289 blocks, help!

[65'Pony]

Im planning on starting on a 347 stroker block pretty soon and I need some advice.

My current 289 block I know very little about all I know is it was swapped some time before 2004 when I bought the car and the car had been sitting for 10-20 years under a tarp. I dont know how hard the previous owners ran it.

I have an option to puchase a 289 cast iron block for 300 dollars that came from summit racing and it has never been taken out of the crate it came in.

A mustang buddy of mine told me to use the old block that came in the mustang because it is seasoned and tempered from useage.

Im wondering what you guys think I should do, is he right about the old block being better or should I purchase the summit block?

I also hear that you can convert an engine from 2 bolt to a 4 bolt main? How long of a process is that and what are the disadvantages of having a block drilled instead of buying a block that was made with a 4 bolt main.

 

[TOM B]

I DONT KNOW OF SUMMIT EVER SELLING A 289 BLOCK, 5.0 OR 302 YES, It use to be that a seasoned block was better, that was before the after market started to heat and cool the blocks before sold. I built my 347 from a 1970 302 Mexican block. This block is the same as a 289 hi-po block but has stronger webing and large main caps like the hi-po, it also can be bored safely to 347 unlike a 289.
I would never bore a 289 to 347. they are to weak in the webs and have small main caps, you might go through 2 or 3 289 blocks before you get one to bore 60 over without problems. If this summit block is a 302 and has the large caps then go for it.

 

[65'Pony]

Correct me if wrong but I was told on 2 occasions that a 289 is the same block that the 302, 5.0 use. Just differect stroke?

Summit does sell 302/5.0 blocks but I always assumed that a 289 was the same block.

 

[D.Hearne]

$300 is too much for a run of the mill 289/302/5.0 block. TOMB is slighly mistaken in his statements about needing to bore a 289/302 block 60 over to get a 347. A 347 is made using a 3.4" stroke crank and a .030 over bore. ANY 289/302 block will get you there. He IS right about the Mex 302 and 289 Hipo having larger main caps, but that's not necessarily needed either, if you use a quality main girdle. Look into the 289 block you have now to see if it's been overbored already, if not, then you've got a good starting point. If it has been overbored, I'd suggest finding a good std bore 5.0 roller block for starting a 347 project. These can be had for as little as nothing, just depends on how much work you want to put into the search.

 

[TOM B]

I stand corrected on the bore size as it is 30 over not 60 --BUT
D hearne is wrong about "quote" ANY 289 or 302 block will get you there"
PLEASE dont use a 289 block to get 347.
And yes I will tell you why. The 289 block was made till 1967 then in 1968 Ford went to the 302. The 302 in NOT a stoked 289. although the stroke was increased to 3.00" The 302 block was a new casting to increase HP and torque.
There were many changes to the 302 block but the MOST IMPORTANT was that the bottoms of the cylinders were extended to provide additional piston support at bottom dead center and this is the main reason why not to use a 289 block for a large stroker.
This means that with a 347 stroker kit the pistons will wobble and scuff at the bottom of the stroke then BOOM goodby money.
Good luck

 

[65stang289]

You can still use standard bore but it will come out to a 341. IF you get the 5.4 crank that is what changes it to a 347 there. you can bore it to how much you want to 60 over 80 as long as the crank is a 5.4

 

[Boo Boo Foo]

There were many changes to the 302 block but the MOST IMPORTANT was that the bottoms of the cylinders were extended to provide additional piston support at bottom dead center and this is the main reason why not to use a 289 block for a large stroker.

Not saying I disbelieve you here, but would you happen to have a cite for this? I'd like to learn more about this particular bit of trivia. Are you saying that the cylinder sleeves themselves were extended?

 

[5.0ina66]

-BUT
D hearne is wrong about "quote" ANY 289 or 302 block will get you there"
PLEASE dont use a 289 block to get 347.
And yes I will tell you why. The 289 block was made till 1967 then in 1968 Ford went to the 302. The 302 in NOT a stoked 289. although the stroke was increased to 3.00" The 302 block was a new casting to increase HP and torque.
There were many changes to the 302 block but the MOST IMPORTANT was that the bottoms of the cylinders were extended to provide additional piston support at bottom dead center and this is the main reason why not to use a 289 block for a large stroker.
This means that with a 347 stroker kit the pistons will wobble and scuff at the bottom of the stroke then BOOM goodby money.
Good luck

Can you prove this? If you cannot, then I'd appriciate it if you would stop spreading this MYTH. I'v visually compared 5 random 302/289 blocks at swap meets and noticed NO DIFFERENCE in the length of the cylinder walls. This seems to confirm the pics, measurements and research that I've seen from an expierenced engine builder, which says that there is NO difference in the cylinder wall length in 289s & 302s of any vintage, except a few thousandths manufacturing tolerance. This came from measuring 10+ random blocks, and quite a few years of research. At any rate, I'm more inclined to believe D.Hearne, as I've seen what he has to say, he seems to know his stuff, and had his share of experience with strokers.
FWIW
--Kyle

 

['66 coupe]

"Though 302 blocks looked vitually identical to the 289 block, the cylinder bores had extended skirts to handle the 302's .019-inch longer stroke. This extended cylinder skirt reduced piston slap and improved stability for quieter operation." pg 21 of High Performance Ford Engine Parts Interchange by George Reid

I'm sure I'm not the only one with this book.

 

[D.Hearne]

You believe someone who has printed the difference in the stroke between the 289 and 302 as being .019" ? The difference is .013", not .019". His books are FULL of other mistakes as well. And while they are useful to some degree, you've got to take what's printed there with a grain of salt. Anyone here have a bare 289 block that they can measure the cylinders with ? I've got a 302 block that I can measure. 351W's are 6.25" long, if I recall

 

[D.Hearne]

At any rate, I'm more inclined to believe D.Hearne, as I've seen what he has to say, he seems to know his stuff, and had his share of experience with strokers.
FWIW
--Kyle

Thanks for the flowers, but I've only done one stroker. Which is more than most but less than others. At any rate, I'd use what ever block had the longest bores for a 347, whatever block that would be. In a 331, it's not going to make that much difference. I've heard both sides in the bore length issue between the 289-302, until I've seen the difference, if there is one, I'll leave that open to thought.

 

[LMan]

I stand corrected on the bore size as it is 30 over not 60 --BUT
D hearne is wrong about "quote" ANY 289 or 302 block will get you there"
PLEASE dont use a 289 block to get 347.
And yes I will tell you why. The 289 block was made till 1967 then in 1968 Ford went to the 302. The 302 in NOT a stoked 289. although the stroke was increased to 3.00" The 302 block was a new casting to increase HP and torque.
There were many changes to the 302 block but the MOST IMPORTANT was that the bottoms of the cylinders were extended to provide additional piston support at bottom dead center and this is the main reason why not to use a 289 block for a large stroker.
This means that with a 347 stroker kit the pistons will wobble and scuff at the bottom of the stroke then BOOM goodby money.
Good luck

wrong, wrong, wrong. The 'extended cyl bores' is a myth.

..but I do like the "the 302 is NOT a stroked 289, although the stroke was increased"

A 289 block works great as a 347 foundation. In fact, it may be MORE suitable as they are/were generally beefier in the webs than later 5.0s....Ford started taking the meat out of the 5.0 blocks to save weight in the 1980s or so....

 

[mustangdave]

Actually, they started taking the beef out in the 70's. I think it's funny that people are arguing about the alleged extended cylinder extension of .013 of an inch....what is that..the thickness of a fingernail? Thirteen thousandth of an inch!
Any 289,302,5.0 block would work but I would stay away from the 70's through 84. A roller block would be great and that is probably what he saw from Summit(a new block). I would use a stud girdle for insurance and forget about 4 bolt blocks.

 

[krash kendall]

Did they not continue using the 289 blocks in the production of the 302s untill the surplus was used up and the newly numberered blocks came in? Is not the only difference in the early blocks the casting number? We have discussed this before when a poster is told by the previous owner that his car had a 302 but he finds his block number dictates it is a 289.

 

['66 coupe]

Damn.
My post was just to point out that there is a difference. Some have pointed out that it's a small difference, but it's still a difference. So why can't both sides be right? There's a difference, but it's not enough to really matter, much less start a pissing contest about.

This used to be the most mature forum on stangnet. But now it seems like you guys are worse than the V6 kids argueing about which CAI to use. "I know more." - "No, I know more." ****ing grow up. Some of us are here to learn, and help. Not to make ourselves feel better about knowing more than others.

 

[D.Hearne]

Actually, they started taking the beef out in the 70's.

Actually the late 70's D8VE block has more "beef" than the later 80's blocks. According to Ford it weighs 10 lbs more than a late 80's roller block. Some of this difference is in the cylinder walls. According to them, it's a thick walled block. The early 80's E0AE-AA, E2AE-KA both weigh in at 120 lbs, the later E5AE-HA ( roller block) has 2 lbs more iron ( probably just in the lifter bores, their bieng taller). The E6SE-DC block weighs 126 lbs. The D8VE-AA 135 lbs.

 

[SoCalCruising]

I have read that the difference between the 85 (E5AE-HA) and 86 (E6SE-DC) is that Ford partially siamesed the cylinders in 86 - which would account for the increase in weight between the two. The change was designed to strengthen the block/bores. Since you can't always believe what you read, I'm glad that D.Hearne's info in consistent with what I had read. Certainly, if you are after a late-model block, pick one that is '86 or later.

BTW, I have heard that Ford stopped making the Sportsman 302 block. Anybody else hear that?

 

[Boo Boo Foo]

In the context of using a 289 block with a stud girdle to do an upper quality 347, is it not the case that modern ultra lightweight forged pistons have higher piston rings in relation to the conrod, and is it not also the case that these pistons also have considerably shorter side skirts?

If that is the case, I would expect that a 347 with such pistons would actually end up using less cylinder sleeve than the original 289. Have I got that wrong?

 

[TOM B]

Do what you will, its your money and I dont give a shi*.
You kids should go back to your buzboms or be spanked.
Hey I have an idea, go get a 260 ford, its the same block, right Lman

 

[67efivert]

65 pony where r u located at i got several diffrent blocks ill let go cheap got 2 86+ blocks if u want one so u dont have to tear down the 289