supercharged 302

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rspears

The 351 is about an inch wider than the 302 due to the taller deck height. A shorty water pump helps, but the SBF is still going to be tight, and the 351 will be tighter. If it were mine I'd strongly consider stretching the frame a few inches instead of setting it back in the firewall. The cockpit is cramped enough without pushing the engine back, and if done right the longer hood actually looks good. People will see a difference, but will be wondering what.

---

Ain't it the truth????? I have never been able to figure out what all the fuss is about with longitudinal clearance in an early car. Stretch the freakin' frame!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
The wheelbase on my T roadster project was 117" to make room for a 429 Ford with all the OEM cooling system in place in front of the motor, cooling through a Walker 4-core brass/copper radiator which was centered in the front tires from a side view.

Freakin' about this is about as silly as using a Chevrolet power steering pump on a Mustang II IFS and then jumping through hoops to reduce the pressure so the pump has a better chance of matching the pressure required by the MII rack and pinion. In the name of all that is holy, fabricate mounts to put the MII pump on the Chevy motor and be done with it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wheelswithin

Can anyone recommend a builder with a great rep?

---

With all due respect to both Jerry Clayton and Pat McCarthy who are regular posters here and both offer custom engine building services, I can vouch for Scot Sehr at Sehr Performance Machine Engine Rebuilding Specialists Scot's got the engines in several current record holder's cars from drags to circle track, builds for the super stock class competition pulling tractors, and has engines running at Bonneville. I enjoyed every aspect of working with Scot, his dad Tim, and Kermitt - all great guys, with top notch customer service along the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techinspector1

Ain't it the truth????? I have never been able to figure out what all the fuss is about with longitudinal clearance in an early car. Stretch the freakin' frame!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

---

:D And a longer hood looks sexy, too! Sounds like this is a done deal though, and he wants to take ready made parts and pieces to get done without much modifying. That may mean notching the firewall for clearance, sacrificing some interior foot space in the process.

Moving the engine back into the fire wall area is a poor choice as it creates several problems----------------clearance gained in the front is paid for dearly by many new problem areas--foot/leg room, steering column issues from steering wheel angle to header clearance, foot pedal problems, etc--------

Most clearance problems in the front arrive with the cross member for the front spring mounting being raised to let the front set lower------a standard type cross member with reversed spring eyes or de arched will allow more clearance around the front pulley/dampner and accessory drive components-------

But I do agree that a frame stretch in that area would help with lots of stuff and would allow the components to be laid out in a much more acceptable/visual way---------and Rootlieb or other hood /side panel makers would have no problem making hoods for anything up thru 1934 stuff(beford the fenders started getting "FAT")

All great replies guys! Thank you for taking the time to post your thoughts and knowledge. Bookmarking this thread when I have the $$ for a build.