302?

[Rusty66coupe]

I have been debating is it better to stick with the 289 I have and rebuild it or go for a 302?

There is a guy in my area that has a 302 roller motor for $50.

From the picture, the heads and some other items are still on it and I could probably sell those and get my $50 back. I would be going with different heads, cam and things of that nature so I wouldn't need these items that are on the block for sale.

It is out of an 80's model Mustang but I plan on using the Holley carb that I have and buying an intake to match it.

My understanding is 302's and 289's are basically the same block with the same motor mounts and so forth but would I have to change anything?

A part of me wants to stay 289 since that is what came in the car originally but mine is a crate motor a previous owner bought so it is not numbers matching anyway....Either way I have to have a block machined but my current motor is decent enough that I could drive it around while I do a build with the 302.

 

[Hack]

One thing.. the late roller blocks don't have the tapped hole for the Z bar if you're running a manual trans you'll have to take care of that.

If it were me I would build a 347. I know it's not what you asked, but if you do a few "might as wells" like resizing the rods, putting good ARP bolts in and buying good pistons you will be very close to the cost of a stroker kit.

If your thing is restoration, you can certainly make the 347 look as though it's a 289 stock motor.

I think roller lifters are great and I would use the newer 302. I swapped a 302 into my '70 - it's from a '91 Mustang and has well over 100k on it, but runs great and has good power. Those EFI 302s really last a long time. If you really want to get away cheap, you might want to check the parts carefully. You may be able to get away with a hone and just get new rings and bearings. However, if you have to bore the cylinders I would recommend you seriously consider a stroker.

http://**********************/ford-...otating-assemblies/347-stroker-rotating-kits/

$800 for the cheap 347 kit.

 

[rbohm]

if you are going to choose between a 289 and 302, then your choice is basically 6 of one and 1/2 dozen of the other. given equal builds, the power curves are very similar, the 302 will have a bit more peak torque, and the 289 will have a bit more peak horsepower only because it will rev a bit higher than the 302.

 

[Rusty66coupe]

Thanks for the tips....

I am honestly for whatever reason half tempted to stay with a 289..guess just because that is what came in the car out of the factory.

However, mine is not a numbers matching car. It is a crate motor a previous owner purchased some years ago so that really is not a consideration.

To be honest, I have no idea if the block in my car now has ever been bored or not.

I am finding it hard to find another 289 block in my area. Have heard some folks say that is a common problem since a lot of them made "back in the day" have been bored enough times that the walls are to thin and now they are only good for scrap metal. Not certain that is true but just something I heard or read.

Have seen two good 302 roller blocks lately for less than $100. The one I spotted today and a similar one that I saw a couple of weeks ago. There is also another 70's something one for sale in the area that is freshly bored 40 over but is not a roller block but it still has the tags on it from the machine shop.

The one advantage I can see to build a motor from a block other than the one I am running currently is that I could start building it in my spare time while running around with the one I have in the car now. Would have very little off the road time that way. I would only be off the road long enough to pull the engine, paint the bay and install the new one.

By the way....thanks for the tip on the Z bar. I currently have an auto transmission but I hate autos I have been wondering how hard it would be to switch to a top loader at some point in the future.

 

[D.Hearne]

Take the 302 roller block and use your 289 crank and rods in it. With the right cam and heads, it'll rev to the moon. Best of both worlds. (although the difference in stroke between the two really isn't enough to really say one will rev higher than the other in my opinion)

 

[A66Auto]

I second the vote for a stroker. I built my 93 5.0 a few years ago and wish I would have spent a little more and bought the stroker kit.

 

[stonecoldtx]

if you are going to choose between a 289 and 302, then your choice is basically 6 of one and 1/2 dozen of the other. given equal builds, the power curves are very similar, the 302 will have a bit more peak torque, and the 289 will have a bit more peak horsepower only because it will rev a bit higher than the 302.

While I agree with your statement about there not being much difference, I'm not sure where you came up with the idea that the 289 would rev higher than a 302.

I know of Pro Stock 800 cubic inch mountain motors that rev to 9000RPM, and NASCAR 350 c.i. engines that run 8000RPM all day

With all due respect, to say that an one engine will or won't rev higher than another just because of the crank and rods makes no sense to me . . . those aren't what dictate how high an RPM range an engine will rev to . . . maybe at what RPM level it will rev to repeatedly, continually or reliably, you might have a point, but if both engines are using the same standard issue connecting rods, there wouldn't be an RPM advantage between the two.

Also, because of the additional cubes, there would be a slight advantage for the 302 over the 289, but it wouldn't be enough to even make a difference in a street driven car, assuming all the other parts were the same.

 

[rbohm]

one of the advantages the 289 has over the 302 is rod length/stroke ratio. and given EQUAL builds, the 289 will rev A BIT higher than a 302 will. the 289 will also have a bit more peak horsepower, and the 302 will have a bit more peak torque, again due to the difference in the rod length to stroke ratio. the differences ARE slight but there none the less.

 

[Hack]

While I agree with your statement about there not being much difference, I'm not sure where you came up with the idea that the 289 would rev higher than a 302.

I know of Pro Stock 800 cubic inch mountain motors that rev to 9000RPM, and NASCAR 350 c.i. engines that run 8000RPM all day

With all due respect, to say that an one engine will or won't rev higher than another just because of the crank and rods makes no sense to me . . . those aren't what dictate how high an RPM range an engine will rev to . . . maybe at what RPM level it will rev to repeatedly, continually or reliably, you might have a point, but if both engines are using the same standard issue connecting rods, there wouldn't be an RPM advantage between the two.

Also, because of the additional cubes, there would be a slight advantage for the 302 over the 289, but it wouldn't be enough to even make a difference in a street driven car, assuming all the other parts were the same.

Right, usually the valve train and the heads/intake/exhaust are what limit the maximum RPM of a street engine. The rods and crank have very little to do with it. There are very good reasons not to have excessive valve spring forces and excessively large ports, but the rods and crank can be and are usually over-built as a safety factor.

 

[SadbutTrue]

I have been debating is it better to stick with the 289 I have and rebuild it or go for a 302?

There is a guy in my area that has a 302 roller motor for $50.

From the picture, the heads and some other items are still on it and I could probably sell those and get my $50 back. I would be going with different heads, cam and things of that nature so I wouldn't need these items that are on the block for sale.

It is out of an 80's model Mustang but I plan on using the Holley carb that I have and buying an intake to match it.

My understanding is 302's and 289's are basically the same block with the same motor mounts and so forth but would I have to change anything?

A part of me wants to stay 289 since that is what came in the car originally but mine is a crate motor a previous owner bought so it is not numbers matching anyway....Either way I have to have a block machined but my current motor is decent enough that I could drive it around while I do a build with the 302.

Is it the original motor? Wouldn't hurt to wrap it and set it aside while you build a monster to have fun with in the meantime... you definitely don't seem to be hurting for space to put your junk

347. Used Trick Flows/AFRs when money permits. Roller cam. Weeee...

There are a million classics with stocker 289s out there. If we were talking a 327 Corvette it'd be one thing, but 289 classic mustangs are a dime a dozen round' these parts.

Besides, I never knew you to be the stickler for stock type.