289 vs. 302 whats better for my mustang - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 09:57 AM
lost_shadow's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: lower Tx.
Age: 30
Posts: 2
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
289 vs. 302 whats better for my mustang

i have a 67' mustange with a 289 it needs an over hall but i also have a 302, off a crown victoria.

I could strip the 302 and the 289 and swap parts or i could just over hall the 289, what would be better. which would give me the best results and get me going faster.


thank you for your help. i appreshiate it

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 10:30 AM
FoxThunder 5.0's Avatar
i think its broke...
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: missouri
Age: 27
Posts: 112
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i dont think i could choose one over the other. since it is 67 mustang, my favorite , id say stick with the 289, and rebuild the 302, but not with the factory parts, since it is a standard output engine. the difference between ur 302 and a mustang 5.0, smaller cam, smaller ports in heads etc. stick with 289!! i dont think u want ur mustang making 155 hp with the 302....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 12:28 PM
4 Jaw Chuck's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Age: 46
Posts: 4,977
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 89 Times in 72 Posts
Do up the 289.
__________________
Outlawed tunes from outlawed pipes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 12:39 PM
madhat's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Amarillo, Tx
Age: 30
Posts: 111
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Stick with the 289 is my opinion, but I just have one question...what are you going to do with the stang? Are you wanting a resto or a street car, a drag car, or a daily driver? The 289 will allow higher revs and a longer powerband, but the 302 will have a slightly lower power curve with slightly lower redline. 289 i think would make a better daily driver, resto, track car, but the 302 could be more easily built to be a drag/street racer...but that is if you are going to rebuild the motors because stock that 289 should have more ponies for your pony.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 01:00 PM
66Mustang's Avatar
New Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 19
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I like my 289 but it wont make as good of a racing engine if thats what you want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 01:29 PM
lluciano77's Avatar
Short changed on common sense
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: california
Age: 37
Posts: 3,548
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Is the 302 a 5.0? I mean does it have a roller cam? If it does build the 5.0. The roller cam is well worth it. Roller cams are far superior to flat tappets. The roller cam block also has a one piece rear main seal. Sell the 289 and use the money for parts to build the 5.0.

If you rebuild the 5.0, use the stock cam 5.0 from an HO block, and use the factory bottom end, dollar for dollar it will make more power than the 289. If you get it rotating balanced it will make more than 200 Hp at least. Unless you build the 289 with a super expensive bottom end and valve train, and plan on spinning 7,500 plus RPMs, it will not spin any higher or faster than the 5.0.

Last edited by lluciano77; 07-29-2003 at 01:29 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 02:03 PM
FoxThunder 5.0's Avatar
i think its broke...
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: missouri
Age: 27
Posts: 112
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i dont know about the 289 but i know the 302 is a roller motor. and u cant use an HO cam in an SO motor, different firing order....289 can probably make more rpms too, the 289 would be better for a racing engine
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 04:37 PM
mustang66maniac's Avatar
Ford Freak
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 676
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
OO i know, use the 289 rotating assembly in the roller block. The 289 has longer rods and a shorter stroke....a better recipe for revving. Match that with the one piece seal and the roller cam, and some good heads, youll have a screamer. You can use a HO cam in a non HO block, the firing order is different, but just change the wires around and itll still work. THe engine will run with both firing orders given that it has the matching cam to go with it. 5.0 HO roller motors and 351s have a different firing order than 302s and 289s, but put a 289 cam in a 351 or 5.0, and change the firing order and itll still run.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 05:17 PM
Nico's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 31
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm a classic mustang fan and have done a few 302 and 351 switch outs. 289 was built like a friggin' tank. I have a couple that I have consistently beat the crap out of and they still perform wonderfully.


I too would recommend the 289 if you want a "good, solid" engine that won't let ya down.

302s are good, but I've had much better luck with 289s

Nico
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 05:29 PM
lluciano77's Avatar
Short changed on common sense
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: california
Age: 37
Posts: 3,548
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I spin my 5.0 to 7,500 RPM all the time and it gets there really fast. I have a 4.11 rear with a C4, and 3,200 stall. Never had any problems. I have a stock bottom end and a not very stock valve train. I doubt a similarly set up 289 with a flat tappet will spin any faster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 06:05 PM
woodz428's Avatar
Troll Hunter
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Philo,Il
Posts: 2,702
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Arrow

I like the 289 also, but I like Mustang66maniacs idea. Use the roller block with the 289 rotating assembly, I'd use the 289 heads also, it's easy to change the firing order, the crank throws are the same .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 07-29-2003, 08:58 PM
Max Keith's Avatar
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fort Madison,Iowa
Age: 66
Posts: 2,391
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
289 vs 302

Go with the 302; even if it were a older version. There is no substitute for cubic inches, even if it is only 13. The amount of RPM an ingine turns is irrelivant to its ability to make power or as a race engine. Remember that the 427 was killed not by the 429, but by the 428, which while displacement wise, was nearly identical, but the 428 was capable of putting out more horsepower at lower RPM's, making it simply a cheaper engine to build, as it didnt require all the necessary equipment to make and engine survive when turning a kazillion RPM. Note also what a 460 will do to a 429 when equipt the same. Ditto for the 289 vs 302 debate. Until the roller cam versions came out, the 302 was basically nothing more than a stroked 289. As for HP etc., I had a 69 mustang with the regular 2 bbl 302, and it put out as much hp and more torque then did the standard 4 bbl 289, of the previous years (not referring to the origional cobra 289), but inch for inch, the 302 simply has the superior capablilities.
I repeat myself; theres no substitute for cubic inches.
So unless you are doing a resto act, go with the 302.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 07-30-2003, 01:18 AM
mustang66maniac's Avatar
Ford Freak
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 676
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Dude, its really not that big of a difference. I dont know if you noticed, but hp ratings went up over the years in mustangs. I could argue that the 289 has longer rods than the 302 which not only allows it to rev higher, but also makes more low end torque.

The 428 killed the 427? OOO, THAT must be why shelby put 428s in the AC cobras....wait a second, he put in 427s becuase they could run circles around 428s. Ford used 428s in the mustang becuase the cobra jet package was simply matching odd parts from the parts bin and made for a cheap fast engine. The 427 was used in anything that was made to go fast, AC cobras, thunderbolts,....NASCAR!

ANd gues what? The 427 had a shorter stroke than the 428.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 07-30-2003, 02:04 AM
Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Shreveport LA
Age: 64
Posts: 5,103
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You could use the 302 roller motor with the 67 intake, carb, & distributor, and use a hydraulic roller cam. The pistons may need to be cut for valve clearance however. The heads from the Crown Vic motor are great for low rpm power & gas mileage, but I'd find something else for any kind of performance use. Your 289 heads would be better. Ford recently discontinued the GT40-P iron heads, but they are still available from some of the aftermarket people & they're even better, plus they're fairly inexpensive. They do have a different header flange, but headers are available for using them in old Mustangs. The roller cam in the Crown Vic motor is also a low-rpm item, having around 180 to 185* duration at .050". The power peak on that motor is at 3200 rpm, the torque peak is at 2000. Definitely not a high-performance setup. The firing order is no problem with the carb setup, as long as the plug wires are hooked up with the firing order that is required by the cam.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 07-30-2003, 05:13 AM
woodz428's Avatar
Troll Hunter
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Philo,Il
Posts: 2,702
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Arrow

Just a bit of info, the 428 worked the 427 because of stroke 3.98 vs 3.78. and the 460 does the same to the 429 ( although there is a big difference in inches). The 428 actually was a little smaller than the 427, I believe ( not much but the designations are deceiving), and finally, most Cobras came with the 428 engine because of cost to produce the 427. A lot of people that blew up the 428 PI engines that came in them opted to install the 427, but originally thay had 428s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
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:

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

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



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.