1966 289 build - Ford Muscle Forums : Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 10:17 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
1966 289 build

New to the forum and have some questions, recently purchased a 289 .30 over with 67k miles after rebuild from a 66 fairlane, looking to install a performer RPM manifold, a edelbrock 600cfm electric choke carb some good headers and a cam, cam I've looked at is Lunati 10311003 and also the Lunati 71900-16 lifters and summit racing 1.6 steel roller tip rocker arms, I will also look into home porting heads as I have an extra set of 289 heads also '66, I am hoping to spin engine to 6K and make 300-350hp and was wondering if this combo will work well? And if there is any other modifications I should purchase to safely spin 6k, Other plans for car is a T-5, front disks and trac-lok.
JP66 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 12:33 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
Posts: 369
Re: 1966 289 build

I don't think you will have too much trouble making 300+ hp with that combo. Shelby made 306 hp with a similar setup back in 66.

The 66 289 heads were not terrible since they didn't have thermactor bosses in the exhaust ports. Just clean them up a little and port match them to the gaskets. One of the things we used to do back in the day was replace the valves with 1.90 intakes and 1.60 exhausts. TRW and Manley used to make them. I think they still do. One thing you definitely should do is install screw in studs.

Shelby used 11 to 1 compression pistons but that's a little much with today's gas. Shoot for 10 to 1.

I personally prefer a dual plane intake to a single plane. Also, Shelby used a 715 cfm vacuum secondary Holley back then. THAT carb is magic on a 289.

If you really want to keep it old school Comp Cams makes an updated version of the Shelby cam.

I had one running 12.0s in th 80's in a 3000lb car basically running an engine like this.

1966 Falcon, 347 stroker and C-4
falconfred is offline  
post #3 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 01:47 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by falconfred View Post
I don't think you will have too much trouble making 300+ hp with that combo. Shelby made 306 hp with a similar setup back in 66.

The 66 289 heads were not terrible since they didn't have thermactor bosses in the exhaust ports. Just clean them up a little and port match them to the gaskets. One of the things we used to do back in the day was replace the valves with 1.90 intakes and 1.60 exhausts. TRW and Manley used to make them. I think they still do. One thing you definitely should do is install screw in studs.

Shelby used 11 to 1 compression pistons but that's a little much with today's gas. Shoot for 10 to 1.

I personally prefer a dual plane intake to a single plane. Also, Shelby used a 715 cfm vacuum secondary Holley back then. THAT carb is magic on a 289.

If you really want to keep it old school Comp Cams makes an updated version of the Shelby cam.

I had one running 12.0s in th 80's in a 3000lb car basically running an engine like this.
Do you have a part # for this cam? I was hoping to find a cam that i won't have to adjust all the valves all the time for convenience.
JP66 is offline  
 
post #4 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 01:58 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
Posts: 369
Re: 1966 289 build

This should be it.

COMP Cams: Nostalgia Plus™, N+271H <br> Sound of Ford 289, Increased Performance

1966 Falcon, 347 stroker and C-4
falconfred is offline  
post #5 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 02:28 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
Okay, and compression is at 9:3 right now I think (so I've been told) can I just mill the heads .015" and get to 10:3?
JP66 is offline  
post #6 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 02:31 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by falconfred View Post
Is there a roller with a similar grind car will be driven daily?
JP66 is offline  
post #7 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-05-2016, 03:55 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
Posts: 369
Re: 1966 289 build

I believe they have a roller version of the same cam.

1966 Falcon, 347 stroker and C-4
falconfred is offline  
post #8 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-09-2016, 01:14 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by falconfred View Post
I believe they have a roller version of the same cam.
Any opinions of the comp 281hr cam, looking at the complete kit and picked up a camera that will allow me to look inside the cylinder head to check how my porting is going, also do you have a link for the intake/exhaust valves
JP66 is offline  
post #9 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-09-2016, 04:47 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
Posts: 369
Re: 1966 289 build

Don't know anything about that cam.

Summit lists a bunch of oversized valves for the sbf.

1966 Falcon, 347 stroker and C-4
falconfred is offline  
post #10 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-09-2016, 05:28 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by falconfred View Post
Don't know anything about that cam.

Summit lists a bunch of oversized valves for the sbf.
new to this so forgive me its my first overhaul on this car so I'm learning a lot but oversized valves, will they help any with the overall flow of the head. I've read that the 289 head is fairly restrictive, but I'm on a budget so aluminum heads are out of my budget but I have 2 sets of 289 heads and am willing to put some money into them if it is worth it in performance gains.
JP66 is offline  
post #11 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-10-2016, 08:37 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
Posts: 369
Re: 1966 289 build

Oversized valves will definitely increase flow. If you are planning to get a valve job the installation is essentially free.

Part of the reason 289 heads are restrictive is because of the dimunitive size of the valves. Any work you do on the ports will be of limited value with stock valves.

BTW switching to a roller cam can be fairly expensive unless you have a later model block.

1966 Falcon, 347 stroker and C-4
falconfred is offline  
post #12 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-10-2016, 06:43 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by falconfred View Post
Oversized valves will definitely increase flow. If you are planning to get a valve job the installation is essentially free.

Part of the reason 289 heads are restrictive is because of the dimunitive size of the valves. Any work you do on the ports will be of limited value with stock valves.

BTW switching to a roller cam can be fairly expensive unless you have a later model block.
what all is necessary to change for a roller? I have looked into comps kit that comes with lifters springs pushrods timing kit retainers hardware etc, what am I missing?
JP66 is offline  
post #13 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-11-2016, 07:33 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
Posts: 369
Re: 1966 289 build

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP66 View Post
what all is necessary to change for a roller? I have looked into comps kit that comes with lifters springs pushrods timing kit retainers hardware etc, what am I missing?
Nothing. I'm just saying it's expensive.

1966 Falcon, 347 stroker and C-4
falconfred is offline  
post #14 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-11-2016, 10:52 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: North Iowa
Posts: 534
Re: 1966 289 build

You can make power with a 289 but it comes down to how much do you have to spend? I have a 455 hp 289, I could have bought a 500 hp 362 from Ford for less money, but I wanted a 289.

Iowan



"One old fart with a few wild ponies"

Last edited by Iowan; 11-11-2016 at 05:18 PM.
Iowan is offline  
post #15 of 33 (permalink) Old 11-12-2016, 09:22 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Virginia
Posts: 10
Just picked up the engine and rpm intake getting carb this coming up week then starting head work and finalizing cam selection, in the meantime I was thinking about the fuel, is a stock style pump/lines/tank etc going to need any revision?
JP66 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Muscle Forums : Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1966 GTA Convertible Build Locations? tomato Fairlane Pages 1 06-03-2015 07:08 AM
How to build up a 1966 289ci grades Mustang Pages (1965-1973) 13 09-02-2010 05:41 AM
1966 fairlane gt build sheet 66fairlane4spd Fairlane Pages 3 08-06-2010 07:22 AM
First Build:1966 Mustang cliffavickery Mustang Pages (1965-1973) 9 05-18-2010 06:56 PM
1966 MUSTANG - STOCK BUILD-UP MNSJR All Ford Techboard 1 01-09-2004 06:01 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome