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

which cam and heads would be right?

  • Thread starter Thread starter baker2956
  • Start date Start date Mar 5, 2004
B

baker2956

New Member
Mar 4, 2004
48
0
0
NY
Mar 5, 2004
#1
  • Mar 5, 2004
  • #1
Im planning on putting a 331 stroker kit in my 289. It will be a daily driver w/ the stock C-4 w/ a 2400 converter. Im still not sure of which cam to put in and what heads will be best? Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
 

ashford

Member
Dec 19, 2003
485
0
16
fargo ND
Mar 5, 2004
#2
  • Mar 5, 2004
  • #2
a 289 block has shorter sleeves than a 302 and some engine rebuilders have told me not to stroke a 289 for this reason. an old 302 block is cheap and there are alot of them.

Heads and cam are dependant on what you want for driveability and power. the 5.0 forum has lots of info on this, alot of people have done it over there
 

LMan

Founding Member
Aug 10, 2002
1,246
0
0
Mom's basement
Mar 5, 2004
#3
  • Mar 5, 2004
  • #3
actually, thats an old urban legend. The bores are the same depth. A 289 makes a fine stroker, not that a 302 wouldnt do as well.

Your combination (you didnt say what gears you have, I assume the stock 2.80) says you need low end and mid range. I suggest ported 351 C or DOOE heads w oversize valves for a strict budget, or Darts/Roush or perhaps E-boks if you have more dinero. Stick with a dual-plane intake and about a 600 CFM carb, vac secondary.

Headers are a must, long tubes if you can fit them in. If you want low end and midrange, dont overcam.
 
B

baker2956

New Member
Mar 4, 2004
48
0
0
NY
Mar 6, 2004
#4
  • Mar 6, 2004
  • #4
Well here's what I've got so far...Weiand Stealth intake, edelbrock 600cfm electric choke carb, edelbrock performer fuel pump, and hedman long tube headers. I have in the plans to put in a hedman 2.5" x-pipe possibly and flowmasters to finish off the exhaust. Then 3:55 gears in the rear and 2400 RPM stall converter for the trans which is the stock C-4. Im still pretty new but how does this cam sound...Comp Cam w/ 1500-5500 rpm range, 218/218 duration @.50", and .456"/.456" lift...Heads im not sure yet
 
B

baker2956

New Member
Mar 4, 2004
48
0
0
NY
Mar 6, 2004
#5
  • Mar 6, 2004
  • #5
LMan said:
actually, thats an old urban legend. The bores are the same depth. A 289 makes a fine stroker, not that a 302 wouldnt do as well.

Your combination (you didnt say what gears you have, I assume the stock 2.80) says you need low end and mid range. I suggest ported 351 C or DOOE heads w oversize valves for a strict budget, or Darts/Roush or perhaps E-boks if you have more dinero. Stick with a dual-plane intake and about a 600 CFM carb, vac secondary.

Headers are a must, long tubes if you can fit them in. If you want low end and midrange, dont overcam.
Click to expand...


I have been getting some flack about the stroker eating up too much gas to be a daily driver though. Other than that are there any down points to the 331 stroker in the 289 block? A good friend of mine thinks it would be better(alot more expensive ) to put in a new 306 from DSS. But I think the 331 is the better way to go.
 
M

mtbdoc

New Member
Nov 2, 2003
245
1
0
Mar 6, 2004
#6
  • Mar 6, 2004
  • #6
I'll stay away from the cam question, as I am throwing a radical 238/248 in my '66 'vert w/331 roller block stroker, BUT I am adding a Kenne Bell blower + Tremec TKO 5-speed, so any loss of bottom end shouldn't be an issue. I am going to run AFR 185's, but 165's would likely be the hot ticket for your application. I have not seen ANYTHING that appears comparable to these heads. The CNC porting from the factory puts these in a whole different class.

I considered the slight $$$ difference for other heads...then thought about the overall cost for the car, and it just didn't make sense to use anything else. Brian at ADPerformance.com keeps these on the shelf (unlike other folks who have to order and wait the 4+ weeks that AFR is back-ordered!).
 

Jonstantine

Founding Member
Jul 20, 2002
487
0
0
Oklahoma
Mar 6, 2004
#7
  • Mar 6, 2004
  • #7
i agree about the afr's... its what i plan to get if i ever graduate and get a job... IF

also, i would get a slightly larger cam
i put a 204/214 .441/.474 ish cam and i have determined that i want more in my daily driver (then again, i will probably always want more)
if anything else, you cant go wrong with more lift...

and with the carb.. i think edelbrock might recomend you get a 500 cfm
edelbrocks DONT have vacuum secondaries, so you can overcarb easily
although you might be alright with the increased cubes, high stall and shorter gears

i have a 600 on my 289, and it was too much for my stock stall and tall (2.8) gears
i had some serious tuning to do to get it not to bog off the line
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Electrical HELP! 1989 5.0 Stick, Voltage Bleed onto Ignition Trigger wire
  • ChickenDeluxe
  • May 14, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
221
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 24, 2026
ChickenDeluxe
C
A
Discussion on mild budget build/ top end
  • Acesario
  • Feb 21, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
713
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 23, 2026
General karthief
Which Lakewood Front Struts Would Work the Best?
  • 93gtmustang
  • Nov 7, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
1
Views
141
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 7, 2025
Ethereal_Zer0
E
S
Block questions
  • s_vargas54
  • Jan 25, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
725
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 8, 2026
Trogdor
H
Forced Induction On3 Turbo Kit- Parts list NEEDED - 302 Stock Motor
  • Hirothecool1
  • Feb 27, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Mar 7, 2026
slow84lx
S
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?