To 289 or not to 289 that is the question
Thread Starter
S.Y.L.O.
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 16,169
Likes: 0
To 289 or not to 289 that is the question
I am picking up a motor tomorrow...a .40 1967 289 ...fresh rebuild....forged pistons.....comp cam (don't know specs yet). I'm thinking a nice set of aluminum heads and a nice upper and lower intake....and a nice large shot of nitrous.....
what size is a .40 289? and are there any disadvantages to this motor? obviously it is not a roller block.....can I make it a rollerized block? This is going into Franky...Franky (89 coupe) has total tubular front end with no HVAC.....spooled rear with 3:73's..........thoughts???
what size is a .40 289? and are there any disadvantages to this motor? obviously it is not a roller block.....can I make it a rollerized block? This is going into Franky...Franky (89 coupe) has total tubular front end with no HVAC.....spooled rear with 3:73's..........thoughts???
Last edited by ODB; Nov 23, 2006 at 12:26 PM.
Thread Starter
S.Y.L.O.
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 16,169
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Scott
Well .40 over probably took away some of the high revving capability.
Guest
Posts: n/a
At .40 over I think you would be well into the water jackets....
Besides, I dont think boring .040 really hurts rev capacity. Its not like you are adding a significant amount of material to the piston to weigh it down.
Stroking is what kills rev ability, as the piston in a stroker motor has to travel faster than it would with a shorter stroke. The reciprocating parts can only accelerate and decelerate so fast.
One thing to consider before you put this in is a dipstick. 289s are meant to have the sump in the front, and I dont even think they have a blank where the boss goes for a rear/dual sump pan.
Are you getting this motor for a steal? They are cool motors, but I dont see the big advantage, especially if you are wanting to convert it over to a roller. You're also going to need a matching flywheel and balancer, since the old engines have the 28oz inbalance while the later(post 81 or something) has 50oz. Maybe I got it backwards, but they are different.
Thats all I can think of for now..
Besides, I dont think boring .040 really hurts rev capacity. Its not like you are adding a significant amount of material to the piston to weigh it down.
Stroking is what kills rev ability, as the piston in a stroker motor has to travel faster than it would with a shorter stroke. The reciprocating parts can only accelerate and decelerate so fast.
One thing to consider before you put this in is a dipstick. 289s are meant to have the sump in the front, and I dont even think they have a blank where the boss goes for a rear/dual sump pan.
Are you getting this motor for a steal? They are cool motors, but I dont see the big advantage, especially if you are wanting to convert it over to a roller. You're also going to need a matching flywheel and balancer, since the old engines have the 28oz inbalance while the later(post 81 or something) has 50oz. Maybe I got it backwards, but they are different.
Thats all I can think of for now..
is doing your girlfriend
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,101
Likes: 0
That block will have short lifter bores, you will have to use retro-fit roller lifters. As for the oil pan, just use a 302 aftermarket pan with a screw in dipstick.
__________________
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it
Thread Starter
S.Y.L.O.
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 16,169
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by boostedOne
At .40 over I think you would be well into the water jackets....
Besides, I dont think boring .040 really hurts rev capacity. Its not like you are adding a significant amount of material to the piston to weigh it down.
Stroking is what kills rev ability, as the piston in a stroker motor has to travel faster than it would with a shorter stroke. The reciprocating parts can only accelerate and decelerate so fast.
One thing to consider before you put this in is a dipstick. 289s are meant to have the sump in the front, and I dont even think they have a blank where the boss goes for a rear/dual sump pan.
Are you getting this motor for a steal? They are cool motors, but I dont see the big advantage, especially if you are wanting to convert it over to a roller. You're also going to need a matching flywheel and balancer, since the old engines have the 28oz inbalance while the later(post 81 or something) has 50oz. Maybe I got it backwards, but they are different.
Thats all I can think of for now..
Besides, I dont think boring .040 really hurts rev capacity. Its not like you are adding a significant amount of material to the piston to weigh it down.
Stroking is what kills rev ability, as the piston in a stroker motor has to travel faster than it would with a shorter stroke. The reciprocating parts can only accelerate and decelerate so fast.
One thing to consider before you put this in is a dipstick. 289s are meant to have the sump in the front, and I dont even think they have a blank where the boss goes for a rear/dual sump pan.
Are you getting this motor for a steal? They are cool motors, but I dont see the big advantage, especially if you are wanting to convert it over to a roller. You're also going to need a matching flywheel and balancer, since the old engines have the 28oz inbalance while the later(post 81 or something) has 50oz. Maybe I got it backwards, but they are different.
Thats all I can think of for now..
won't a 302 pan fit with a 302 pick up and dip stick? If not I have a 68 stang pan and pick up....I also have a 289 timing cover with dipstick in it...so are you saying .40 is too much for this motor?? and I will have overheating probs?? and yes I am getting it for a steal.......
Thread Starter
S.Y.L.O.
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 16,169
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Duceanahalf
That block will have short lifter bores, you will have to use retro-fit roller lifters. As for the oil pan, just use a 302 aftermarket pan with a screw in dipstick.
I gota Cheby
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 0
I like them 289's you can rev them to the moon. 11:30's Doug Nash 5 spd 5:13's in my old Maverick back in around 1988. On the motor, slicks uncapped. about 7600 rpm and then saw more on some missed shifts 
__________________
Only 1/4 mile track I know is Gandy Bridge
Only 1/4 mile track I know is Gandy Bridge
is doing your girlfriend
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,101
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by FBP
I have heard of these.....got any link Ryan??
__________________
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it
