Is this possible?

[bdepedro]

I had my engine rebuilt this past year. All the engine mods where already done to the motor when I bought it. My engine builder finally got all the specs to me and this is what he says I have in it:

289 block bored 0.30" over
10.5:1 pistons
double roller timing chain
512 292 cam
351W heads ported and polished
stainless steal valves
double valve springs
performance push rods
0.10" deck milled
0.10" head milled
315W crank and rods
roller rocker arms

My question is this, is it possible that I have 351W crank and rods with a 289 milled block? I know that it has 351W heads and also know that the 351W blocks had a taller deck than the 289 did. Is there enough deck height in my milled 289 block with 3.5" 351W stroke? My builder is great but he's a Mopar guy, not Ford so I question whether he definitely knows the difference between the 289 and 351W internals? Any help would be appreciated.

 

[bdepedro]

Another question. Assuming all this is right, what would be my current displacement? I would think 351ci. No?

 

[zookeeper]

Ok first off, I'm no expert, but I really doubt the motor has a 351 crank. How could it since 351W motors have a 1 inch higher deck? Seems like the pistons would be sticking out of the deck at the top of their stroke! I'd ask him how he determined it was a 351w crank, but do it in a non-confrontational way, because I've been wrong before...

 

[D.Hearne]

You cannot put a 351W crank in a 289 or 302 block. The main journals would have to be turned too far down to fit the smaller mains. The stroke of the crank is too much also, there are no rods and pistons for this combo anyway. Then there's the issue of the much larger 351W counterweights. Those too would need to have material removed. I think maybe you'd be better off with another builder next time, this one sounds fishy.

 

[bdepedro]

I appreciate the info guys. I figured the stroke from a 351W would be too long for the 289 deck height. My engine builder is actually really good, he just is not a Ford guy. I'll have to ask him how he came to the conclusion that the crank and rods were 351W. It could be that they are not stock 289 but a stroker kit which he assumed were 351 because the heads are 351. I would definitely like to know exactly what I have in there but whatever it is, it's fast and runs great! I'll let you know what he tells me. Thanks again.

 

[bdepedro]

Been doing some research and found that it IS possible! At least to use the 351W crank. Here's a link to the Mustang Monthly page. http://www.mustangmonthly.com/techarticles/17460_stroker_engine_build/
It says that the crank's main journals are milled down to fit the main on the 289 block. If the crank in my motor is from a 351W then the rods must be shorter than the 351's if they are not stock 289 rods.

 

[D.Hearne]

Been doing some research and found that it IS possible! At least to use the 351W crank. Here's a link to the Mustang Monthly page. http://www.mustangmonthly.com/techarticles/17460_stroker_engine_build/
It says that the crank's main journals are milled down to fit the main on the 289 block. If the crank in my motor is from a 351W then the rods must be shorter than the 351's if they are not stock 289 rods.

God! I new something was fishy when I saw the first "We" in that article. Jim Smart is an absolute dumb ass. A 351 crank is not the same as a 347 crank. Turn down a 351 crank and put it in a 302 block and you still have a 351 (actually its a 352, do the math) How would you lose 5 cubic inches ? If you want to believe the stuff he writes, I've got a bridge to sell. Along with some swamp land in north Africa. A 351 has a 3.5" stroke, the 347 crank has a shorter 3.4" stroke. The size difference in the mains between a 351W and a 302 is about 3/4", that's a LOT of meat to remove from 5 journals. Not to mention the stuff that has to come off the counterweights. Want a 347? just buy a stroker kit and forget all the machine work. Want a 352 in a 289/302 block? Buy a 347 kit, but with .060 over pistons.

 

[zookeeper]

Wow, it sounds like it's possible alright. I do know that people built big-inch small blocks back in the '60's, before today's current cranks were available. Maybe that's how they did it. The article did say they machined both the mains and the counterwieghts, who knows? Just because I've never seen it done doesn't mean it won't work.

 

[rbohm]

in 1979 jack roush built a 363ci engine for the mustang pace car. he used a 302 block bored .060" over, stock length 302 rods(5.09"), a piston height of about 1.35", and a modified 351c crank. the journals were turned down to fit the 302 specs, and the counterweights were modified to fit, as`well as the block being clearanced.

 

[brianj5600]

The reason you can buy stroker cranks is because in the 80's it started getting popular to use 351c cranks in a 302 block. If the motor is a stroker and more than 20 years old, it is likely a turned down 351 crank. I know I'm not the only one on this forum that remembers the 80's. People saw a market and developed kits.

 

[zookeeper]

There you go. The 351C cranks had a smaller main and could probably be used easier than a 351W crank. But one thing I've learned is that just because some people have never seen it done, does NOT make it impossible. Impossible is only impossible once. Then someone does it with good results and all of a sudden, it's the norm.

 

[strange65]

It goes back further then the 80's, back in the mid 60's there where some 377 C.I. "289's" being raced as souped up 289. You guy's didnt actually think a 306 h.p 289 could beat a 325 h.p. stock chevy 327 did you?

 

[brianj5600]

It goes back further then the 80's, back in the mid 60's there where some 377 C.I. "289's" being raced as souped up 289. You guy's didnt actually think a 306 h.p 289 could beat a 325 h.p. stock chevy 327 did you?

377ci in an 8.2" block? I doubt it.

 

[bdepedro]

God! I new something was fishy when I saw the first "We" in that article. Jim Smart is an absolute dumb ass. A 351 crank is not the same as a 347 crank. Turn down a 351 crank and put it in a 302 block and you still have a 351 (actually its a 352, do the math) How would you lose 5 cubic inches ? If you want to believe the stuff he writes, I've got a bridge to sell. Along with some swamp land in north Africa. A 351 has a 3.5" stroke, the 347 crank has a shorter 3.4" stroke. The size difference in the mains between a 351W and a 302 is about 3/4", that's a LOT of meat to remove from 5 journals. Not to mention the stuff that has to come off the counterweights. Want a 347? just buy a stroker kit and forget all the machine work. Want a 352 in a 289/302 block? Buy a 347 kit, but with .060 over pistons.

OK, so apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't know it all! Seriously, I really appreciate all, and I mean all, the help. I now do not think my crank is a 351. The engine is from the sixties obviously but I doubt it was stroked then, who knows. I agree that the amount of work needed to fit the 351 crank would not be justified as opposed to buying a stroker crank which I do not think I have. I haven't had a chance to talk to my engine builder but suspect he noticed that the crank said windsor and assumed 351 but it is most probably a 302 crank. Again, he doesn't know Ford engines very well. I thought I read somewhere that the early (68) 302s were basically 289s with a longer stroke crank (302), but I do know that there is a difference in a 289 and 302 block. I definitely have a 289 block and was told that it was a 302 when I bought it. Either the seller was as ignorant as I am or he knew it was stroked to a 302. What should I ask my builder that would help him and me figure out what it is? Bear in mind that the engine is now complete and running so I will have to rely on his memory since we can't see the crank now.

 

[strange65]

HEH HEH, Want to bet your mustang on it? Did you see the quotes mark's around the 289 part?


"377 C.I. "289's"


377 C.I. ford engine- that resembled a 289 externally. Something like the 351 windsor or more like a 351 cleveland, but looked just like a 289.
Back then I actually thought it was a 371 C.I. , I found out since that it was a 377 C.I.

 

[dennis112]

HEH HEH, Want to bet your mustang on it? Did you see the quotes mark's around the 289 part?


"377 C.I. "289's"


377 C.I. ford engine- that resembled a 289 externally. Something like the 351 windsor or more like a 351 cleveland, but looked just like a 289.
Back then I actually thought it was a 371 C.I. , I found out since that it was a 377 C.I.

Oh, the fake 289. Add the 289 HiPo air cleaner and no one is the wiser. Here is a picture of my "393 C.I." 289:

 

[brianj5600]

It looks like a "289" with the hood closed, but would be hard to get through tech. It would take .140" overbore and a 3.5" stroke to get 377ci. I'm not buying it. Is it possible now? Yes, with modern blocks with siamesed bores.

 

[strange65]

Modern blocks nothing - this motor was never officially brought out in any car.
Got a story to tell you guy's, got the tech and the final proof. You can judge it for yourself. But first I got a question for D.Hearne. If such a motor exsist as a ford 377 and you filled it with stuff like an eagle crank, and other parts made to your spec's.
Could you make a 427 or something like a 427 out of it?
Money would be no object. 1965 dollar's, parts would be nothing but the best.

 

[strange65]

It looks like a "289" with the hood closed, but would be hard to get through tech. It would take .140" overbore and a 3.5" stroke to get 377ci. I'm not buying it. Is it possible now? Yes, with modern blocks with siamesed bores.

Funny thing is they made it thru tech, and I know how it was done. It took me a long time to fill in the missing part's but the power of the internet made it alot easier.

 

[D.Hearne]

Modern blocks nothing - this motor was never officially brought out in any car.
Got a story to tell you guy's, got the tech and the final proof. You can judge it for yourself. But first I got a question for D.Hearne. If such a motor exsist as a ford 377 and you filled it with stuff like an eagle crank, and other parts made to your spec's.
Could you make a 427 or something like a 427 out of it?
Money would be no object. 1965 dollar's, parts would be nothing but the best.

In an 8.2 deck block? No I doubt that right offhand (I don't have time to research the dimensions right now) I know with the Dart block it's easy to get 377, but not with a production factory block 377 would be a stretch there. With a taller deck block the bets are off. I know Ford did a lot of one-off stuff back in the 60's and early 70's, so I wouldn't bet money on anything.