• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

289 crank

  • Thread starter Thread starter seijirou
  • Start date Start date Feb 19, 2006
S

seijirou

Founding Member
Aug 15, 2002
2,417
4
48
DFW
Feb 19, 2006
#1
  • Feb 19, 2006
  • #1
In a late model 302 block. Is it going to be bolt in and go or am I going to have different bearing sizes.
 

dragnazz5.0

My "0" key d0esn't w0rk, s0 I have t0 use the zer0
Nov 19, 2005
815
5
18
mooresville, nc
Feb 19, 2006
#2
  • Feb 19, 2006
  • #2
its the got the same journal sizes so it would work. but the stroke is something like 2.87 compared to the 3.0 of the 302 crank if you dont mind me asking, why are you thinking about putting a 289 crank in a 302 block
 
S

seijirou

Founding Member
Aug 15, 2002
2,417
4
48
DFW
Feb 19, 2006
#3
  • Feb 19, 2006
  • #3
I need to make room for some pistons with a taller compression height.
 
8

87AODGT

Founding Member
Jan 6, 2001
373
1
19
Toms River, NJ
Feb 19, 2006
#4
  • Feb 19, 2006
  • #4
if you're just trying to make those pistons fit why not use the 302 crank, and get some shorter rods to make up for the extra compression height
 
S

seijirou

Founding Member
Aug 15, 2002
2,417
4
48
DFW
Feb 19, 2006
#5
  • Feb 19, 2006
  • #5
Shorter rods out of what?
 

Realmongo

I prefer to be called "Evil Genius"
Founding Member
Oct 10, 2001
2,468
86
99
Western Mass
Feb 19, 2006
#6
  • Feb 19, 2006
  • #6
The crank will fit but you will have to have it machined and change your 50 oz harmonic balancer and flywheel for a 28 oz and change over to 289 rods which are a different length.
 
S

seijirou

Founding Member
Aug 15, 2002
2,417
4
48
DFW
Feb 19, 2006
#7
  • Feb 19, 2006
  • #7
I thought the balance was different. A new flywheel and balancer is never a bad idea anyway. I'll be using stock 302 rods (shorter) and taller compression height pistons.

What is it that is going to need to be machined if the main and rod journals are the same diameter?
 

bobcatv8

Member
Aug 25, 2004
141
1
16
Ocala,FL
Feb 20, 2006
#8
  • Feb 20, 2006
  • #8
All 289s have a 2 piece rear main seal. Late model 5.0s have a 1 piece. The rear of the crank is machined differently.
289 crank in a 302 block will give you only 289 cubes {stock bore} regardless of rod length or piston height.
 
S

seijirou

Founding Member
Aug 15, 2002
2,417
4
48
DFW
Feb 20, 2006
#9
  • Feb 20, 2006
  • #9
What needs to be done to the crank for it to fit the 1 piece rear main. Conversely, can I not use a 289 two piece rear main seal in my 302 block?
I do realize I'll have a 289 instead of a 302, that's fine.
 

thumper460

Founding Member
Jul 24, 2000
3,022
2
56
Orange Park , Fl
Feb 21, 2006
#10
  • Feb 21, 2006
  • #10
Machine the oil slinger off the rear for the crankshaft to allow it to fit the 5.0 block!! a shop can do it , or IF you have a die grinder tou can do it!! Look at the 5.0 crankshaft.. and then the 289 crank!! cool?? the Pistons are going to WAY in the block!! make sure the compression height on the pistons will allow for all that depth!! cool?? Have fun...

Just me.........................

Thumper
 

dastang2

Active Member
Dec 11, 2003
2,020
0
46
tx
Feb 21, 2006
#11
  • Feb 21, 2006
  • #11
too much extra BS if you ask me, just buy short rods from summit and use a 302 crank. it would definantly be cheaper like this.
 
S

seijirou

Founding Member
Aug 15, 2002
2,417
4
48
DFW
Feb 21, 2006
#12
  • Feb 21, 2006
  • #12
Oh, thanks Thumper. Simply taking the oil slinger off is defanently not going to be a problem.
My junkyard special crank/rods/pistons combo will amazingly give a deck clearance exactly where I want it

I could go buy short rods but it defanently would not be a cheaper alternative. Consequently with the more rpm friendly 289 stroke and improved rod ratio I doubt I'll even miss the 13 cubes.
 

dastang2

Active Member
Dec 11, 2003
2,020
0
46
tx
Feb 21, 2006
#13
  • Feb 21, 2006
  • #13
why wouldn't it be cheaper, to use the 289 stuff you need the different flywheel or have yours rebalanced, different balancer, plus you need to grind or machine the oil slinger ring. the other alternative just includes buying rods. i do love the 289 though
 
S

seijirou

Founding Member
Aug 15, 2002
2,417
4
48
DFW
Feb 21, 2006
#14
  • Feb 21, 2006
  • #14
In order to use a 302 crank I would need to order custom length connecting rods. Or stock rods and custom pistons.
Either way custom = $$$.
A balancer I would buy even if it was just a stock rebuild so I don't consider that any additional expense.
Rebalancing a flywheel actually isn't very expensive.

And like Thumper said, I can do the crank myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine Obstinate Pilot Bearing removal
  • FastDriver
  • Feb 12, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
40
Views
866
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Feb 22, 2026
manicmechanic007
P
67 Mustang, with the 302 want to convert auto back to the original manual
  • Pdunn
  • May 3, 2026
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
2
Views
92
Classic Mustang Specific Tech May 7, 2026
Mcmahst
H
1966 mustang starter and pulley troubles
  • Hotrods4ray
  • Sep 24, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
339
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jan 10, 2026
Realmongo
S
Help. 1968 engine swap to 95 5.0
  • superdog68
  • Jun 23, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
181
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 23, 2025
Mcmahst
J
Cobra 289 motor & parts
  • James Werstiuk
  • May 20, 2026
  • What is it Worth?!?!?
Replies
2
Views
67
What is it Worth?!?!? May 20, 2026
Noobz347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?