Brought to you in part by:

.

Shop Eastwood for your Auto Restoration Needs!


  Mustangsandmore Forums
  Ford Racing
  has anyone made one?

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   has anyone made one?
sic67coug
Gearhead

Posts: 170
From: clearlake california
Registered: Dec 2002

posted 01-12-2003 03:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for sic67coug   Click Here to Email sic67coug     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
has anyone stroked out a 289 to 347? or are all the 347s 302's? just curious as to the outcome

IP: Logged

SteveLaRiviere
Administrator

Posts: 33371
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99

posted 03-03-2003 06:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for SteveLaRiviere   Click Here to Email SteveLaRiviere     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Sorry we missed this one.

Both 302 and 289 use the same 4.00" bore block, so you can use either although the 302 has longer cylinder bores which offer better piston stability at the bottom of the stroke.

------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150

Please remember our sponsors,
Mustangs Plus, NPD, Osborn Reproductions, MyFordPerformance.com, and FordRamAir.com

IP: Logged

steve'66
Gearhead

Posts: 6522
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 03-03-2003 07:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for steve'66   Click Here to Email steve'66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I asked my engine builder this question, and he said he prefers to use 302 blocks. FWIW

SteveW

IP: Logged

65_289
Gearhead

Posts: 761
From:
Registered: Jul 2001

posted 03-03-2003 07:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for 65_289   Click Here to Email 65_289     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
In an old issue of MM&FF, they said that due to the shorter bores, the 289 should not be used for a 347. I bet a 331 would be ok, though.

IP: Logged

sic67coug
Gearhead

Posts: 170
From: clearlake california
Registered: Dec 2002

posted 03-03-2003 08:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for sic67coug   Click Here to Email sic67coug     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
i asked another forum about this same thing and was told that the cylinder length was a myth and that they are the same length in the 302 as in the 289 i wouldnt know this will be my first engine to build and im gettin as much info as possible probly gonna need some more help on this in the future need to find someone to help my build it or at least walk me through it

IP: Logged

bifs66
Gearhead

Posts: 165
From: Maryland
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 03-03-2003 09:12 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for bifs66   Click Here to Email bifs66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Without actually measuring the cylinder lengths yourself, its anybody's guess if its a myth or fact (289 vs 302). However, I know that in the 60s Pete Robinson stroked a 289 to 352 and ran it in a blown dragster, even defeating Garlits' blown Chrysler at a major event. IIRC, they typically used Y-block cranks back then to stroke 289s.

------------------
Bernie Frank
66 Fastback restomod project
85 GT (preserved)
82 GT (original)

IP: Logged

steve'66
Gearhead

Posts: 6522
From: Sonoma,CA,USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 03-03-2003 09:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for steve'66   Click Here to Email steve'66     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
But,

It would be nice to keep your original 289, and get a 302 or even a roller 5.0 block for the "hot rod" motor wouldn't it?

SteveW

IP: Logged

sic67coug
Gearhead

Posts: 170
From: clearlake california
Registered: Dec 2002

posted 03-04-2003 12:01 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for sic67coug   Click Here to Email sic67coug     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
well yeah but its not my original engine i bought it from a guy said it came out of a 65 mustang and since it was only 40 bux i said illll take it but i do have to get heads and intake so my options are pretty open i just hope the things not cracked

IP: Logged

Ryan Wilke
Gearhead

Posts: 1501
From: Stanton, Michigan 49707
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 03-04-2003 08:35 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ryan Wilke   Click Here to Email Ryan Wilke     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by sic67coug:

.....but its not my original engine i bought it from a guy said it came out of a 65 mustang and since it was only 40 bux........

You may want to consider rolling it over and checking the casting #. If it's a C5----, you probably could sell it for more than it would cost to buy a roller 302 block; then you'd have a better block and $$$ in your pocket to spend on the 302....... just a thought.

Ryan

IP: Logged

[email protected]
Gearhead

Posts: 422
From: Lakewood, CO, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 03-04-2003 10:58 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for JCQuinn@work   Click Here to Email JCQuinn@work     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If you look at the crankcase portion of the blocks you will see that the 302 block has the bore extended with a ridge around the bottom of the cylinders and the 289 block does not have this ridge. I have not measured the bores but Ford put the extension on the castings when they went to the 3" stroke to provide piston stability.

The guys telling you this is a myth probably have never seen the inside of a 289 block.

John

IP: Logged

All times are ET (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Mustangsandmore Front Page

Copyright 2003, Steve LaRiviere. All Rights Reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47d

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

[Build a free Mustangsandmore.ws Home Page!]

[About M&M][Acronyms][Calendar][Chat][Classifieds] [Members' Pics] [M&M Mug Shots]

[ Mustangsandmore.com Bookstore] [Mustangsandmore.com T-Shirts][Tech Articles]