Hello all, I am thinking of buying some 302 heads for my 273 for a future build. Does anybody know some of the advantages of these heads over the stock 1967 273 heads. I know these heads allow for a modern intake manifold and no loss of compression do to the closed chambers. What about the valves? Are they bigger? Can I use my same rocker assemb. and push-rods? What about the holes for the air-pump that came on these models? Is it a big deal to have plugged? Thanks!

The 302s have a better runner design. Your 67 273 heads are the typical pattern for intakes (64/65 are the only different years). Its not a big deal to plug the Air ports on the exhaust side. 1/4-20 or 1/4-28 thread, set screws and loc-tite. Valves are the same size as the 273. and yes, you can re-use your rocker/pushrod assembly.

'67 273 heads might still be closed chamber, with a similar chamber size as the 302's. some people on the board have flow tested both, and found the 273 closed chamber heads actually flow about the same or slightly better than the 302's, both OOTB and ported...I'd pull your heads and check them out before spending money on new ones that aren't really going to give you anything...

I bumped the valve size in my 302 heads up to 360 valves and did a home bowl clean up and blend at the cut line

gonna stick them on the 360 short block I have for a torque monster in a work truck

yea check the 273 heads,if closed chambers,I would just bump the valves to 1.88/1.60 in those and run them

The 273 heads you have should have a 920 casting number on them and will use regular intakes and flow more than the 302 head. The 920 heads have a 57cc head and the 302 is about 62 (averages from 2 sets of each I tested). The 302 head has some chamber area that overhangs the cylinder on a 273 and that is not good for power, mpg or emmisions, that kind of an area is called crevis volume and is not good for anything.

Thank You Guys! I will probably stick with the 920 heads. Found some 302's locally and was just wondering. HotRodDave, Can you tell us the build on your 68 Cuda that gets 29 MPG with a 318, Thanks!