There's only a few cubes in it.. I'd use what you have.

 

Unless the 289 is a K-code engine, go with the 302

 

Hi Frisco, I just went through the same thought process, rebuild the 289 or go 302 roller shortblock and decided to stay with my 289. Your 289 can make the same power as the 302. When I priced the roller shortblock the addtl. parts were going to add $500-$1K to the rebuild as I couldn't use any of the parts I had. I had already picked up roller rockers, lifters, etc. to make my 289 run with less friction anyway but the roller lifters/ machine work and cam are 2-4X more expensive than the normal hydraulic parts. From what I could gather the lower friction from a roller cam saves 15-20HP over hydraulic and I couldn't justify that for the $ it would cost.

I asked on a few different forums and most said go roller 302 but I have to pay for it and really like the fact that I'm keeping the original motor in it just making it faster. I go to a lot of cruise ins and shows and it's getting harder to find a '65-67 that still has the 289. I've read our old 289 blocks have a higher iron/nickel content and more webbing/ reinforcement than the newer blocks, someone will correct me if that's wrong. I'm building for as bulletproof as I can get as I'd like to drive it a lot and I want the motor to last 100K if I can.

My 289 is at the shop now, it was already .030 over but the cylinders were fine to just hone. It'll be reassembled with a stroker kit to 331ci. I picked up some used AFR 165's as the stock heads are the restrictive part of a sbf. I am also installing an AOD and a 9" and installing 3.50 tracloc. I discussed all parts I had and my intentional use for the car with my builder and he suggested 3 different cams, we mulled them over and he eventually landed on the same CompCams XE262 I was researching as it fit my RPM range, driving use, gearing, etc.
Your heads will be the key if you can reach 300-350HP I'd say, won't know what mine will dyno at until it's done and any number >300 will be fine with me, stock it was only 200HP and spun the 2.79 gears...
Hope some of this info. helps, I'm sure others will chime in.
Jon

 

My understanding is that the blocks and cranks are the same, except for the stroke in the crank and cylinder bore (?). The areas where difference that matter might appear is with respect to the factory heads. If you are not using factory heads, the you could use either block. You may wish to learn how much you are away from having a zero-deck block, which means checking whether the piston crown comes absolutely to the top of the block and if not, how many thousands below (probably .020). You want to determine this volume in order to later determine the combustion chamber size with different heads, relative to factory. You could gain or lose .5 on the compression ratio by things such as this. It may help you determine how much to mills heads.

You also want to compare valve diameters between heads. for instance, does the 289 head have the same size intake valve as the 302? What about runner diameter and flow?

I don't know the answers to these, but to get max power out of your rebuild, you want to know how each part will affect the others. Some of the mid to late 70 302 blocks are weaker than the 289 block. there are subtle casting differences.

good luck. If you want to go the 302 route, I have a mexican block 302 all cleaned up and crated to ship. It just needs a buyer. By my measurement, it has never been bored (has the 4 inch bore) and the cylinder walls do not need a clean-up bore. Just hone them and build away. The block comes with the main caps, too. The mexican block 302 maincaps are like the 289 K code maincaps - beefier than 289/302 standard blocks. There is no truth to the rumor than the cast iron in these blocks has a higher nickle content. I think some of the webbing is also a bit thicker, as these were built for use in trucks and buses. The block casting numbers date it to 1976, if I remember correctly.

 

320hp is certainly attainable with a 289 or 302. Since you already have a 289 block, crank, and rods I'd say go with those. I prefer the 289 anyway, it has a better rod/stroke ratio than a 302 so it will make just a little more hp per c.i. Below 4000 rpm, the extra 13 c.i. of the 302 usually translates into about 10 more ft-lb and 10 more hp but to reach your hp goals you'll probably be over 5000 rpm at peak hp and that's where the 289 really shines. Plus, you'd still have the original 289 engine size that is getting more rare to see these days. As another poster mentioned, it seems that most early model drivers today have a 302 or a stroker. Don't underestimate how much fun a short stroke engine with alot of gear can be!

Assuming a 289 build; to reach your hp goal you're going to need aftermarket heads or a really excellent porting job on your 289 heads. I'd suggest the AFR 165. Twisted Wedge would work well too, but you'd have to mill the decks to get adequate compression since they come with a 61cc chamber. Some may say the AFR 185 would be better for this HP level, but the short stroke/long rod combo of a 289 doesn't really need the extra flow to reach scary rpms and the smaller port volume will help low rpm drivability. Also, get race quality prep/machine work to assemble the short block. There's nearly 50hp available in properly and accurately machining the block and bottom end that many people throw away by trying to save a few $$ in this area. Don't skimp on the shortblock and you'll be rewarded with not only a reliable engine but more power too. You'll need a relatively low profile intake to fit under the stock hood, but a Stealth works well in this power range. For even more cool factor you could go with the repro cobra dual quad intake and a pair of 390 cfm Holley's. It's not the cheapest intake set up, and likely won't make much (if any) more HP than a Stealth but there's just something special about a 289 with dual Holley's. It's not only retro cool and nostalgic, but once you hear it run you'll agree there's nothing else like it!

 

You have to be very careful when building a motor with that few cubic inches. Sure, you can get it to make 350 hp at 7,000 rpm but below 2500 it is going to be an absolute dog. If you try putting a motor like that in front of an auto with 2.79 rear gears you are going to be VERY disappointed.

IMO you need at least around 350 cubic inches in order to have the best of both worlds. My 347 pulls hard to 6500 no problems but I can also run it in 5th gear (.62 OD) at 1500 rpm.

The original 289 HiPo in my Shelby had a serious cam and worked iron heads. It screamed above 4000 but was it was no fun trying to launch it. Boss 302s tend to have the same problem.

 

The way I understand it the main reason everyone is switching to roller block 302s is for reliability and maintenance. The horsepower seems to be more a secondary bonus. With the epa mandates some of the high pressure additives have been reomoved from most motor oils except specialty products. The result has been wiped cam lobes, I even remember someone menmentioning wiping a cam with 20,000 miles on it. The roller lifters don't have this issue (although they need a different distributor gear). I also can't see the machine work costing any more on a roller vs a standard block as the only applicable difference that I know of is taller lifter bores.

If you do decide to build the 289, look into 351w camshafts (find a profile you like for the 289 and look for a matching profile in the 351w cam). This will allow you to run the 5.0 HO/351w firing order, which is supposed to be slightly better for hp.

If anything I've written is incorrect I'm sure someone will correct me.

 

There is not much difference between the two engines..The blocks are pretty much identical until you get up to the 5.0 roller blocks which have longer bores for the roller lifters...You can buy linked roller lifters to use in your early block if you want the roller cam in your 289..It's the top end (heads,camshaft,intake,carb) that will determine how much power you will make and at what rpms...The block basically just holds it all together..

 

you can have your 289 block machined to accept standard roller lifters ...... instead of the expensive retro jobbies

I would be looking at stroking that 289 if it were me ............... in fact that IS exactly what I am doing ........... 400-450 HP goal

 

Great feedback all, appreciate it. I do plan on changing out the gears from the 2.79 to a 3.55 with an AOD. Will that be the best gear ratio on a 302 pushing 320+hp and an AOD?

 

I have a 289 with AOD and 3.50 9" traction-lok in my '66. I have 351w heads on it for the better runners and larger valves. The car, in street trim, has run a best ETA of 14.003 and best MPH of 102mph (not the same run) in the 1/4 mile, and I can get 22 mpg on the freeway. It would be at least mid 13's with some slicks ... it is severely traction challenged even with the traction-lok.

It's a great setup and a real "kick in the pants" on the street.

Nowadays, it's not that much more to go aluminum than it is to do the 351w head swap, though.

In stock form, I prefer the 289 over the 302 because it had better heads. The heads, IMHO, more than make up for the missing 13 cubic inches.

 

"machined to accept standard roller lifters". If you don't mind, how exactly is that accomplished?
On my engines, the non-roller blocks have shorter lifter bores versus those that are OEM roller cam blocks. I don't see how machine work would change that. I do know you can drill the block valley to accept an OEM spider and just risk the roller lifters rocking in their bores. Something I wouldn't care to do myself, but is there an alternative?

 

I think he means sleeving the lifter bores (installing longer sleeves). I've heard of doing this and I think it would work, however I don't think it would be worth the cash when 5.0 roller blocks are so cheap. Id rather use a conversion cam with a smaller base circle than sleeve the lifter bores.

 

I suspect something like that, but it would mean having the sleeve protrude somewhat out of the block and sleeves are generally meant to be supported by the block casting. My personal aversion to doing this probably would mean little if "lots of guys are running engines like that with no problems", or something similar.
I'm just curious really. People are thinking up new and off-the-wall ways to do things all the time.

 

289 block is a much stronger block than the 5.0 roller block ......they machine to make it possible to use the dogbones instead of tie strap lifters... talk to an engine builder ......... not a bunch of internet experts

 

When I talk to my engine builder SWMBO gives me funny looks.
"not a bunch of internet experts " Are we implying something?

 

You WANT THE TRUTH?

The truth is you pulled that 300 HP number out of thin air. What is 300 HP? 300 HP is roughly twice as much HP as your 289 made when it was new if it was a c-code.

The truth is, you just want significantly more horsepower than you have now.

The truth is, if you build up the 289 with aftermarket heads, a decent cam, and a nice exhaust, it will make more power than you really need in a 40 year old car.

The truth is, you really need to address the rest of your car including things like brakes, chassis and suspension BEFORE you double the power the engine puts out.

The truth is, you'll want 3.55's or lower with that AOD and traction lock too.

The truth is, there is no limit to the amount of time and money you can throw at an old Mustang.

The truth is, once you have that built up 289 for a couple of years, it's going to feel a little weak and may want to go with a 347 after all. IIWY I'd just bite the bullet now and start with a 347. A 347 is going to cost you more money, but it's cheaper to buy it first then build up your 289 and try to step up later. I know because that's EXACTLY WHAT I'M DOING NOW. And my 289 had about all the parts, inclucing the AFR heads that were recommended to you. It makes a nice motor. In an old mustang you'll be able to run off and hide from a bone stock 4.6 Mustang GT. Is that enough? For me it isn't.

Phil

 

Block strength between the two makes no difference until you hit around 500 hp. Since that's not the Posters goal, we can ignore that fact.

The fact remains, plain and simple that you have to build the snot out of a 289 for it to get any real power.

Someone here mentioned they are hitting 14.0's on their warmed over 289. WHile that's a fantastic time slip compared to stock, it still won't keep up with today's cars.

Todays average semi-performance cars will hit 13's. This includes mustangs, 350z, and many sport sedans.

If you want to keep up with today's cars, you have to get a little more serious than the 289.

The roller 5.0 blocks for years have satisfied this. I'll have to admit though that even those are starting to get old. Strokers are the key to the future.

ANyhow, with 5.0 roller motor being "disposeable motors" there is no reason On God's green earth to spend the pretty coin building up a 289.

you're gonna sink thousands into that 289 to make some real #'s.

Hit up the 4x4 junkyard motors and get a 96-01 explorer 5.0 engine.

It comes with the roller 5.0 block, gt40 or gt40p heads, and an efi gt40 style intake. Keep the efi intake, it flows well, or put a fat carb setup on it.

swap a real cam and valve springs, and you've got a 300 hp engine for $500-800 out the door.

Makes no sense to build a motor any more unless you want serious HP.

Roller blocks don't wear out (nearly)...just grab a sub 200k longblock, drop in and enjoy.

 

289 block is a much stronger block than the 5.0 roller block ......they machine to make it possible to use the dogbones instead of tie strap lifters... talk to an engine builder ......... not a bunch of internet experts

what if the engine builder also happens to be an internet expert?

 

My 289 is in that HP range. But I had some major head work done, motor bored 30 over. And everything thing you can bolt on...... Exhaust is a big area. Try Y headers, exhaust system. etc.

 

Hack...cough cough. HAW!. Dammit LMan, I was eating when I read that. About choked to death.

 

289 block is a much stronger block than the 5.0 roller block ......they machine to make it possible to use the dogbones instead of tie strap lifters... talk to an engine builder ......... not a bunch of internet experts

what if the engine builder also happens to be an internet expert?

well ......... thats always a possiblity .............. problem is 99.999% of em aint !!!!!


but I was out of line ......... I was thinkin about strokin to a 347 .......... not really a 289 build ............. :shrug:

 

Well.........I'm not an expert.........but I do play one ...........on the internet............

 

Well.........I'm not an expert.........but I do play one ...........on the internet............

me too !!!!!!!................. :loco:

 

Thats why im here, the internet is full of experts!