vintage-race
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 289 engine

To: "David R. Mapes" <dmapes@erols.com>, <vintage-race@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: 289 engine
From: "Charles Christ" <cfchrist@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 00:02:02 -0500
silly question here but are there "canadian" blocks in the ford line as
there were in the chevrolet line?  i remember the canadian GM blocks had
thicker walls and were a bit tougher than the run of the mill GM blocks.  it
would make sense if fomoco did the samething to be hunting a ford equivelant
?

chuck.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David R. Mapes" <dmapes@erols.com>
To: <vintage-race@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 10:12 PM
Subject: Re: 289 engine


> Hi,
>
>         Any specific reason you have to have a
> 64 or 65 K code motor?  I ask because they're
> getting a little scarous and expensive (not that
> this is EVER going to be a cheap hobby).  But
> a Mexican block and after market rotating assembly
> would be a more solid start on a fresh engine for
> not to much more money (when you figure in the cost
> of machine work on the used parts).  After all
> people didn't pay the extra terrif on the HOPO 289
> to put back and forth to Sunday school.  Many of
> those used 289s have seen the high side of 7800Rpm
> many times in the last 37-38 years (ask me how I
> know  =8^) ).  And cast cranks (even 2.87" stroke
> ones) don't really like that kind of treatment
> (again ask me how I know (well don't actually, the
> memories are painful, BANG RAttel rattel...), or
> why I've swarn off of cast crank motors.
>
>         If the rule book absolutly requires period
> correct internal parts, then (of course  O;^) ) your
> stuck, but at this point I'd look any HIPO gift
> horses VERY carefully in the mouth.  Just my $0.02
>
>         I will say the the 65-67 289/ 67-70 302 blocks
> are pleny stout with the addition of a main stud girdle.
> I'm about to take delivery on a 306 based on a 65 298
> block for street, SCCA SOLO II CP competition, and
> the occasional FATT:
>
>    "Stroked" 289 Windsor (4.03" bore X 3" stroke = 306 ci)
>    CNC ported Canfeild Aluminum Heads. 2.08" Intake/1.6" Exhaust
> valves.  Out-of-the-box flow:(@ 28" of Water):
>      Valve Lift   Intake CFM   Exhaust CFM
>      0.10"             61.82         57.33
>      0.20"            126.31        103.58
>      0.30"            185.46        150.46
>      0.40"            234.38        178.97
>      0.50"            260.62        192.27
>      0.60"            280.64        199.24
>      (hard to beat at $1400 complete)
>    Canfield Rocker stud girdle, 7/16" rocker studs
>    1.6:1 aluminum roller rocker arms
>    10.85:1 Static Compression
>    4340 Steel Lightweight Eagle Crank (43 Lbs. Before
>    balancing, required about 0.25" off of each counter
>    weight to balance with the rods pistons selected)
>    4340 Steel Eagle Connecting Rods
>    Wisco Forged Pistons
>    Cam (Flat Tappet Mechanical):
>             Intake        Exhaust
>    Lift:    0.541"        0.522"
>    Duration (Advertized):
>             2880          2840
>    Duration (@ 0.050" lift):
>             2420          2460
>    Canton Main Cap Stud Girdle / Windage Tray
>    Canton 9 Qt road race oil pan, and 3 Qt Accusump
>    Edelbrock Performer RPM Air Gap Intake.
>    Holley 780 CFM Vacuum Secondary Carb.
>    Dual 2 1/2" Exhaust with 2 chamber Flowmaster
>    Mufflers.
>    1.75" Primary tube, 3.5" Collector Hooker Super
>    Competition Headers.
>    McLoad 17# flywheel
>    Center Force Dual Friction Clutch
>
> Not exactly a torque moster, but the rule book lets me take
> another 450 Lbs (from where it was at 3150) off of the car.
> Since I'm only running 16"x8" wheels with 23.5"x10.5" slicks
> (as opposed to 16x12 and 25x12), the lighter the better.
> There WILL be a bit of an adjustment as the previous motor
> was a 410CI Windsor which WAS a torque monster (it would
> haze the slicks in 3rd gear as the tach swung past 3700 RPM).
> Alas, it showed up with 5 cracks in the crank after teardown
> a couple of years ago (reason two, why I've swarn off of cast
> cranks).
>
>         Anyway, if you can, you may want to expand the range
> of engines your looking at for a foundation.
>
> At 11:19 AM 10/28/02 -0500, you wrote:
> >Need an early, circa 1964 or 65, hypo 289 Ford core engine to build into
> >a vintage racer.
> >
> >Any clues out there?
> All the Best!  Dave  ;^)
> '66 Formula S Barracuda, CP/Vinatage
> '66 C code Mustang Coup, CP
> '91 Sundance, HS (150,000 miles and counting)
> '97 Cherokee
> Lame Horse Racing
> College Park, MD

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/vintage-race


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