Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 289

[dave harris]

Since my appointment at the DMV was 1 hour late on (January 3rd) this year and I missed out on being able to register my car to the "year it replicates", I've been thinking of just building up a 1966 block 289. This way I can register it whenever I'm ready, and play the DMV lotto at a later time.

For the questions - in the late 60's with cast iron heads I could get 325 to 340 HP and spin them to 7500 rpm with out too much trouble. I assume that with todays better aluminum heads, pistons & cam profiles and a set of webbers I should be able to push up close to 400 hp and still have a reliable and revving little motor. but then, maybe only 380 HP is reasonable ?

I think I've found a 1966 block that's NEVER been bored! to use as a starting point!

now for your learned suggestions;
Cams - profiles/duration/lift?
heads - afr 165's? I assume that 185's would be too much? and Victor Jr's way too much?
Rod lengths
Piston types?

Thanks for helping me spend my $$

cheers

 

[Alex Hirsbrunner]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Hi Dave,

I have 54cc Canfield heads with CNC'd combustion chambers on my 289 and they will support in excess of 400HP (they flow >260 intake, 190 exhaust @ 0.500" lift). They are custom assembled for your application - very nice pieces. In a recent Mustang publication that compared virtually all aftermarket SBF heads, these came out near the top. http://www.canfieldheads.com/sbf_cncc.html {no affiliation}

In my experience, I think these are at the very edge of what you want to consider for street use. My 289 is not near 400 HP (more like 350 at the crank based on my G-Tech Pro) - great fun to drive at Road America, but almost unbearable in traffic :-(

Regards,

Al H.

 

[dave harris]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Hi Al,

Can you describe why you say "unbearable" in traffic?

also, what compression ratio are you running?

thanks for the inputs!

cheers

 

[Fred/Belgium]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Hi Dave,

I am in the same process of refurbishing a 1971 SB302 mexican block.

Cyl heads: Edelbrock Performer RPM (1500-6500 RPM range)#60259 . with intake 2.020 and exhaust 1.600"
Crank and rods: Forged Eagle fully balanced (bought from Keith Kraft-see banner on site)
Damper: ATI Super damper
Camshaft: Edelbrock #7122 (290/300)
Pistons: Mahle forged
Rockers: Scorpion
Waterpump: HV Aluminium
Oilpump: Precision pumps HV
Oil pan: Kevko 7qrt
Objective: real 350 HP.I hope this will be the best option for street(mainly)/track fun.
Email me if you may need more detailed info.
Good luck
Fred

 

[Steve Toner]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Go for it. Nothing wrong with a 289.

FWIW, when I had my engine built, I didn't specify a desired power output, but told the engine builder what kind of driving it was going to see (mostly street, occasional open track events) and that it was to be built for reliability and low maintenance (e.g., hydraulic lifters), and let him choose. Ended up with something that dynoed at 308hp. So unless you're building the engine yourself, my suggestion would be to find a good builder who knows Ford small blocks and let him know your requirements.

What my engine had: Edelbrock Performer RPM heads (straight bolt-on) with the big vavles, Cam was Federal Mogul CS1231R (214/224 dur, .472/.496 lift, 110 degree lobe separation), Weber 8x44IDF carbs. Rods were stock 289 rods (probably with ARP bolts though - I never got a build sheet). Not sure about the pistons either - I know they were flat tops, but what particular brand I don't know.

Seems like to go up from where I was, you'd use a hotter cam (solid lifter, or perhaps even fitting a roller cam) and possibly different heads, but I think it's more a matter of where you want the power to be in the RPM range than what is the maximum you can get. With the pump gas you get nowadays, I wouldn't go too crazy on the compression ratio either (milling the heads or using pop-up pistons)...

 

[StuartB]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Have you not considered a 331 stroker? The rod ratio is still good so you`ll still have the revs and at anywhere close to 400bhp a 331 is going to have far better road manners than a same power 289.

 

[dave harris]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Hi Stuart,

the issue I have is registering the newer model 302 blocks - The 289 gets me past the registration issues until I can get an exemption number from the State (only 500 given out each year in California!).

cheers

 

[Steve Toner]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

You could probably stroke a 289 to 331- they're only going to look at the date codes on the block. The only issue is that there are those who claim the 302 blocks have extended cylinder skirts to handle the 302's .130 inch longer stroke. Other people say that's not the case,a nd that they are identical. If you're planning to replace it with a 302 (or stroked 302) at some point in the future, then you might want to build it "like" a 302, which means timing cover, water pump, harmonic balancer would want to be 302 style...

 

[StuartB]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Dave, who`s going to know what stroke crank you have in a 289 block, the`re all 4" bore so the only thing I can think worth checking would be the length of the piston cylinder. Even if the 289 cylinder is slightly shorter you still have the option of resleeving it to 302 spec` and allowing you to go 331, possibly worth it if staying `original 289` is the priority.

 

[Alex Hirsbrunner]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Hi Dave,

My comment about unbearable was mainly with regard to idle quality and low end torque. With my 289 you really need to get above 2500 RPM before you get up on the torque curve. The large ports, cam overlap and single plane intake all play into low vacuum (marginal for power brakes) and a cool sounding but rough idle. I do know that a modern dual plane manifold and current generation roller cam can greatly improve the situation and make heads that would otherwise be too much for the street work for you.

I'm running 10.25:1 CR.

Steve mentioned checking the date codes. On my 289 (which is out of the my Capri right now (new cam and intake), there are no externally visible casting numbers.

I have a few photos of the Canfield heads (and my 289) if you are interested here:

http://homepage.mac.com/ahirsbrunner/PhotoAlbum17.html

Regards,

Al H.

 

[Howard Jones]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

I agree with Al, 40 or so extra CI should be worth aprox 60hp giving you 1.2 hp per inch. A 289 at the same output, 400hp, would be nearly 1.4 hp per inch. I believe as you near 1.5 hp per inch you begin to get into the drivability issues that come with race engines. If you are going to replace the rotatng assembly why not take advantage of a bigger motor. I think a 331 would still be oversquare and lend itself to a nice mid to high rev range with the 165 AFR's.

Call up comp cams tec line 1-800-366-1807 and speak to them. I would think about 290ish duration and about .550-.575 lift would be about the limit for a street engine. The other cam makers should be able to help you also such as crain and others.

I really like the comp pro magnum roller rockers and would sugest a kit from comp cams with the correct springs pushrods and roller lifters.

I would use hyd roller lifters unless you want a +7000rpm motor. I don't think that would be necessary for a 400hp 331.

Max 10 to 1 for 93 octain and 9.5 for calif 91 octain.

Good harmonic ballancer is also a good investment.

Lastly I have a 750 holley doublepumper on top of a rpm performer intake and it really runs good. My 302 makes about 365hp. This would be too much carb for a 3500 pound car but will work well on our light 2500 pound cars.

Use ARP rod and main cap bolts, again more insurance.

 

[Andy Besic]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Hi Dave
I have just installed my 1965 289 Hi-Po block that I had built with a 331 kit. Here is what I know;
289 HiPo block (similar to Mexican) cylinders .030 over.
Ford 331 Crank kit with H-beam piston rods.
10.5 : 1 compression
Hydraulic roller cam lazer cam grind fw-hr 287a/293b-06
Brodix ST 5.0 R aluminum heads (175)

Running on 93 pump gas, Holley 770cfm vac. secondary 4bbl.

From 2500 rpm to 6000 rpm the Tq curve gently curves from 360 ft/lb to 390 ft/lb to 360 ft/lbs. Hp peaks at 6000 rpm at 410hp. All flywheel numbers.

The motor is VERY tractible and smooth.
PM me if you want me to e-mail further spec.s or dyno sheets.

Cheers
Andy Besic

 

[dave harris]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Thanks everyone for the inputs!

Andy, I'll send you a PM with some specific questions.

cheers

 

[David Briggs]

I went thru that California DMV debacle on Jan 2nd at 8:00 and received certificate #6, but the issue of the year of the block never came up, I was able to get the smog exemption based on the fact that the car and the engine configuration looked like a 1966. I ran the car on a Temporary Cert from August until January. Why can;t you do the same? There are so many better ways to achieve 400hp today and still have excellent driveability. I have had 289 Hipo's in Tigers, they were fun but when I replaced the last one with a 5.0 based engine with J302 heads it was a quantum leap forward. Small, torqueless, motors are not much fun on the street. The 331 is an excellent option and adding the roller lifters and one piece rear seal of the 5.0 block will pay off in drivebility. IMHO

 

[Howard Jones]

Your AB100 exemption for your gt40 was based on the precieved year of the body. You can pick either motor or body. With GT40 being made in 64-67, ya I know they were made later than that, you can avoid smog checks by selecting car body year as 1965.

It would be foolish to use engine year in a GT40. Even if you installed a 65 motor. In that case you would be in violation if you later put in a SVO crate motor for example.

With a 1965 body it doen't matter what year the motor is.

 

[David Briggs]

Hi Howard, we are drifting off post here, I don't know about the other cars but CAV's vin # actually has 1966 in it along with the chassis number and the CHP accepted that number and the smog exemption was based on that too, but the primary thing seemed to be the appearance of the car' was it in fact a "replica" or not.

 

[Howard Jones]

Ya your right back to 289's

 

[Steve Toner]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

I just remembered something - you may be required to have all smog equipment that was original to a California car for the year of engine you use. I had a 65 Mustang, and it had a PCV va;ve that fed back to the air cleaner housing. 66 289s had thermactor pumps (in CA) and special heads which pumped air into the exhaust ports. If you are required to have the original heads, bear in mind that the exhaust ports are restricted by the thermactor bumps, so you're unlikely to see 400HP from them.

I would check with the smog overlords (ideally the specific person who would be checking and "validating" your engine) to find out the exact requirements before going down this road. Depending on how anal they are, they may not allow you to run Webers either.

 

[David Briggs]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Not so! My engine is a new SVO 347 w/webers and a host of components that did not exist in 1966. The car was tested for smog and given an exemption. It did not have to pass any test. I showed the receipts on all the components of the car to the DMV (to calculate the cost of the vehicle for tax purposes), they knew exactly what was in it. The appearance of the car is what allowed it to be registered as a 1966.

 

[Steve Toner]

Re: Need some inputs on Engine components - goal ~ 400 Hp 28

Do you have an SB100 registration?