347 stroker in a bored .060 289? - Ford Muscle Forums : Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 12 (permalink) Old 08-22-2018, 05:44 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 1
347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

Thinking about stroking my 289 to a 347, but I've never done any crank shaft work. How hard of a job is it to stroke the motor? How will it affect my cooling? Is it possible to stroke it with a .060 bore?
cameronbates1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 (permalink) Old 08-23-2018, 04:19 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: North Iowa
Posts: 954
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

I think it's safe to go 30 on the small block but not 60. On cooling it seems to be a hit and miss because some people have problems and most don't. Be ready to upgrade the cooling system with a larger radiator, fans mechanical or electric and shrouds.

Iowan
"Obsolete is neat"

Iowan is offline  
post #3 of 12 (permalink) Old 08-24-2018, 11:33 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,788
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowan View Post
I think it's safe to go 30 on the small block but not 60. On cooling it seems to be a hit and miss because some people have problems and most don't. Be ready to upgrade the cooling system with a larger radiator, fans mechanical or electric and shrouds.

well said. while the max overbore for the 289 is .060, if you want to go that far out you best have the block sonic checked for core shifting. personally i would go no further out than .040 on a 289 block.

64 falcon
66 mustang
82 fairmont
a mans fate is a mans fate
and life is but an illusion
rbohm is offline  
 
post #4 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-02-2018, 03:34 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 60
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

I wouldn't go over .040. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the 302 cylinders a tad deeper than the 289 to accommodate the longer stroke of the 302 crank, let alone another 4/10 of an inch with the 347 crank? Just curious, but I thought that to be the difference between the 289 and 302 all else being the same (deck height, bore, etc.). If that's the case wouldn't another 13/100 on top of the 4/10" be kind of a deal breaker being the total stroke difference is over half an inch (.53 to be exact)? I could be wrong about all of this but my thoughts are that if the 302 has deeper bores to accommodate just a small difference in stroke, then wouldn't the combination of almost 1/2" of stroke along with a shorter piston, put the piston below the bottom of the cylinder, or at least dangerously close?

Last edited by Guitar74; 11-02-2018 at 03:37 PM. Reason: brain fart
Guitar74 is offline  
post #5 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-28-2018, 08:51 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 2
I have a 289 bored .060 over. I have a stock radiator and no special fans. Never has overheated. Runs great. Lots of power. We put a bigger cam in too, but I don’t remember the size right now. Sorry, I don’t know about stroking a 289.
iuproud is offline  
post #6 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-29-2018, 07:09 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Central West Virginia
Posts: 7,359
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

It's not recommended to bore 0.060". The cylinder is getting REALLY thin at that overbore. What little there is to be gained with cubic inches... is lost with thin, weak cylinders that are not stiff and lose ring seal. Only overbore as much as is necessary for cylinder integrity. No reason to go over 0.030", unless it won't clean up at that, and then I'd set my limit at 0.040" before looking for a different block.

As for cylinder length... I have measured several 289 and 302 blocks, and found no significant difference. Plus, the 'new' Boss 302 block Ford sells as aftermarket has FAR shorter cylinders than either 289 or regular 302 blocks. Most advise against using the 3.4" stroke (347) cranks in them, but some do anyway. Those blocks are so short, a portion of the PISTON PIN is actually below the cylinder at BDC!
n2omike is offline  
post #7 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-29-2018, 12:23 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Anaheim CA
Posts: 465
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

There are many .060 over 289 blocks out the running cool. Most people nave no clue. Just freshened a genuine 289 Cobra engine that surprised the owner by being 4.060. He commented "it never ran hot". Sonic checking is the only reliable way to determine cylinder wall thickness. I agree that there is no practical reason to bore a block any more than it needs. Custom pistons can be made at ANY bore size that there are complementary rings for. 4.005 4.006 whatever. It is important for people to remember that HALF of the total size increase is being machined , so 4.060 is only .015 more material per side. That small amount has little affect on a cylinder without core shift. It is FAR better that the STUPID idea of sleeving all 8 cylinders back to stock. If you need to know why just ask.
Randy

Experimental Ford parts collector.
GT350HR is offline  
post #8 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-29-2018, 12:39 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Anaheim CA
Posts: 465
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

Block strength / integrity goes from early 6 bolt blocks being the best and only getting worse as they moved toward the pathetic hyd roller blocks . I don't care how many girdles or braces you use increased HP will crack a roller block. Switching up to a four bolt '69-71 Boss block is good , the A4 and R blocks are better the new Boss is thick but suffers from the short cylinder length n2oMike called out. A Dart or World block would be the strongest of all. The aluminum blocks are light but will not make as much power as an iron block. Not EVERY engine needs a high end block. For 300 or so HP a late roller block will go 200,000 miles. Early blocks can handle 400 or a little more. 450 and up should be looking for four bolt mains . Sure the blocks will all make more power but the blocks will begin cracking with extended use.
Randy

Experimental Ford parts collector.
GT350HR is offline  
post #9 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-29-2018, 12:50 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: North Iowa
Posts: 954
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GT350HR View Post
There are many .060 over 289 blocks out the running cool. Most people nave no clue. Just freshened a genuine 289 Cobra engine that surprised the owner by being 4.060. He commented "it never ran hot". Sonic checking is the only reliable way to determine cylinder wall thickness. I agree that there is no practical reason to bore a block any more than it needs. Custom pistons can be made at ANY bore size that there are complementary rings for. 4.005 4.006 whatever. It is important for people to remember that HALF of the total size increase is being machined , so 4.060 is only .015 more material per side. That small amount has little affect on a cylinder without core shift. It is FAR better that the STUPID idea of sleeving all 8 cylinders back to stock. If you need to know why just ask.
Randy
I've seen that done, sleeve all eight cylinders on a restoration just because the customer wants a standard bore. The block hadn't been bored previously and the customer had OEM pistons.
It wasn't even a high performance motor. Lol

Iowan
"Obsolete is neat"

Iowan is offline  
post #10 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-30-2018, 12:27 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Anaheim CA
Posts: 465
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

Iowan,
Here is why "I" say it is stupid top do that. The walls are already thin. a sleeve is typically .125 wall or thicker. that means you have to bore a 4.250 hole or bigger into all eight places SO much material is removed that water jackets are exposed and the "deck" or top of the block has LITTLE parent material tying it to the main webs. But it's STANDARD is all people care about. The sleeves are only press fit into the block so the bolt areas are weakened and "pull" up under bolt torque MUCH easier. People think "standard" makes a part a virgin.
Randy

Experimental Ford parts collector.
GT350HR is offline  
post #11 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-30-2018, 02:48 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Central West Virginia
Posts: 7,359
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GT350HR View Post
Iowan,
Here is why "I" say it is stupid top do that. The walls are already thin. a sleeve is typically .125 wall or thicker. that means you have to bore a 4.250 hole or bigger into all eight places SO much material is removed that water jackets are exposed and the "deck" or top of the block has LITTLE parent material tying it to the main webs. But it's STANDARD is all people care about. The sleeves are only press fit into the block so the bolt areas are weakened and "pull" up under bolt torque MUCH easier. People think "standard" makes a part a virgin.
Randy
A 0.125" is a thick wall sleeve. Thin ones are more like 1/16" wall.
And, yes... boring a block that big simply to sleeve it back to standard is counter-intuitive.

For best cylinder wall integrity, don't bore a cylinder any more than necessary.
n2omike is offline  
post #12 of 12 (permalink) Old 12-03-2018, 01:36 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Anaheim CA
Posts: 465
Re: 347 stroker in a bored .060 289?

But guys do it EVERY DAY. Like it somehow restores 'virginity" to a block! The word "standard" is now something to be proud of for some silly reason.

Experimental Ford parts collector.
GT350HR 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











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
425 stroker (4.060 x 4.100) stroker kit L n L Engine 2 01-12-2011 04:57 PM
Is .060 safe for my 347? valleyfirearms Stroker Engines 23 05-26-2009 10:56 PM
Is a 306 stroker a 302 bored 0.030 foleysfriend Stroker Engines 6 12-12-2008 06:24 AM
390 bored .060 over? Sinister Galaxie Pages 16 11-22-2007 04:23 AM
Bored, bored, bored Murff The Garage 20 11-10-2007 04:17 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