tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: "K" vs "HP"

To: 102430.3640@CompuServe.COM ("Edmund E. Powell")
Subject: Re: "K" vs "HP"
From: Roland Dudley <cobra@cdc.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 96 8:54:50 PDT
> 
> Okay.  Laugh if you must, but someone please tell me what this is all about.
> 
> I've seen references to 289 HP and HiPo, which I think are the same, and 289 K
> engines.  What are you cats talking about?  Do these two designations describe
> different engines?  What are the differences?  My Tiger has the stock 289
> engine; is it a K or HP -- or neither?
> 
> And as long as I'm trying to figure out what's been making my car go for the
> last twenty-eight years, help me out with something else.  What is the 
>unleaded
> 92 octane juice that passes for fuel in California doing to my engine?  The 
>car
> runs fine and seems to have proper power, but does benefit from 104 octane 
>boost
> in the mountains.
> 
> Eddy - California
> 

The K or HiPo series 289 has several differences from the stock 289:

 beefier main caps
 beefier connecting rods with 3/8" bolts (rather than 5/16")
 heads have screw-in rocker studs, different porting
 solid lifters
 HiPo cam
 10:1 compression ratio (higher than 2V; same as 4V)
 stronger crank 
 different damper 
 additional crank counter weight
 289 2V 200HP @ 4400 RPM
 289 4V 225HP @ 4800 RPM
 289 HiPo 271 @ 6000 RPM
 dual point distributor
 probably other stuff I don't recall offhand

I have a 2V 289 in my snake at the moment (CR=9.3:1 + 31 years of
carbon build-up) and it runs just fine on el cheapo 87 octane.

Roland

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>