 out of any fuel injected ford product after 86 and have over 200 hp with alot more available for under $1000(like +300hp) and it will nearly directly bolt to 1 great, 2 solid, and one marginal factory jeep transmissions.
 
#25 ·
My brothers Completely stock one owner 87 Convertible( heaviest) GT 5spd ran 14.86 on stock tires with 55,000 miles on it. He was a novice driver at the time. a lighter notch or even hatchback would do better, especially with a seasoned driver. Ford have ALWAYS been meaner except fo a couple times in history that for smartly waited for chevy to show its hand.

Time and time again ford have done more with less.

Also of note to the guy talking about z28 so you seem to be forgetting that most 305s were in RS camaros, with 170 hp.
Speaking of lesser models say the gt and z28 were apples to apples. take a step "down" and a lx 5.0 surpasses a gt, while a rs 5.0(camaros) struggles to break the tires free.

Iknow these points as a fact while as im only 29 and not of age at the time my brothers each bought a brand new 5spd one the 87 vert gt, one an 89 rs 5.0. They raced the mustang won 10 years later the paint peeled off of the camaro and my brother sold it for 1,700 in 1999. My other brother still has his gt, with 129,000 on it, we freshened up the motor (it has been sitting undriven since 2005). And it is in near original shape, save for some blemishes.

But all this mustang talk doesnt matter, the fact is that the OP can pull a 5.0 out of any fuel injected ford product after 86 and have over 200 hp with alot more available for under $1000(like +300hp) and it will nearly directly bolt to 1 great, 2 solid, and one marginal factory jeep transmissions.
Correct, so I said Z-28 every time, and did not mention RS or imply it was "every Camaro". So comparing a 5.0 Mustang to an RS Camaro is ridiculous.

The original point was, the 305 is a perfectly good motor. Not a thing wrong with it, and since it's a Small Block Chevy, which is the best and most successful V-8 of all time, it has all the advantages of an enormous aftermarket and decades of knowledge in making them run.

What some of you don't seem to be getting in the Mustang/Camaro debate is this: It wasn't the motor that was the difference. The motors had the same power. 225hp is 225hp. There was like a 5lb difference in torque. The ONLY difference was the weight of the car. The Mustang was lighter, therefore, the lightest ones were slightly faster with a good driver. Didn't have a damn thing to do with the motor.

And yes, a 5.0 Stang would beat a RS Camaro with the lesser engine....just like the RS would beat the Mustang with the V-6, and an F-250 with a 460 would beat an F-250 with a 302. Duh.

You have to look at the complete picture.
 
#29 ·
Yeah 75-85 was dark times for everyone buddy. An old roomate of mine is driving around a 1980 Vette that will not break the tires free for a second. Thats a 350.

And your still only comparing the creme of the crop 305 to every 302 of the era. Seems like cheating to me.

Speaking of cheating, you can go ahead and leave awesome bill out of this. Bill Elliott did as much for nascar as anybody in the last 30 years. You dont see me going and danceing on earnhardt grave do ya.

Back to ford beating chevy GT350>corvette GT40>all!!! Boss 302>z28,aar,amx Boss 429>ss396,ss454 Boss429 engine>nascar(prompted chrysler to engineer a freeking airplane) Flathead V8> over everyone for for a decade the list goes on.

Once again to go out and get a AVERAGE! 302/305 out of a 80-early 90s vehicle of any size. You will see more out of the 302 and ultimatly building a 305/302 up to 600hp is going to cost about the same +/- $250.

Honestly ford VS chevy will never end ( COUGH! 2013 GT500/Shelby 1000 COUGH!)

LETS JUST GO BACK TO HATING FOREIGN CARS, DIDNT THE OP ASK IF THE 4 CYL OUT OF A 76 HONDA WAS A GOOD SWAP FOR A MILITARY CJ?
 
#35 ·
Personally I would go with the 302, as I have personal experience with them. We installed a 302 in our 1965 F250, the truck was involved in a accident that perforated the radiator, (before the days of cell phones), the poor truck got us home but then the engine seized, after sitting overnight the engine started right up, blew some blue smoke for a few minutes and then cleared right up. This took place in the late 80's and the engine is still running strong to this day.
 
#40 ·
Okay... hopefully all the bickering is passed...

I don't recommend either. They are both decent engines for their time and can be built for decent power with tons of cash dumped into them, but were engineered in a time when our need for fuel economy improvements were ahead of our ability to make it efficient.

If you want to see a big V8 and feel the power and have a carbed engine and don't care about gas, just get a 360. You can often find a Waggy with a 360 for cheap, and still use the same trans, etc from a Jeep.

If you want more power and economy and don't mind putting in a little more time or money, go with a Chevy LS motor. I suggest the 5.3 LM7. It's in almost every truck made by Chevy or GMC after 99, and has 300 hp with no mods. You can find them cheap in the salvage yards and mod the wiring yourself or buy a ready-made harness from places like Painless. Bolt up a SM465 and a D300 and now you have to worry about axles and driveshafts breaking more than anything.

We are in an era now when the old 302 and 305 just don't make a lot of sense any more if you are starting fresh.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top