Discuss 1965 Mustang 289 vs 289 HiPo engine? on AllFordMustangs.com, the place for Mustang enthusiasts.
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.
Sorry for this very stupid question, but it just shows how little I know about engines and my Mustang so far. Like I stated in a previous thread, I bought my Mustang about 3 weeks ago and the previous owners informed me the 289 engine had been rebuilt a few years ago. They stated it was a Hipo engine with 300+ horsepower. It runs great so I am not complaining about it, just curious how to tell if in fact it is now a hipo engine. The car is an automatic and I thought I read where all hipo's were manuals. I am curious about what to look for on the engine itself that can be an indicator. Car has hooker headers and flowmaster exhaust. Thanks.
You'd have to look at the VIN number. The Hi Po 289 was engine code K, you should see it in the VIN number.
AFM Site Administrator
Member: Mustang Club of America #82740, White Mustang Registry #362, NMRA, Fun Ford Weekend, Mustangs of Burlington MOOG Certified Technician For mods and sound clips, see profile and gallery.
Do a dyno on it. I'll be doing one for my 65 fastback next week. I have a 351W stroked to a 383 by the previous owner who claims to have way over 400 HP but I want to test it to see for myself and also get it tuned to make it run as good as possible
It's a code C. just curious if they increased it to a Hipo when the rebuilt it and how to check for more horsepower upgrades.
You can't just increase the HP and have a Hipo motor the are a few things needed to "clone" a Hipo. The block itself is vitually identical except that it has heavier main bearing caps as this is covered most wouldn't bother to upgrade a plain 289 block and you really don't need to it will handle the HP increase well enough and putting the heavier mains on a regular block requires machining which can be expensive. A Hipo will also have a brinell tested crankshaft and will have a letter K stamped after the regular casting number, easy to fake, and again the "regular" crankshafts will do just fine anyway. The Hipo will also have a small extra counterweight that goes on the crank. More noticable is a heavier wider harmonic balancer. The Heads are also a different casting but you won't notice the differance unless you pull a valve cover. Most noticable would be the cast in valve spring pockets, regular heads don't have them there are a few other differences also but it is actually the same basic head that comes on the C code and you won't see a performance gain by using them. And finally a Hipo will come with a solid lifter Cam if it's got a hydralic bumpstick it ain't a Hipo.
If I had to guess I'd say that whoever you bought this from slapped a 4 barrel on it with a Hipo dress up kit and passed it off as a Hipo motor. Hipo's are fairly rare so I would bet against one showing up in your car if it wasn't originally equiped with one. But dont sweat it...the C code that you have is a good solid motor that will handle a lot. And if it already has all the chrome goodies on the outside...so much the better.
Depending on what has been done to the motor 300 Hp isn't out of line, but if he claimed it was a Hipo I'd question anything else he told me. Headers, an Intake-4 barrel and a decent cam will add 40 to 50 HP if it's a freash motor you're lookin' at 250-260 HP with head work a bit more. Not too bad for a "little" ol 289.
Hope that helps.
"Government is not the answer to our problems, government is the problem."
It could be the engine is not original. I have a C-Code, and if I found a K-Code and stuck it in my car, it would be a HiPo, just not a factory hipo. It could be a K-code long block with the original C-code dress. Maybe.
People that aren't Mustang people like us will have different ideas about what HiPo means. Maybe to this PO, the warmed up 289 is Hipo because it is higher in performance than it was originally.
Or maybe, someone told him "hey man, you got a HiPo in your Mustang!" and he believed it, and he's just trying to be helpful.
Frankly, I think you are better off without the K-code. The mechanical cams are noisy and require very accurate adjustment of the valves. They are more of a high RPM engine, and, in my opinion, not fully taken advantage of by the average daily driver. Having something rare is great, but then you have something rare. I'd rather have something common (like a Mustang), and make it 'mine' (like my Mustang).
Again, not necessarily what I think happened or the most likely scenarios, but they certainly warrant consideration.
1966 289-2V C-4 Convertible. 2nd owner, resurrected rustbucket. Factory console and power top, conversion to P/B with dual res MC.
1990 GT 25th Anniversary 5.0 AOD Convertible. SOLD
Hello. If it is a K code motor, obviously, it would have K code heads. On a K code head, there will be a number cast into the front outboard side of the d/s head and the rear outboard side of the p/s head that will be either a 19, 20 or 21. If it's anything other than this, it isn't a K code head. They also have screw-in rocker studs instead of the press-in type, and the valve springs sit in pockets to keep them from scooting around at high rpms. Here's a couple of pictures. Hope that helps.
Alot of people add aftermarket stuff or better stuff and call it a HiPo because it is, in their minds, hi performance. Stick the HiPo cam into a C code, flat mill the heads to the correct compression, get the exhaust manifolds and intake and carb and youre making MORE power than one because the advertised compression ratio was higher than the true number. Most of the HiPo stuff isnt worth it unless you have a K code car, and then its just a value thing. Theyre nice to say you have though, but as stated the heads are virtually the same save for screw in rocker studs, they wont flow any different. If you really want power look to some 351 heads. Now im rambling, but good luck.
I like to let 'em stick with me for first and second, then I put the hurt on 'em when I chirp third ~
1967 Plymouth GTX, work in progress.
440 cubes (thats 7.2 litres for you modern guys)
480 ft lbs of torque
MODS: Direct Connection Purple Shaft cam
I know I am way late on this one. Nice post Veronica, stole my cast #'s and screw in rocker studs. Only 3 K-things to add. Slotted pushrod guides(see in V's nice pics) cast in head allowing you to use a HD non-rail rocker that would sustain higher RPM's. Last is the combustion chambers which were 49cc vs. 54cc(don't quote on those #'s) to give it a 10.5 compression ratio, .5 higher that the A code, as the pistons were the same.
It's not in a Mustang but shares a lot of the same history. Just for a reference, here is a HiPO 289 from 1966. My dad bought ordered it and had Dave Zeuschel balance and build it into a great engine for the little 66 Ski Sporter Donzi. Dyno'd at about 261 horsepower and has an isky cam, mondello modified heads and edlebrock intake.
It still runs, has about 300 total engine hours or less after all these years of having it in the family and we did a little work to bring it back on line this summer. With the oil pan off you could see the heavy duty components. My mechanic was showing me all that went into the hipo engine. Firing order was different though. It sounds so nice with no mufflers...
Also the HIPO had dual points, and did not have vacuum advance on the distributor. And one last note I've ran the 289 271HP hipo cam in my 65 since 1974, and the only time I need to adjust the valve lash, is when it starts to get noisy, which is about once every two years or so, and it takes about 30 min to do, I run isky valve springs which have alot more spring pressure than the stock ones, retainers, and keepers, I turn it up to 7500 rpm, it has not been rebuilt since 74, but it is due. I love the clatter of the valve train, it has a nostalgic sound, just like my cherry bomb mufflers. Good Luck.