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

289 was built by chevy ???????

  • Thread starter Thread starter SLVRBOY
  • Start date Start date Oct 15, 2005
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

1320stang

Founding Member
Nov 13, 1998
4,329
23
89
Edmond, Oklahoma
Oct 17, 2005
#21
  • Oct 17, 2005
  • #21
Your right, it was Z.A.D. that invented it. Brain's a little fuzzy....
 
D

danny clemens

Member
May 4, 2005
728
0
16
Oct 17, 2005
#22
  • Oct 17, 2005
  • #22
Factory displacement numbers are not always correct. I remember reading that a Ford 427 actually figured out to be 425 cubic inches and a 428 was actually 427 cubic inches. I never have taken time to figure if that is correct but probably is. Also 352 and 351 Ford engines both have the same bore and stroke. I'm sure that there are others that are not 100% correct either.
 

Pakrat

Founding Member
Aug 6, 2000
3,843
0
56
Currently: NH Originally: Rhode Island (and all po
Oct 17, 2005
#23
  • Oct 17, 2005
  • #23
SLVRBOY said:
my uncle keeps telling me that the 289 was built by chevy and that the distributor is in the back. i tell him that its in the front but he doesnt believe me. is there any truth to this or is just a myth from a chevy guy.
Click to expand...

What you need to do is slap your grandmother for inhaling rattle can fumes from a paper bag while she was pregnant because your uncle has obviously suffered from severe brain damage. This obviously happened at birht which in all likely hood caused him to be a chevy guy form the begining. A perfect example that should be shown to Bush on why free choice is so important.
 

chepsk8

Founding Member
Jan 15, 2001
2,203
3
49
Easton, PA
Oct 17, 2005
#24
  • Oct 17, 2005
  • #24
I have heard:

"Can Hear Every Valve Rattle Over Lousy Engine Timing"

Boss on back of the manifold is for the old draft tube of the early 60's as a means to vent the crankcase.
 
P

psycodelek

New Member
Sep 19, 2025
2
0
0
04250
Sep 19, 2025
#25
  • Sep 19, 2025
  • #25
THX 138 said:
sorry I'm use to boads like that
GM put the 283 crank in their 327 block to meet the trans am rules of 5.0L in the late 60's. There's a small and large crank journal version. The idea actually came from drag racers that bored out their 283s .125" over to make "301's" but they called them 302s when the factory did them possibly not to confuse them with pontiac 301's but I think those were in the late 70's though
.
a 307 is a 327 crank with a 283 block. a 305 has the same crank as a 350. You can make a 335 with a 305 block .030 over and 400 crank. You can make a 377 with a 400 block .030 over and a 350 crank. You can make a 350 with a 400 block and a 327 crank. and on and on and on and of course a 383 with a 350 block .030 over and 400 crank... I fyou wanted to make a modern chevy 302 you can get a 265 (4.3L)v8 crank from a L99 b-body and put it in your LT1 or LT4 or any 1 piece rear main seal 350 Gen 1 or Gen 2 block.
Click to expand...
here was a fvery rare run of CHEVY 289ci engines where the crank wasn`t nmachined for it but green wire was used. They were made at tonawanda chevy from the tonawanda boys, I know this is fact because it`s where I was born and I knew a guy that was in on the build. I`
 
P

psycodelek

New Member
Sep 19, 2025
2
0
0
04250
Sep 19, 2025
#26
  • Sep 19, 2025
  • #26
psycodelek said:
here was a fvery rare run of CHEVY 289ci engines where the crank wasn`t nmachined for it but green wire was used. They were made at tonawanda chevy from the tonawanda boys, I know this is fact because it`s where I was born and I knew a guy that was in on the build. I`
Click to expand...
d say there may have been a couple, few hundred made and they were race motors some on the 68-71 yr range and they obviously weren`t "production" motors but they were made by chevy.
 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member
Sep 9, 2000
4,675
38
119
Antelope Valley, SoCal
Sep 19, 2025
#27
  • Sep 19, 2025
  • #27
psycodelek said:
I know this is fact because it`s where I was born and I knew a guy that was in on the build. I`
Click to expand...

So nothing verifiable then?

No wonder I didn't recognize this thread; nobody had posted in it for a month shy of 20 years.
 

Noobz347

Stangnet Facilities Maint Tech... Er... Janitor
Admin Dude
Jan 4, 1985
43,017
21,203
234
Box behind Walmart
Sep 19, 2025
#28
  • Sep 19, 2025
  • #28
65ShelbyClone said:
So nothing verifiable then?

No wonder I didn't recognize this thread; nobody had posted in it for a month shy of 20 years.
Click to expand...


Made you look!
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Best place to source power steering parts for a '67? (control valve, ram, hoses)
  • SophiaTatum
  • Jun 15, 2026
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
2
Views
63
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jun 18, 2026
SophiaTatum
S
P
New here
  • PortCity
  • Jun 9, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
2
Views
80
The Welcome Wagon Jun 9, 2026
AeroCoupe
S
1965 289 xmission
  • sctang
  • Nov 15, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
191
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Nov 30, 2025
Mcmahst
5
Hello fellow Mustang fanatics.
  • 580HP*428Cj
  • Apr 2, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
2
Views
190
The Welcome Wagon Apr 2, 2026
General karthief
D
66 Coupe Progress Thread
  • DTCRAWLEY
  • Apr 19, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
43
Views
942
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 17, 2026
DTCRAWLEY
D
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?