Go Back   Ford Mustang Forums > Mustang > Classic Mustang > Classic Talk

Welcome to our Mustang forums where Mustangers come together to hang out, discuss and enjoy their favorite Mustang hobby with fellow Mustang enthusiasts. We invite everyone to read, post, and enjoy our Mustang forum as well as the many other sections of our site.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest. By joining our community you gain access to post topics, communicate with members, upload your photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free so why wait, join our Mustang community today! If you have any problems with registration or your account login, please contact support.

Classic Mustangs Talk General Discussions

General discussions specific to 1964-1967, 1968-1970, and 1971-1973 Classic Mustangs. Discuss all non-technical topics related Vintage Mustangs here.

Classic Forums | Classic Talk | Classic Tech | Classic Pictures | Introductions | Mustang Tech | Mustang Lounge 


Reply   Post New Thread
Unread 12-13-2009   #1 (permalink)
Lizer is online now SHELBY GT 350 Member

Classic Member


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,674 Threads: 95
 Lizer's Country Flag
Kalamazoo   Michigan
Lizer is on a distinguished road
Default 289 or 302 for 1967 Mustang Coupe

I got rid of the 4v 289 I have in my 67 Coupe as the previous owner had seized the engine, which made the piston go through the cylinder wall and toasted the block. I was going to replace it with a remanufactured 289 long block, but one of my buddies is telling me to put a 302 in it.

If I put in a 302 I'd probably make a little more power with it, but my original reasons for wanting to stick with the 289 is because it's not as common as a motor and it's what V8 would have been offered originally with the 67. With that being said, I'm not making a numbers-matching car here. I think the 289 is a more classic motor than the 302 as well, though perhaps some might disagree.

Also, for my silly reason...Chevy has their white trash motor...the 350, and Ford has its own as well...the 302. No offense to those that have them in their cars because I know many of you here do But that's not going to make it or break it for me.

So what would you pick and why?
Lizer is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Unread 12-13-2009   #2 (permalink)
PaulS is offline Made Member


Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,815 Threads: 3
 PaulS's Country Flag
Seattle   Washington
PaulS is on a distinguished road
Default

There is a ton of after-market parts for the 302 which is basically a stroked 289. If you want a little more power then the 302 will easily give it to you.
The 289 is a good engine - I built a 350 HP 289 back in the early 1970s but Most of those parts are no longer offered for the 289. There just aren't enough 289s out there to support the after-market parts for them.
__________________
1966 Coupe
351W
Top Loader
rebuilt, rewired, modified for slalom and hill climb
No racing - just a fun car built by and for me.
Project in process
PaulS is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-13-2009   #3 (permalink)
67ragtopStang is offline Made Member


Joined: May 2008
Posts: 850 Threads: 43
 67ragtopStang's Country Flag  View 67ragtopStang's 4 photos
Cape Cod   Massachusetts
67ragtopStang is on a distinguished road
Default

What engine choice you make, really depends on what you are planning to do with your car.

Are you restoring it for cruising, weekend racer or daily driver?
__________________
I contend, that for a nation to try to tax itself, into prosperity, is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
—Winston Churchill

1967 Mustang Convertible - 289-4V w/C4
1992 Bronco - 302 EFI Auto
1974 24' Lyman Biscayne
67ragtopStang is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-13-2009   #4 (permalink)
Jonk67 is offline GT Member

Classic Member
S197 Member


Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,990 Threads: 19
 Jonk67's Country Flag  View Jonk67's 1 photo
Smyrna   Tennessee
Jonk67 is on a distinguished road
Default

I kept my 289 for the same reasons, I'm guessing 75% of the classics at my local cruise ins/ shows have been swapped to a later model 302 or roller 302. I like the fact that I am still using the 'little 289' that my car came with originally.

Now, since I wanted to rebuild the motor with some more oomph I stroked it to 333ci and added some AFR 165's to wake it up, expect to double the factory HP rating. I've painted it all ford blue as I'm not into too much flash and the heads were shinier alum. than the dull intake so now they all match and it looks fairly stock to the untrained eye.

From everything I've read going from a 289 to roller 302 built comparitively the roller nets 15 HP more due to the roller cam having less friction. If the roller uses a taller cam than the 289 that number will be greater of course. I installed roller rockers to close that gap a little. I used new parts and the same thing in a roller (cam, rockers, lifters) would have cost me > $700 more to go roller but you can also run a taller cam.

I like the originality even if I give up a little HP.
Jon
__________________
'67 Coupe 289 stroked to 333, AOD, 9" w/3.50:1, PDB, Candyapple red w/red deluxe int., PS, ext. decor group, light group, foxbody seats.
'09 Black Warriors In Pink with glass roof - the wifes Mustang.
"If it ain't broke, I haven't fixed it yet" -Jon
Jonk67 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-13-2009   #5 (permalink)
67ragtopStang is offline Made Member


Joined: May 2008
Posts: 850 Threads: 43
 67ragtopStang's Country Flag  View 67ragtopStang's 4 photos
Cape Cod   Massachusetts
67ragtopStang is on a distinguished road
Default

I don't agree that there isn't much out there for upgrades to 289's. There is plenty, but there is more out there for the modern 302 block, which is different than the '68 up through the 70's 302 blocks.

When I bought my '67, it had a tired '74 302 in it, which the seller led me to believe was a 289. I didn't know much about Mustangs and Ford small blocks then. I decided to buy a '67 289 block and have a new engine built from there, while keeping the '67 theme/look to the casual observer. I put a mild cam in it, Windsor Jr heads, Edelbrock Performer Intake and Edelbrock Performer 600CFM 4V Carburetor on it. As you can see in my gallery photos, it's all painted Dark Ford Blue and is a nice stealth 289, with some extra power over the stock 289. I wasn't looking for a racer engine, but just a cruiser with some kick.
__________________
I contend, that for a nation to try to tax itself, into prosperity, is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
—Winston Churchill

1967 Mustang Convertible - 289-4V w/C4
1992 Bronco - 302 EFI Auto
1974 24' Lyman Biscayne
67ragtopStang is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-13-2009   #6 (permalink)
scottman70 is offline Apprentice


Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 175 Threads: 23
 scottman70's Country Flag  View scottman70's HomePage
Goodyear   Arizona
scottman70 is on a distinguished road
Default

I would just go the largest displacement that you can with that engine block. Why not? Once it's built and you paint it all original no one will know if it's a stroked 289 or really a 331. That's what I would do get the most you can from the engine block! You also should do a roller cam when you build the motor!
__________________
2005 Mustang GT, Satin Silver, Roush Shifter, Flowmaster axle backs, K&N CAI
scottman70 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-13-2009   #7 (permalink)
Lizer is online now SHELBY GT 350 Member

Classic Member


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,674 Threads: 95
 Lizer's Country Flag
Kalamazoo   Michigan
Lizer is on a distinguished road
Default

As for what I'm doing with the car...it's going to be my summer fun car. Basically I'll participate in some cruises and shows with it, and drive it around for enjoyment and make other people envious It will not be my daily driver. From the Mustangs at car shows I've seen in central Iowa, mine, as I'm restoring it now, looks to be nicer than about 75% of them I'd say, but nothing here is remotely close to concours quality and neither is mine.

Regarding performance...horsepower is always fun to brag about, and I'd like to optimize that for what's realistic for my budget (~$3000, give or take) but I'm most concerned about maximizing low end torque in the 2500 rpm range. I want to have fast acceleration, but comfortable cruising at highway speeds. Maximum RPM will probably be around 5000-5500.

I really didn't have a roller cam in the plan because the art of the valve train is quite intimidating to me, and switching to a roller cam makes everything more complex pretty quick.

My initial plan with the 289 was the Weiand intake, Performer 289 cam (because it's a cookie cutter cam and hard to go wrong), Comp Magnum roller rockers, a Holley 600 cfm carb (it's the carb that was on the previous 289. I haven't looked closely enough to know which one it is yet, but I'm presuming it's probably a 600 cfm), HEI distributer conversion (this is only preliminary...I haven't researched much about ignition at this point), headers, and 2.5" dual exhaust with cross over and high flow mufflers (exhaust isn't factored into engine budget).

I'll keep the stock heads and do some minor porting and use a thin head gasket. The engine will be balanced, and I'll probably be running cast hyper Badger pistons.

To get a little more zip on the acceleration I was going to raise the ratios of the first two gears during the transmission rebuild but will keep the rear end the same (my rudimentary understanding of this would lend me to believe that this would cause the car to cruise at a higher rpm in 3rd gear, which would kill mileage and wear the engine faster?).

The engine block itself will be a remanufactured long block from Hiperformer. They seem to have the lowest industry failure rate and have a 100,000 mile/7 year warranty. I can drop ship them my valvetrain component upgrades and they'll install them there. The nice thing about this is regardless of the fact that they're building a higher performance block than the stock blocks they build, it still maintains the same warranty.

A balanced 289 block with my parts installed will cost about $1900 shipped. There is absolutely no way I can buy a block, machine it, and put all new internals in myself for this price. Likewise I could order a 302 and the price would probably be about the same.

The point here is I have that option. But if I were to switch to a 302, how does that change my plans for the current configuration I was going with...if it changes them at all?
Lizer is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #8 (permalink)
PaulS is offline Made Member


Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,815 Threads: 3
 PaulS's Country Flag
Seattle   Washington
PaulS is on a distinguished road
Default

Cost comparison between the two is going to be nil.
The 289 and 302 use the same block dimensions. most all of the parts are directly interchangeable (as assemblies). You could put your 289 crank and rods with pistons into a 302 block and it would be a 289. You could also put a 302 crank, rods and piston in the 289 block and it would be a 302.
__________________
1966 Coupe
351W
Top Loader
rebuilt, rewired, modified for slalom and hill climb
No racing - just a fun car built by and for me.
Project in process
PaulS is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #9 (permalink)
sixtsixstang is offline Made Member

Classic Member


Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 759 Threads: 43
 sixtsixstang's Country Flag  View sixtsixstang's 22 photos
Williamston   South Carolina
sixtsixstang is on a distinguished road
Default

Since both engines are basically the same and you are not going for original, I would go for the cubes. As was mentioned, there are more aftermaket parts available for you to choose from now and in the future.
__________________
1966 Mustang Coupe. Mica Merlot with black stripes, Deluxe interior, 302 4V, 4-speed toploader, 3:70 9" rear end. Visit Car Shows of the Southeast on Facebook for info on shows. Add some of your own!
sixtsixstang is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #10 (permalink)
Dave is online now MACH I Member

S197 Member


Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,578 Threads: 43
 Dave's Country Flag  View Dave's 6 photos
Amherst   Wisconsin
Dave is on a distinguished road
Default

I'd go with the 302 and just swap over all the 289 externals. Put a 289 decal on the air cleaner and who's to know what's in there.
Dave
__________________
2013 Stage 3 Roush
'66' Ranchero w/almost done 302 T-5 swap
2000 4x4 Ranger
2003 4x2 Ranger
'69' Fairlane Cobra, 428 4-speed waiting for work
Dave is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #11 (permalink)
Lizer is online now SHELBY GT 350 Member

Classic Member


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,674 Threads: 95
 Lizer's Country Flag
Kalamazoo   Michigan
Lizer is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave View Post
I'd go with the 302 and just swap over all the 289 externals. Put a 289 decal on the air cleaner and who's to know what's in there.
Dave
actually that's exactly what I was going to do, since I'm keeping the 289 air cleaner :shiny:

So it looks like the overwhelming consensus is for 302. I think I can do that.
Lizer is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #12 (permalink)
Sick467 is offline GT Member

Classic Member
V6 Member


Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,038 Threads: 141
 Sick467's Country Flag  View Sick467's 69 photos
Sedalia   Missouri
Sick467 is on a distinguished road
Default

If you have to start from scratch and fiind/buy all your engine components - go 302. SO long as you aren't nostalgic. I happen to be a bit nostalgic and have a 289 block with no previous bore. If my block was junk - I'd be surfing for 302 stuff and probably looking hard for 302 Roller motors.
__________________
Ride On,
Noel

"I'll fix it or break it, Guaranteed!"
Sick467 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #13 (permalink)
RF Mustang is offline GT Member


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,579 Threads: 35
 RF Mustang's Country Flag
Miamisburg   Ohio
RF Mustang is on a distinguished road
Default

For what its worth, the cylinder walls of a 302 block extend down slightly farther versus the 289 to help support the increased stroke of the 302. It helps reduce piston slap. Other than this, there is NO difference between the 2 blocks.
__________________
'66 Ragtop, vibrant red, 289-4V, 4-speed toploader
'68 Fastback, space blue metalic, 351C-4-V, 4-speed toploader
'69 Mach I, (Pending Resto Project)
RF Mustang is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #14 (permalink)
Buckhunter is offline Apprentice

Classic Member


Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 54 Threads: 13
 Buckhunter's Country Flag
Brownstown   Illinois
Buckhunter is on a distinguished road
Default

I went with a 289 for my 68FB because thats what it had from the factory . I just wanted it that way . I sold the 302 that was in the car when I bought it .

BTW .......... my 289 has been puttin on a little weight lately ................ it now tips the scales at 347 ........... please dont tell anyone


would you put 289 fender badges on this car ?????
__________________
I bought a Comp Cams hydraulic roller instead of a custom ground cam because j.allen at camshaft innovations has the ABSOLUTE WORST customer relations I have ever experienced .........:nogrinner.......... 8^) ................... I LOVE my Comp cam ........ thanks j.
Buckhunter is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Unread 12-14-2009   #15 (permalink)
Shnate is offline Made Member

Classic Member


Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 266 Threads: 47
 Shnate's Country Flag  View Shnate's 9 photos
Ukiah   California
Shnate is on a distinguished road
Default

I just had to rebuild my 289 out of my 66. My car had the original block and i wanted to keep it that way. A very trusted friend of mine had 302 crank, cam and heads with oversized valves that he sold to me for my build. Everything was basically brand new. Anyway, I now have 302 cu out of my original 289 block. Fired it up yesterday and it runs great!!
Shnate is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply   Post New Thread



Thread Tools



Mustang Photos
Mustang Links    Top Sites    RSS    Link To Us    Add to Favorites    Archive    Terms of Use    Site Rules    Privacy    Contact    Sponsors    Advertise   
AllFordMustangs is not affiliated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company. ©Copyright 2002-2011 All Auto Enthusiasts Network

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164