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

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN 289 AND 302 ??

  • Thread starter Thread starter pimpinphil
  • Start date Start date Apr 24, 2010
P

pimpinphil

Member
Jan 25, 2003
45
0
7
cumberland,md
Apr 24, 2010
#1
  • Apr 24, 2010
  • #1
hi,
to make a long story short,my g/f's dad has a 289,not sure of the year yet,just thought about this today. but i have a late 80 roller 302,and i have already bought pistons and rods for it,and was just wondering weather i could use my pistons and rods in his 289 block? i have tried to check stuff out through summit,and from what i can tell,i can,the pistons seem to have the same parts numbers for 289,and 302,im kinda stumpped on the rods,because if im not mistaken they had 3 different rod lengths there,and they was 5.090,5.155,and 5.400.now im sure they are for stroking the 289.just not sure what options i have,if someone could help me out that would be great.
i have speedpro forged pistons 4.030.and eagle forged i beam rods 5.090.if i can use it in the 289,what crank would be the best? i would like to keep low compression if possible,because i want to run boost. and is there anything i need to keep and eye on or should i be just fine? i had my 302 machined before i knew they was weak blocks. and this is just a way of helping me build some good horsepower and not have to worry about the block cracking down the middle. thanks for all your time and input.
 
5

5.0ina66

Member
Jun 6, 2003
664
0
16
Ohio
Apr 24, 2010
#2
  • Apr 24, 2010
  • #2
A 289 block isn't *THAT* much stronger than a 5.0L block. The 289 block will take some fancy machine work to take the 1-pc rear main seal 5.0 crank and it doesn't have the hole in the side of the block for a dipstick either.

I wouldn't mess with the 289, I'd just finish rebuilding the 5.0.
 
P

pimpinphil

Member
Jan 25, 2003
45
0
7
cumberland,md
Apr 24, 2010
#3
  • Apr 24, 2010
  • #3
i was meaning maybe using the 289 crank instead,and using my rods and pisonts. i dont know if that would work or not. im just checking my options. and i have to buy a crank yet,and oil pan. pretty much all i have is the pistons,rods,and the block,i need most everything else. thanks
 
5

5.0ina66

Member
Jun 6, 2003
664
0
16
Ohio
Apr 24, 2010
#4
  • Apr 24, 2010
  • #4
pimpinphil said:
i was meaning maybe using the 289 crank instead,and using my rods and pisonts. i dont know if that would work or not. im just checking my options. and i have to buy a crank yet,and oil pan. pretty much all i have is the pistons,rods,and the block,i need most everything else. thanks
Click to expand...
You need 5.155" rods with a 289 crank and 5.090" rods with a 302 crank. 5.400" are stroker rods.

Plus, you'd have to have the 289 crank machined if you wanted to fit it into a 1pc rear main 5.0 block
 
P

pimpinphil

Member
Jan 25, 2003
45
0
7
cumberland,md
Apr 24, 2010
#5
  • Apr 24, 2010
  • #5
i think we are getting a little confused,sorry. i am meaning using my pistons,and rods and a 289 crank in a 289 block . i have the higher comp. pistons,and with the shorter rod,i should have low compression,what do you think??? if they would even work together i dont know. thanks .
 

SScott

Powered by LORD
Apr 23, 2004
304
0
16
Alabama
Apr 24, 2010
#6
  • Apr 24, 2010
  • #6
You could BUT, the shorter rods would reduce your compression ratio and you would lose power, unless your goal is to reduce compression??? TBO, you can do a whole lot with these little motors, I put chevy 5.7 rods in a 289 to make a long rod motor to see for myself if it had any advantages. It is an age old dispute that seems to never get settled.
 
P

pimpinphil

Member
Jan 25, 2003
45
0
7
cumberland,md
Apr 25, 2010
#7
  • Apr 25, 2010
  • #7
yea,that is kinda what im looking for. i would like to lower my compression some. as it is right now,with the heads and all,im looking aroud 9.5.1-10.0.1. compression. how much do you think my compression would be with the rod so much shorter? all the heads i like play around 58cc-60cc.and how much power is a 289 good for,meaning the 302 is good till around 500 ish,and then its just a matter of time before it breaks. how about the 289?? thanks alot guys.
 

SScott

Powered by LORD
Apr 23, 2004
304
0
16
Alabama
Apr 25, 2010
#8
  • Apr 25, 2010
  • #8
Just my opinion but that is perfect already. And if your reasoning is boost then you really need a little stronger setup if the compression matters for the levels that require it.
 
P

pimpinphil

Member
Jan 25, 2003
45
0
7
cumberland,md
Apr 25, 2010
#9
  • Apr 25, 2010
  • #9
well it prolly is, all i was really looking for in the first place was around 500 ish hp. crank hp. i just didnt want to be worried about the engine cracking issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Engine HO cam in non HO roller block ‘93 f150
  • DanC1993f150
  • Mar 21, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
210
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Mar 29, 2026
General karthief
Engine Suggestions on an engine rebuild. Stock cam/GT40Ps or aftermarket on both for a fun weekend driver?
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Apr 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
583
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 7, 2026
MadSquirrelTech
A
Engine 04 GT timing chain issue
  • AwesomeX1103
  • Sep 3, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
347
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Nov 5, 2025
Noobz347
F
289 to 302 Engine
  • Fri Guy
  • Feb 13, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
632
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Feb 13, 2025
Fri Guy
F
Need some camshaft guru advice on power loss from supercharger to nitrous
  • TTSaleen
  • Dec 1, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
18
Views
573
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Dec 29, 2025
revhead347
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?