• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

289 Head question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Exhooah
  • Start date Start date May 4, 2005
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member
Sep 9, 2000
4,675
38
119
Antelope Valley, SoCal
May 7, 2005
#21
  • May 7, 2005
  • #21
Jonstantine said:
but if you want very good hp gains - a manifold/carb swap by itself is not going to be worthwhile imo
save up a little bit and change the cam (and get headers)
Click to expand...

Even going from a stock 2bbl to a 4bbl and aftermarket intake? The seems like a big improvement. I have never driven nor owned a 2bbl(and then swapped to 4bbl), so I'm curous. My current '68 is a two barrel, but its never going to be driven before I have a Holley 600 on there.
 

Jonstantine

Founding Member
Jul 20, 2002
487
0
0
Oklahoma
May 7, 2005
#22
  • May 7, 2005
  • #22
65ShelbyClone said:
Even going from a stock 2bbl to a 4bbl and aftermarket intake? The seems like a big improvement. I have never driven nor owned a 2bbl(and then swapped to 4bbl), so I'm curous. My current '68 is a two barrel, but its never going to be driven before I have a Holley 600 on there.
Click to expand...
if everything else on the motor is stock, it will only make a minor difference...
it will be noticable
id definitely have it done, but dont stop there
 

degins

Member
Sep 18, 2004
361
0
17
Texas
May 7, 2005
#23
  • May 7, 2005
  • #23
Jonstantine said:
if everything else on the motor is stock, it will only make a minor difference...
it will be noticable
id definitely have it done, but dont stop there
Click to expand...

The difference between a standard 65 "C" code 2V and "A" code 4V 289 was 25 HP (225 vs. 200). Only differerence is intake and carb. Same camshaft.
 

Jonstantine

Founding Member
Jul 20, 2002
487
0
0
Oklahoma
May 7, 2005
#24
  • May 7, 2005
  • #24
degins said:
The difference between a standard 65 "C" code 2V and "A" code 4V 289 was 25 HP (225 vs. 200). Only differerence is intake and carb. Same camshaft.
Click to expand...
so you trust the ratings from the 1960's?
i did say it would be noticable, but probably not worth the monetary effort by itself
he should do it, but he should do more also

*the most important part of the equation is that it "might" be 25hp at 5krpm
and he probably wont spend much time there
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
First post 289 rebuild question!
  • Ddyer2868
  • Nov 24, 2025
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
3
Views
282
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Dec 5, 2025
rednotch
G
Supercharger Options 5.4 32V Intech
  • Germangazguzzler
  • Apr 19, 2025
  • Other Auto Tech
Replies
4
Views
1K
Other Auto Tech Apr 23, 2025
RaggedGT
R
1974 Datsun 620 pickup / 5.0L HO
  • RJH46
  • Aug 24, 2025
  • Other Auto Tech
Replies
1
Views
248
Other Auto Tech Aug 24, 2025
Noobz347
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
955
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
D
Brakes 1966 Mustang convertible 289, Auto - Disc brake conversion issues
  • DRGunn427
  • Feb 26, 2025
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
5
Views
690
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jul 23, 2026
All Stock93
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific 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?