The 289 is also a Windsor engine. It depends on your deep pockets. If it were mine, I would just keep the 289 as an original engine with an overhaul. You can always stroke it to some incredible numbers for sit you back in your seat too. But that can be done years later when you have the funds.
Not trying to be a smarta$$, but the 289 is actually a Cleveland
that is flat out wrong, the 221,260-289-302-351w are classified in the windsor family, although not always built and casted in ontario
.............classified in the Windsor family by who?
Come on, do you really think I thought the 289 is a Cleveland in the terms "Windsor" and "Cleveland" are used today?
I just wanted to point out that "none" of the 289`s were built in Windsor. ("none" meaning that there were a few)
(this is why I wrote the smarta$$ thing)
_____________________________
66 HT, Ford Racing 5.0L, Edl Air Gap, Holley650cfm, Mallory+MSD ignition, Hedman+Hooker exhaust, Toploader close ratio w/Hurst shifter, KYB shocks, 1-piece export brace, monte carlo bar, 1"sway-bar, SSBC discbrakes, Currie-built rear 3.55:1 trac.lock
66 HT, Ford Racing 5.0L, Edl Air Gap, Holley650cfm, Mallory+MSD ignition, Hedman+Hooker exhaust, Toploader close ratio w/Hurst shifter, KYB shocks, 1-piece export brace, monte carlo bar, 1"sway-bar, SSBC discbrakes, Currie-built rear 3.55:1 trac.lock
Well, I have checked this on three dyno's and they all said about the same thing. PLUS Edelbrock stated about the same thing with their package so, you're wrong.. The Hi Po 289 put out 271hp so, what makes you think a 289 with all the part I have would not put out 100hp more?
quote:
ORIGINAL: myshifter
quote:
ORIGINAL: slickman
I would keep the 289 and build it up. I just got my 289 short block back from the machine shop all done and the following will be installed over the next two or so weeks. Based on the Dyno, it should be about 380hp with 370ft lbs torque at the crank... Enough to keep you in the seat.
My new built up 289;
* Keith Black Forged pistons (9.5:1 Compression) * Comp Cam's XE262H (493 / 500 lift with 268 duration) * Comp Cam lifters and push-rods * Edelbrock Performer PRM intake with endurashine * Edelbrock Performer RPM heads * Edelbrock 650 Carburetor with endurashine * Crane Roller Rockers * High volume oil pump * high volume water pump * MSD Distributor * Fluidyne 3 row ALum radiator * Ford Racing Chromed Cast alum valve covers * Chromed 7 qt oil pan
that motor is not making 380
< Message edited by slickman -- 6/25/2006 9:48:44 PM >
Here, check this out. This is the Edelbrock setup on a stock 302 block using their cam (Which I did not use, my cam is hotter then theirs) Check out the link below, Mine is the one with the #60229 Edelbrock heads'' Now my dyno may be off a little but, it's going to be one hot 289 no matter what..
Here is what they state about their package which is NOT as an agressive cam as I have.
Test Results with the Edelbrock Performer RPM Total Power Package... Engine dynamometer testing was done on a Ford 302 c.i.d. engine equipped with an Edelbrock manifold #7121, Performer RPM cam #7122, Performer Series carb #1405 and Performer RPM heads #6025 with 9.5:1 compression and pump gas. The results: 367 hp at 6500 rpm and 340 ft/lbs. of torque at 4500 rpm... proven performance from Edelbrock. See Power Package graph.
Posts: 2310
Joined: 3/25/2006 From: Where I lay my head is home Status: offline
i know a guy, used to work with him actually, who has a 91 5.0 pushing evey bit of 638HP at the rear wheels thru a tremec T-5. so a 400 hp 289/302 is not a far cry. now, granted, the guy didn't build the motor himself as far as i know and it IS N/A, no N2O, no turbo(s), not S/C.
ON EDIT: i can tdo no more to prove the power numbers than tell you i have seen the dyno sheet along with about a dozen other guys and been thrown into the back seat when he opened this beast up!
< Message edited by Clu7ch -- 6/25/2006 10:05:53 PM >
Posts: 2310
Joined: 3/25/2006 From: Where I lay my head is home Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: daver
You could take that 351W and toss some 302 pistons on those rods and have a 393
maybe i'm missing something, but i thought just about all pistons were 4 in. give or take. how does just swapping a set of pistons take a 351 to 393? you'd need a new stroker crank, at the least, to get the proper stroke to go from 351 cubic inches to 393 cubic inches.
Posts: 2310
Joined: 3/25/2006 From: Where I lay my head is home Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: daver
I was just going by what i read on another forum, maybe im missin somethin........ya that didnt sound right to me either.
reading things on another forum!!! how dare you, now go to your room and think about what you've done!
well, i was looking into a 347 stroker and to achieve that i needed a crank with a longer throw to it.
easiest way to explain this is it's cylinder size x pi (Z x 3.14) x stroke.
say your cylinder has a .03 overbore, your cylinder = 4.030, leading to (4.030 x 3.14) which is 12.6542
than you multiply that by your stroke (we'll say for grins it's a 4 inch stroke) 12.6542 x 4 = 50.6168
than multiply that by 8 (cylinders) and you have your total CI for your motor. this one equals 404.something but remember i was just giving an example, these weren't specific numbers. you get the jist of it, right?
so your equation is, (cylinder times pi) times stroke equals cyl Volume, cyl Volume times #of cyls equals Cubic inches
(c x 3.14) x s = V
V x # of cylinders = ci
< Message edited by Clu7ch -- 6/25/2006 10:39:23 PM >
Posts: 2310
Joined: 3/25/2006 From: Where I lay my head is home Status: offline
to install the 351, just need new motor mounts and whatnot to connect it to your tranny (torque converter ect.) and possibly a taller hood. check for clearance issues.
that motor is not making 380hp, sorry to break it to you. Believeing the people trying to sell you the parts is the last people you believe. 15 years of building motors for everyone from AA/Automatic nhra racers to pro-street guys, I can guarantee that package isnt making 380.
You could take that 351W and toss some 302 pistons on those rods and have a 393
maybe i'm missing something, but i thought just about all pistons were 4 in. give or take. how does just swapping a set of pistons take a 351 to 393? you'd need a new stroker crank, at the least, to get the proper stroke to go from 351 cubic inches to 393 cubic inches.
the 393 is the poor mans stroker, its nothing more than a 3.85 stroke crank, stock length 351 rod and stock height 302 pistons
that motor is not making 380hp, sorry to break it to you. Believeing the people trying to sell you the parts is the last people you believe. 15 years of building motors for everyone from AA/Automatic nhra racers to pro-street guys, I can guarantee that package isnt making 380.
If I get this 351 then could I send it to you and pay you to rebuild it?
i know a guy, used to work with him actually, who has a 91 5.0 pushing evey bit of 638HP at the rear wheels thru a tremec T-5. so a 400 hp 289/302 is not a far cry. now, granted, the guy didn't build the motor himself as far as i know and it IS N/A, no N2O, no turbo(s), not S/C.
ON EDIT: i can tdo no more to prove the power numbers than tell you i have seen the dyno sheet along with about a dozen other guys and been thrown into the back seat when he opened this beast up!
your missing a ton of details on that motor, its not a pump gas motor for one, compression is at a minimum 12:1, its not a 302 or 306 and its running atleast a yates head. Far cry from what this is building. Its not a stock production block either, maybe a mexican block or a boss block, but at over 700hp at the crank the block like all production ford 302's will split in half over the 600hp mark. Your missing ALOT of details. 700 at the crank from a 302 is over 2hp per inch. I can name 3 engine builders in the country that are known for doing that.
Printable Version
RE: Stroked 347 vs 351w vs 289 - 
