Register now to get rid of these ads!

302 in my 53 Ford

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Rob Graham, Feb 22, 2011.

  1. Rob Graham
    Joined: Feb 22, 2011
    Posts: 9

    Rob Graham
    Member
    from San Diego

    Fellow H.A.M.B.ers

    I am sure this is a life long question that has been asked time and time again for installing a 302 in a 53 Ford. I looked thru to older blogs and could not find enough info to satisfy my questions.

    I have a fresh built 302 allmost ready to install but need extra advise before I get into the install with the wrong parts. So far I have figured out the 302 into a 53 requires the rear sump and pickup tube.

    Question: Has anyone used the Jamco engine mounts from the Jamco 51 kit in there 53? I ask becuse the 51 kit looks like a better kit to install??

    Question: Any pros or cons to share with installing the 302.
    a. Oil Filter?
    b. Header Clerance linkage w/ Three on the tree?
    c. Radiator clearance?
    e. Gas Peddel Linkage to Carb?
    f. Other issues?

    Sincerely
    Rob G.
     
  2. teddyp
    Joined: May 28, 2006
    Posts: 3,195

    teddyp
    Member

    not my choice but a good one good luck
     
  3. Mark H
    Joined: May 18, 2009
    Posts: 1,461

    Mark H
    Member
    from Scotland

    Rob,no experience of the '53 Ford but have fitted a 289 in my 'A'.If you need a little extra clearance around the oil filter,you can fit Motorcraft EFL90(or equivalent) oil filter.At around 3 1/3 inches long,it's quite a bit shorter than the stock one.
     
  4. hottweelz
    Joined: Oct 5, 2007
    Posts: 157

    hottweelz
    Member
    from So. Cal

    Hey Rob, the 52/53 cars have a different crossmember than the 49/51 cars. Our kit was designed around the for the 49/51. I do not think it will work on the 52/52 ch***is. Beacuse of the different crossmembers, the angles and spacing will most likely be off.
     
  5. 53sled
    Joined: Jul 5, 2005
    Posts: 5,817

    53sled
    Member
    from KCMO

    I bet a small chevy slides right in. :)
     
  6. JeffB2
    Joined: Dec 18, 2006
    Posts: 9,665

    JeffB2
    Member
    from Phoenix,AZ

    I posted the info you need in the 52-56 Ford group,here is pic of a '53 with a 302 with the mounts from Speedway and the Hedman 88420 headers.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. hotrodnailhead
    Joined: May 18, 2005
    Posts: 579

    hotrodnailhead
    Member
    from Phoenix

    It's an easy install. We fabricated engine mounts, and slightly modified the original trans x-member. Using stock exhaust manifolds. No problems with clearance anywhere.
     
  8. tommyganly
    Joined: Feb 4, 2011
    Posts: 76

    tommyganly
    Member
    from seaford de

    i got a 51 merc and we are putting a 302 with and AOD in it. We got ours out a late 80's early 90's mustang. This way we were able to use the stock oil pan and the stock shorty headers (plenty of clearance around steering column and all) we are using a short motorcraft filter. We were also able to the original trans cross member just modified it a bit. The only clearance problems we had was in the firewall we had to trim about an inch out along the top.
     
  9. 6t5frlane
    Joined: Dec 8, 2004
    Posts: 2,403

    6t5frlane
    Member
    from New York

    Silly Man....Hot Rods are to go Faster
     
  10. tommyganly
    Joined: Feb 4, 2011
    Posts: 76

    tommyganly
    Member
    from seaford de

    Why ruin a great FORD by putting a Chevy in it?
     
  11. JeffB2
    Joined: Dec 18, 2006
    Posts: 9,665

    JeffB2
    Member
    from Phoenix,AZ

    A '53 Chevy with a 460 Ford would be fun :D
     
  12. mtkawboy
    Joined: Feb 12, 2007
    Posts: 1,213

    mtkawboy
    Member

    Van and early 302 Bronco pans and oil pump pickups give you several more options as far as clearance goes too
     
  13. Rob Graham
    Joined: Feb 22, 2011
    Posts: 9

    Rob Graham
    Member
    from San Diego

    Thanks for the heads up, I like the Ford motor in a chevy idea.

    Rob G.
     
  14. Rob Graham
    Joined: Feb 22, 2011
    Posts: 9

    Rob Graham
    Member
    from San Diego

    Hottweelz,
    So does the 53 kit bolt in or weld?
    Does it matter waht year the 302 is for the kit?
     
  15. hottweelz
    Joined: Oct 5, 2007
    Posts: 157

    hottweelz
    Member
    from So. Cal

    It also bolts in. it is just a different design. Below is a pic of the 52/53 kit.
    [​IMG]
     
  16. Rob Graham
    Joined: Feb 22, 2011
    Posts: 9

    Rob Graham
    Member
    from San Diego

    Thanks Hott Weelz, Any photos if this kit installed?
     
  17. bulletproof1
    Joined: Feb 23, 2004
    Posts: 2,079

    bulletproof1
    Member
    from tulsa okla

    i put a 302 in my 53 ,i had a rear sup pan,but still ahve to cut the crossmember under the motor,i boxed it back in..i used mounts from a 70 ltd,and made frame mounts.pretty simple..i also used a aftermarket radiator..used small exuast mainfolds..
    after i got tired of getting out run ,i pulled it and started a SBC install...if you really want to help the car put a s10 clip under it...drives ,stops ,steers great..and you can buy frontend/brake parts about anywhere...
     
  18. Rob Graham
    Joined: Feb 22, 2011
    Posts: 9

    Rob Graham
    Member
    from San Diego

    Bulletproof1,
    My problem is I dont have a welder or the skill in the mod dept. I was hoping for a bolt in installation. I have the fox type pan so hopfully i do not have the cut the cross member etc. You must of had a stocker 302 from 1979 if you were geting out run? I bought a 302 motor and found out it was fron a 79 LTD that came 113 hp, WTFO! i am learing as I go, he hard way. Had the motor rebuilt with the right parts, i hope to stomp it doen the road.

    Sincerely
    Rob G.
    First time i have hear about the S-10 front clip.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.