|
Author
|
Topic: GT350R 360hp 289
|
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 888
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 11-15-2005 01:25 AM
 
Anyone have info on the 360HP 289 put into the GT350R's? I never knew such a beast existed but noticed it on a Mustang site when I was looking at different engine options for different mustangs. I've always knew about the 271hp HiPo and that was what inspired me to build my 289 (always loved that motor) but the Shelby motor had to be even sweeter. Any specs on it? Cam? Compression? etc B-loose
|
427Fastback
Gearhead Posts: 530
From: N.Vancouver.B.C
Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted 11-15-2005 02:09 AM
Wouldn't that be one of there Weber carbed engines..????Cory ------------------
68 Fastback 427MR 4 spd.Deluxe interior,8000 tach,140 speedo,am/fm,tilt.
|
JCQuinn@work
Gearhead Posts: 998
From: Lakewood, CO, USA
Registered: Jun 2001
|
posted 11-15-2005 11:22 AM
According to the NHRA engine spec's for the Shelbys this is what was available in 65.Issued: 15 April 1966
Revised: 5-22-70
Bulletin #: SHELBY65 Page 1 of 1 Specifications for the 1965 Shelby-American engines. HP Disp C.R. Ind. Make Model/Transmission Manifold R.R. Lifter Head cc Notes 271 289 11.6 1-4 Ford C3OF-AB/AJ/ALL 1.6 M 47.7 1
300 289 11.6 2-4 Cart AFB-3259S & 3258S/ALL 1.6 M 47.7
306 289 12.7 1-4 Holl 3259/ALL 1.6 M 42.0
325 289 11.6 4-2 Webb 48 IDA or IDM/ALL 1.6 M 47.7
Notes
1- Built on a mixed basis with C4OF-AD,AL,AT,C4ZF-G.
Deck Piston
HP Disp Cl Type Height Vol Valves Cam Lift Springs 271 289 .0015 1780/1460 478/478 Outer w Damper
300 289 .0015 1885/1635 478/478 Outer w Damper
306 289 .0015 1885/1635 478/478 Outer w Damper
325 289 .0015 1885/1635 478/478 Outer w Damper If there was a 360hp version it probable was the Paxton supercharged version. I understand a few of those were built.
|
Scott H
Gearhead Posts: 1480
From: Chicago area
Registered: Mar 2005
|
posted 11-15-2005 02:56 PM
I think you're thinking of the 306 version, yes?
|
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 888
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 11-15-2005 09:56 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Scott H:
I think you're thinking of the 306 version, yes?
Nope, the plain run of the mill GT350 got the 306hp which also would be another sweet motor. Apparently there was a specially prepped 360hp motor for the GT350R. I found on another site where they say it was indeed the Webber carbed version but they list it at 350hp. They also say 12 of the 350R's were made. Talk about limited quanities. I'd love to know the cam specs, compression, and head type used on the R's. The 306 and 360hp mills had to be a wicked little beast. Wonder what the 1/4 mile times were. B-loose
|
427Fastback
Gearhead Posts: 530
From: N.Vancouver.B.C
Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted 11-15-2005 10:57 PM
There were 35 competition(R) model cars built plus 2 protoypes, also 9 GT350 Drag cars were built in 65One of the drag cars did the quarter in 12.6 Cory... ------------------
68 Fastback 427MR 4 spd.Deluxe interior,8000 tach,140 speedo,am/fm,tilt.
|
blackford
Journeyman Posts: 76
From: Corona, Ca
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 11-16-2005 09:21 PM
I can't help you directly, but I can share with you a friends 289 that is putting out about 390 FWHP @ 6100 and about 355 ft/lbs of torque. It's got a dual quad manifold, dual 600 cfm vacuum secondary holleys, Comp 294S solid lifter cam, Dougs tri-ys, forged pistons with about 10:1 CR, shot peened rods with ARP bolts, stock crank, and.........ported stock heads with 1.9/1.6 valves. And some say you can't make HP with ported SBF heads...rubbish!He has a toploader behind it and over 330 RWHP...that's one excellent running 289! I'm hoping that after I get my C4 to T5 conversion done that my 331 puts out more RWHP than his 289. ------------------
Tracy Blackford
'65 "Black" ford FB, 331 with H beam 289 rods, KB322s, fully prepped 351w heads, 282S cam, C-4 auto, 3.50 9" posi. Many Suspension and handling mods. 4.5 year restomod project completed in May '04. 313 RWHP @ 6300. [This message has been edited by blackford (edited 11-16-2005).]
|
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 888
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 11-17-2005 01:17 AM
That's cool. I don't know what my 289 make for HP but it has to be pretty healthy to run a 12.65 in a 3400# car. When I was around 16 a friend of mine had a 289 HiPo in a '66 Fairlane. That car was fast and sounded mean as hell. Most of our friends with bigger motors had a hard time running with him. So when it came time for me to do a motor for my '68 I wanted a 289 in the same league as his was back then. I really didn't model mine after the HiPo but because of the HiPo I had an idea of what these little mills were capable of. But at 306 and 360hp those Shelby motors must have been even sweeter sounding and running than the ordinary HiPo. B-loose
|
blackford
Journeyman Posts: 76
From: Corona, Ca
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 11-17-2005 12:25 PM
To add a bit more info about the 360 HP 289, the Dragonsnakes (289 powered AC Cobra drag cars) had 380 HP 289s I believe. Back then Ford had small block heads that were referred to as Heavy Duty heads if my memory serves me correctly (from books i've read...I was too young to be there). The pictures of the heads clearly showed bigger intake and exhaust ports and I would guess larger valves too. They were used in Trans Am and drag racing. They weren't the 302 tunnel port heads...I think they were before the tunnel ports. I never seem to hear anything about those heads these days.Bill Carroll's Ford Stockers Bible probably has the 360 HP 289 cam specs. I have often thought about building a kick butt 289 with long rods and lightweight pistons, big solid lifter cam, AFR 165 heads, at least 11:1 compression, etc. that produced power in the 450+ HP range and revved to something like 7500 rpm. The 289 design has excellent bore/stroke characteristics. I met a guy who used to drag race 289s in a dragster back in the 60s. He used Hi Po 289 cranks and race heads and revved the engines to some ungodly rpms. ------------------
Tracy Blackford
'65 "Black" ford FB, 331 with H beam 289 rods, KB322s, fully prepped 351w heads, 282S cam, C-4 auto, 3.50 9" posi. Many Suspension and handling mods. 4.5 year restomod project completed in May '04. 313 RWHP @ 6300. [This message has been edited by blackford (edited 11-17-2005).]
|
mtkawboy
Journeyman Posts: 54
From: Billings Mt
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 11-17-2005 12:33 PM
I was lucky enough to see the black Dragonsnake Cobra run at the Nascar drags at Deland Fl during Feb speed week in I believe 1968. Ran 11.80's on a crappy old airport 1/4 miles track on 7 inch Caslers. Same year Petty ran the Cuda and all the big factory dogs were there. Greatest race I ever been to. Set the P/S record in a dense fog with my 59 Biscayne 283/185 4 speed car {there wasnt one before so no big deal}
|
JCQuinn@work
Gearhead Posts: 998
From: Lakewood, CO, USA
Registered: Jun 2001
|
posted 11-17-2005 02:51 PM
quote:
Originally posted by blackford:
To add a bit more info about the 360 HP 289, the Dragonsnakes (289 powered AC Cobra drag cars) had 380 HP 289s I believe. Back then Ford had small block heads that were referred to as Heavy Duty heads if my memory serves me correctly (from books i've read...I was too young to be there). The pictures of the heads clearly showed bigger intake and exhaust ports and I would guess larger valves too. They were used in Trans Am and drag racing. They weren't the 302 tunnel port heads...I think they were before those. I never seem to hear anything about those heads these days.
Depending on what year you are talking about those were probably the first generation GT heads. Those are the heads Ford used as a model when they designed the 80's version called GT40 heads. In the 60's those heads were never released to the public (something that aggrivates me to this day). Those of us trying to race the small block were stuck with the production heads while GM kept upgrading their small block heads. Grrrrr John
|
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 888
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 11-17-2005 10:14 PM
Very cool info guys. I love that little 289 and am glad I resisted the urge to go to a 347 in the FB. Now the wagon, that's another story.  B
|
blackford
Journeyman Posts: 76
From: Corona, Ca
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 11-29-2005 12:54 PM
I looked up 289 cam specs in Bill Carrols Ford Stockers Bible. In there they have a 289 buildup in stages using stock Ford parts that eventually achieves 360 HP. It uses a 600 cfm carb, an aluminum high rise manifold, high compression pistons, 351w heads, a 302 stroke crank and a C7FE-A cam (over the counter service item) which has seat timing specs of 318 degrees intake, 304 degrees exhaust, .510 lift, and 108.5 lobe seperation. 94 degrees of overlap too. Race cams back then commonly had a ton of duration with what may be considered mild lift compared to todays cams. That cam must have sounded pretty radical with all that overlap. With a larger carb and ported heads or modern aftermarket heads, it would probably have been well into the 400 HP area.An update...the cam was referred to as the Le Mans cam elsewhere in the book. ------------------
Tracy Blackford
'65 "Black" ford FB, 331 with H beam 289 rods, KB322s, fully prepped 351w heads, 282S cam, T5z, 3.50 9" posi. Many Suspension and handling mods. 4.5 year restomod project completed in June '04. 313 RWHP @ 6300 with old C4 auto...new dyno coming soon. [This message has been edited by blackford (edited 11-29-2005).] [This message has been edited by blackford (edited 11-30-2005).]
|
289nate
Journeyman Posts: 23
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 11-30-2005 05:35 PM
Valley Head Service right by me in Northridge CA used to do the head porting for Shelby's competition cars. My guess is that the heads for the R model may have been regular 289 hipo heads worked over by these guys. Just a thought.There was a feature in Mustangs & Fords in the early 90's on a '65 R model GT350. If my memory serves me they also claimed 360 + hp out of the competition version of the 289 which had a larger solid cam (maybe the old le mans grind), higher compression, highrise dual plane aluminum intake, single 780 cfm Holley, headers, side pipes without mufflers, etc. I think they also wrote that you could order one form a ford dealership.
|
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 888
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 11-30-2005 07:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by blackford:
Race cams back then commonly had a ton of duration with what may be considered mild lift compared to todays cams. That cam must have sounded pretty radical with all that overlap.
Even the Hi-po cam had a mild lift with lots of duration. Seems to me they did that because the heads didn't flow like they do today. Why open the valve a ton when the heads stop flowing at .500 lift. But then keep them open as long as possible to get the mix in and out. Make me sort of wonder why you can't still do that with mildly ported stock heads. Looks like a good ticket to performance with less than ideal port flow. B
|
blackford
Journeyman Posts: 76
From: Corona, Ca
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 11-30-2005 10:19 PM
It may have also been due to the technology available at the time for valvetrain components. Maybe springs were not as strong or durable, and valves, rockers, and pushrods were heavier. For those reasons possibly, they kept the lift low compared to today's standards. I was also noticing that the really radical 427 cam was 330 duration and .600 lift on both intake and exhaust. I think this was the tunnel port cam...not sure...but it said in the book that this cam had extreme lift and required special valvetrain components.------------------
Tracy Blackford
'65 "Black" ford FB, 331 with H beam 289 rods, KB322s, fully prepped 351w heads, 282S cam, T5z, 3.50 9" posi. Many Suspension and handling mods. 4.5 year restomod project completed in June '04. 313 RWHP @ 6300 with old C4 auto...new dyno coming soon. [This message has been edited by blackford (edited 11-30-2005).]
|
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 888
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 12-01-2005 09:25 AM
quote:
Originally posted by blackford:
It may have also been due to the technology available at the time for valvetrain components. Maybe springs were not as strong or durable, and valves, rockers, and pushrods were heavier. For those reasons possibly, they kept the lift low compared to today's standards. I was also noticing that the really radical 427 cam was 330 duration and .600 lift on both intake and exhaust. I think this was the tunnel port cam...not sure...but it said in the book that this cam had extreme lift and required special valvetrain components.
You could be right. There is no doubt we are faster now than then so there must be plenty of wisdon in the current grinds. 360hp from 289 ci is nothing to sneeze at though, especially back then. B
|
janne
Journeyman Posts: 10
From:
Registered: Nov 2005
|
posted 12-01-2005 10:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by blackford:
It may have also been due to the technology available at the time for valvetrain components. Maybe springs were not as strong or durable, and valves, rockers, and pushrods were heavier. For those reasons possibly, they kept the lift low compared to today's standards.
Hi lifts are also easier to market, I would think...
|
289nate
Journeyman Posts: 23
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 12-01-2005 01:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Bloose:
Even the Hi-po cam had a mild lift with lots of duration. Seems to me they did that because the heads didn't flow like they do today. Why open the valve a ton when the heads stop flowing at .500 lift. But then keep them open as long as possible to get the mix in and out. Make me sort of wonder why you can't still do that with mildly ported stock heads. Looks like a good ticket to performance with less than ideal port flow.B
I have a reproduction of the hipo cam in my 289. Runs altitude corrected high 12's at 105ish mph with a 1.84 60ft sporting mildly ported 289 heads, stock size valves and only 9:1 comp in my '65 fastback. I only hoped it could dip into the 13's with the restrictive heads, low comp, and a waaaay out dated cam. Seems as though your theory may be correct in my case. Another goofy aspect of the cam is it has a very wide lsa of 114. Guess Ford wanted to smooth out the idle.
|
