iv herd of 302's but not a 289 in a comet? dose enybody have a pic or info on this swap? and what kinda power we talken about hear? i might be able to get ahold of one for cheap if its worth it!
bolts in just like a 302 , guys use the 302s for the extra cubes over a 289 but still like the sound of a high revvin 289
Visually, it won't look any diffrent. You could build a 289 and a 302 that look identical... My dad had a '67 Cougar with a 289/3 speed, and they definately have a diffrent sound to them. But I would go with a 302 over a 289. "no replacement for displacement."
I have a 289 in my 70. And had one in one of my drivers. With the right combo they can be quik little motors.
hhhmmm thats cool, i was told they rev higher and produce more torq as a standerd but they suck as automatics. i think im going to go with a 302 instead. can you bor a 289 to a 302?
the guy at the machine shop I tool my 5.0 block to, checekd out a 289 Hipo I had, block was cracked though, told me that the deck height was shorter on the old 289 than on 302s but I'm not sure about that.
302 is basically a stroked 289 just like dodges version of a 360 is just a stroked 340. all components remain the same(cept rods) so have at it. im sure a nicely built 289 would eat a substandard 302 any day, or vice versa. its all how you pay attn. to detail on assmbly.
I use to have a "built" 289 in my car with ported 302 heads and an old solid lifter factory HI performance 289 cam (man did it sound GOOD) along with a top loader 4 speed Alot of fun winding that thing up and ripping the gears!
In the '70's, I had a 450 HP 289 in 1967 Ford Fairlane. I had a bumper sticker made that said, "How Does It Feel to be BEAT by a 289?" My Chevy buddies didn't like it.
Hottie2 is currently running a nice sounding 289 in her car. i just posted an engine pic in the turkey rod run thread if you want to see it.
The deck heights changed on the 302 during it's production run... It started the same as a 289, but they added a very slight amount of deck to it during the emission years. I think this is how they dropped compression on the engine over the years while using the same heads and pistons. So you may have had one of those slightly taller blocks from the 'dark ages' that he was comparing to the 289. The two engines are identical save the crank and rods. So there is not really any 'swap' to it. It would be the same as pulling your 302 to put another 302 in. You could put a 302 crank and rods into a 289 and have a 302. Some engine builders don't recommend it though. Something about the 289 cylinder skirts not being stroker friendly. I doubt it matters much with the slight stroke difference. I know for sure stroker kit manufacturers say you can't put a 331-347 crank in a 289 block. In my experience, 289s and 302s both love rpm and neither is better or worse to use over the other, unless you plan a stroker kit. The slight difference in cubes is why I like the 302, but it really doesn't make a huge difference. Dave
