• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

289 in our car???

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yobi1Kanobi
  • Start date Start date Oct 19, 2008

Yobi1Kanobi

Member
Apr 9, 2003
559
0
16
Oct 19, 2008
#1
  • Oct 19, 2008
  • #1
Can you use a 289 motor in our car? The car that I am trading for has a fresh 289 and I want to keep my 347 and supporting hardware. Can I make that 289 with heads and all work with fuel injection?

thanks more questions to come.
 

BlownFiveLiter

have car, will race....wait, it doesn't run
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
3,133
18
108
Chicagoland
Oct 19, 2008
#2
  • Oct 19, 2008
  • #2
Yep, it's the same block, for the most part.. The 289 uses the same 4.00 inch bore with a 2.87 inch stroke, versus the 3.00 inch stroke of the 302. IIRC, the 289 doesn't have a provision in the block for a dipstick. I think they were located in the timing cover, or oil pan.
 

Yobi1Kanobi

Member
Apr 9, 2003
559
0
16
Oct 19, 2008
#3
  • Oct 19, 2008
  • #3
no problem I have a canton pan. That would be great it would save me a bunch of cash on the swap.
 

94CobraPace

Founding Member
Aug 30, 2000
907
1
0
Houston, Tx.
Oct 19, 2008
#4
  • Oct 19, 2008
  • #4
Make sure it's not a early, before 65, possible 64, as they can have a different bell housing bolt pattern. Otherwise, as stated the dipstick is located different. Use the fuel injection intake and should be no issues using the 289.
 

Yobi1Kanobi

Member
Apr 9, 2003
559
0
16
Oct 19, 2008
#5
  • Oct 19, 2008
  • #5
Its out of a 68... this is pretty good news. Is the firing order the same and everything. I would think it has tappet lifters?

And what T5 should I use a 94 or a Fox?
 

BlownFiveLiter

have car, will race....wait, it doesn't run
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
3,133
18
108
Chicagoland
Oct 19, 2008
#6
  • Oct 19, 2008
  • #6
It'll be flat tappet lifters and the 302 firing order, versus the 351/5.0 HO order. That's a simple cam swap to change, however. If you need a T-5, the Fox ones are more plentiful, but you'll also need the Fox bellhousing, clutch fork, and a driveshaft spacer, or lengthened driveshaft. You could always pick up a Fox T-5 and swap in the 94-95 specific input shaft, too.
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,296
1,640
214
Acworth, GA
Oct 20, 2008
#7
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #7
You don't have to change the camshaft. You can get away with rearranging the spark plug wires to adjust to the old firing order.

Kurt
 

Yobi1Kanobi

Member
Apr 9, 2003
559
0
16
Oct 20, 2008
#8
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #8
I have a TFS 2 laying around or maybe a stock cam.
 

BlownFiveLiter

have car, will race....wait, it doesn't run
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
3,133
18
108
Chicagoland
Oct 20, 2008
#9
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #9
If you go with an off the shelf roller cam, or even the stocker, you'll need to run retrofit lifters (expensive!). A flat tappet 351W cam would be tons cheaper, but you'll need to swap your distributor gear to be compatible with it. You could also run an off the shelf reduced base circle cam and do a roller conversion that way. It's not the preferred method, but it is another option, and wouldn't require the distributor gear swap.
 

Yobi1Kanobi

Member
Apr 9, 2003
559
0
16
Oct 20, 2008
#10
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #10
I guess I will just change the plug wires around.
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,296
1,640
214
Acworth, GA
Oct 20, 2008
#11
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #11
Those roller lifter conversion kits cost a fortune. The only downside to moving the spark plug wires to a different sequence is that the injectors will not be opening in the same sequence as the valves opening. I think it will still run though, just not as well. You can make extension harnesses for the injectors and swap the sequence on them too. It would take a little bit of work.

Kurt
 

Yobi1Kanobi

Member
Apr 9, 2003
559
0
16
Oct 20, 2008
#12
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #12
thats true. So i would be force to change the camshaft. I am really starting to think this isnt going to work out for me.
 

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.
20+ Year Stangneter
Jun 14, 2004
9,296
1,640
214
Acworth, GA
Oct 20, 2008
#13
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #13
Well, in my opinion, you can get away without changing the camshaft. You would have to change the gear on the distributer though.

Kurt
 
6

68coupe1

New Member
Apr 27, 2001
25
0
0
portsmouth ohio
Oct 20, 2008
#14
  • Oct 20, 2008
  • #14
It is also 28 oz. instead of 50 oz. You will need the correct flywheel and balencer to match the 289.
 

Yobi1Kanobi

Member
Apr 9, 2003
559
0
16
Oct 21, 2008
#15
  • Oct 21, 2008
  • #15
I think it already has thebalancer and flywheel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6
Motor ID
  • 65er
  • Mar 14, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
138
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Mar 14, 2026
Noobz347
R
First project car and first time learning on cars
  • Rustang jr
  • Oct 2, 2025
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
9
Views
324
The Welcome Wagon Oct 6, 2025
Rustang jr
R
SBF rebuild with no oil pressure NEED HELP
  • Falcon67
  • May 27, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
288
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- May 27, 2025
horse sence
R
Progress Thread A small update on our first-gen Mustang project
  • Restomotive
  • Apr 24, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
89
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Apr 24, 2026
Restomotive
R
F
289 to 302 Engine
  • Fri Guy
  • Feb 13, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
650
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Feb 13, 2025
Fri Guy
F
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 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?