Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've been looking over the specs between the 68-98 302 and my 67 289. The only difference that I find between the two engines is the rods on the 289 are shorter. If I changed the rods to 302 rods, will this make my 289 into a 302? Let me know if anybody has done this. Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
The 302 has a differnt crank too. I wouldnt put in the 302 stuff for cubes. Not enough differnce to really matter.

The only reason there is to go with a 302, would be to use a later block for the roller cam.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
625 Posts
I was reading about making a 400 horse 302 with some basic parts, and the author metioned that the 302 crank was worth 15 ft lb of torque. It was in Hot Rod and Mustangs & Fords magazine about 3-4 years ago. So I guess it is your call.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I guess if I'm gona go through all the trouble to replace the crank and rods, I should just make it a 347 stoker motor. I should be able to make 400 horse with that set up. I found several cast stroker 347 cranks, and I was wondering if anybody could comment on whether to use a cast crank.
Thanks

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Dean Justice on 1/28/02 8:05am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,929 Posts
I'd build the 331 before a 347. They last longer due to better ring placement. Most 347's have the pin up into the ring land. I have built the 331 with great success. Stout little engine. Bring it over, I'll build it for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
The cranks are also different..
crank 289 = 2.87 in, rod = 5.155 crank 302 = 3.00 in, rod = 5.090 By the way Dean Justice 289 rods are longer
A good prepped cast crank will see you @7000 rpm time & time again..GOOD LUCK..BOSS-289.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Henry Micallef on 1/28/02 9:17am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Is the 289 block a good block to be stroken???? 302 would be stronger and it looks the same....Just my 2 bits....Russ..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
359 Posts
that all depends if it is a regular 289 or a 289 HiPo then again the late model 302 is a roller motor

personally I say pick up a 302 short block out of a junk yard
with the stock crank and rods and a good set of pistons you can make more power that you would belivie

on top of all of that it is a cheap buildup
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,470 Posts
There's nothing wrong with 289 blocks. The earliest blocks made before 65 had the old 5-bolt bellhousing, but any after that are 100% interchangale with 2-piece rear seal 302 blocks. 289 blocks can even be used in place of late model 5.0 blocks as long as a 2-piece rear seal crank is used. Pre-85 blocks just aren't set of for hydraulic roller cams.

Speaking of 5.0 roller blocks... these are weaker than the 289 and early 302 units. They had a lot of meat taken out of them to save money on production and to make them lighter. The 50oz-in 5.0 cranks are more flimsy than the early model cranks as well.

289 and early 302 blocks are functionally identical, and are completely interchangable. Yes, they have the same 5 1/8" long cylinder walls, and are both fine for stroker kits.

Good Luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
If rebuilding account the surfaces are wore out(needs bored...crank needs reground). Its always cheaper to rebuild what you have. If crank is shot completely I would go 302 crank(same cost as 289) and pick up some reconditioned 302 connecting rods and new 302 pistons. It just makes sense considering it just a few dollar more to pick up the rods and would cost no more if you were going to recondition the 289 rods anyway(resize big end, shot peen, and good rod bolts). Pistons are the same cost wise. 306(.030 302) cubes out of a 289 will always a cheap increase in engine size.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top