probly has been done. there different 289s. have you ever heard the saying there is no replacement for displacement. a standard 289 will be most likely what you will be able to find will have less toruque than a 302. power is all about how much air and how fast you move the air through the motor. the biger the motor you move more air at lower rpms. so if you have a 289 and a 302 with the same heads, intake, carb, cam, and exhast they will make about the same horse power but the 302 will make it at a lower rpm. also biger displacement seems to make more torque than smaller motors do.
I ran a 289 for over 20 years. There were a number of different combinations over the years. The top dog was the 289 HiPo which was rated at 271 HP and the 289 HiPo in the Shelby's which were rated at 306 HP. They are the same physical size as a 302.
ive always wanted to get a newer stang block with roller provisions and 1 piece rear seal and make a reliable roller 289 with older 351 heads or gt40 heads and a nice cam
thats what i got. 5.0 roller block (new) 289 crank ground 10/10 new 5.315 rods new speed pro pistons & rings stock 86 5.0 roller cam (for now) 69 302 4V heads rebuilt with new valves & springs roller tip rockers edelbrock performer 289 intake 500 cfm edelbrock
I did it, 289 first real engine I ever built 17 years ago. Put it in my 72 Grabber. It was a mild build, 268H CompCam, Cast Pistons(.060 over, yep, it was a donor block, been through a few miles), 66 289 heads mild home porting with stock valves and CompCams Roller Tip Rockers, Edelbrock Performer Intake and Carb. It would keep pace with a lot of the 5.0 mustangs(non-juiced) running around at the time and most of them didn't believe it was a 289. I went back to the 302 after a few years on that 289, and built up the 302 a little more, so its hard to say how much difference you get between the two. I've always wanted to see a 289 and 302 built exactly the same and dynoed to show what the real difference would be between the two, don't really think it would be that much with the exact same components on each engine.
You can't really tell the difference. A 302 revs really good and likes to make power at high RPM, but the 289 is even more high strung is all. They look exactly alike and act almost identical except for the RPM thing I just mentioned. I guess if I had a choice between the two, I'd say 302 just to get the couple of extra cubes. There is no replacement for displacement. Learn it, live it, love it. Oh, you asked if it has been done... Add to all the previous responses that my Uncle loves 289s and has owned a Comet and Maverick. He fitted both with a 289. He currently runs a 70 Mav with 289. He built it to scream, and scream it does. That is the only real way to make high power with an SBF without stroking it.
I put a 289 in my Mav in 1973, ran it for about 17 years. Now I would only consider a roller cam 302.
I'm going to high-jack here a moment... Where were you in Memphis 17 years ago? I worked for Mr Lube, I managed a few of the locations. I lived near Kirby and Winchester. Drove a 72 Sprint, then a yellow 75 with a Dodge Demon hood scoop. I thought I knew everyone with a Maverick around that time.
wouldnt trade 10 289's for one good 302 roller. why go down on the evalutionary chain??? there's a reason they only ran them for a handful of years. ive had both and like the 302 better. the 289's shorter stroke tends to burn up rings and break pistions a little bit quicker/easier than the 302 counterpart. and like mentioned before, no replacement for displacement. and if you can, find a 5.0 stang for a donor..... better stock heads, roller cam, forged pistons, one peice rear main and a WIDE range of aftermarket parts. just my thoughts
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, start reading car mags, get some books on building engines, making hp, and anything else you may want to know, it never hurts to educcate yourself, but you should always read from different sources, some information may not always be 100% Shaun
A 289 could definately be a mean motor. i built a hipo 289 for a friend of mine with a mustang. we got it on a dyno after the build and got 320hp to the wheels with just a nice cam and 68 hipo heads w a port polish. but then again on the other hand the new motor i built for my mav is a 331 stroker that puts out right at 410 hp with around 420lbs... just got to find a happy medium on economy and performance...
