I am pulling a 289 out of my 66 Stang right now and recently purchased a 302 for really cheap and after taking off the heads, I have come to learn that it would need to be rebuilt first. So my question to you expert Stangers is which engine I should invest in getting rebuilt. Please explain why and what the big differences would be. Thank you for your time.
289 or 302, which is better to invest in to rebuild?
- Thread starter ubs
- Start date
brianj5600
Active Member
66P51GT
New Member
I recently had the same question. I'm eventually doing an EFI swap so it was really a no-brainer. I went for the 302 Roller. I found a short-block with a steel crank, forged pistons, and an E303 cam for $100. Cleaning, honing, bearings and ARP rod bolts should be enough for my moderate build.
The only 302 that would have a distinct advantage over the 289 would be a mid 80's up 5.0 roller block.If it's a 68-85 302, then the heads are boat anchors unless someone swapped on a set of early 351W heads. Most 289's had good heads with small combustion chambers, they would make better power on the 302 because of the increase in compression. A good port job and/or bigger valves would go a long way here, ditto for the 87-up E7TE 5.0 heads.
66P51GT
New Member
My reasoning... $$$ To take full advantage of the EFI I need to change the firing order of the 289. To do this I would need a retrofit roller camshaft kit. The cost of this alone is more more than the purchase and rebuild cost of my roller 302.
66P51GT
New Member
The owner is a good friend of mine. I was part shopping in his backyard over the weekend. I picked up all the EFI stuff he had. After doing some research, I decided I'd need a 302 block as well. I gave him a call and he gave me the specs on the block. I'm pretty stoked!D.Hearne said:
blue66tang
Founding Member
ubs said:
Its more up to your choice, bolth engines are basicly the same (besides stroke) and with all the same bolt on's will make virtualy the same power.
brianj5600
Active Member
66P51GT
New Member
That is a good bit of information about the Erson cams. That could have weighed in on my decision but I would still probably go with the late model roller. If i'm not mistaken these cams have a reduced turning circle to make up for the longer roller lifters. I would also have limited cam choice in the future if I decide to get a better set of heads than my Windsor Jr's or add a blower.blkfrd said:
From the research I've done, running the late model firing order is not required. However, since the computer is sequenced to the 351w firing order 1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8, the fuel will not discharge in the proper order and a rough idle situation will occur. Once the RPMs increase, the engine will smooth out.
In theory I guess you could rewire the injector harness to match the early 1-5-4-2-6-3-7-8 firing order. However, I'm not too keen on cutting and splicing wires that are computer controlled especially with the hostile environment inside the engine compartment. I also don't know if there would be any side effects from rewiring the harness.
SadbutTrue
Founding Member
from what i've heard the 289 is a nice bore/stroke combo for a high revving motor... and a 302 makes a good bit more lowend. obviously the difference can't be too big, but it depends on which you're going for. D Hearne makes a godo point about the heads though... most of the power of an engine is decided by the heads, and at least initially, its very possible the 289 will have better heads (compression wise).
Now if the 302 is a roller, then by all means, go for it over the 289.
Now if the 302 is a roller, then by all means, go for it over the 289.
1995cobraR
Member
I'd also go with the 302 unless you are restoring the car and need a matching # block.
I'd keep the 289. You may want to put it back in one day (or you could sell it to a show car guy).
Good luck
I'd keep the 289. You may want to put it back in one day (or you could sell it to a show car guy).
Good luck
