289 vs. 302

Discussion in 'Technical' started by chip_gilkey, Feb 19, 2007.

  1. chip_gilkey

    chip_gilkey Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Trimble, Ohio
    In your honest opinion, which motor would be better to have in your maverick, a 289 or a 302. Ive heard that 289's are the classic ford motors and are much better than the 302's, and ive also heard that 302's are much more powerful. I know, at least around here(south eastern ohio), 289's are hard to come by, but i was thinking about trying to find one of those, but im not sure yet. Please put up your opinions.
     
  2. wagesofsin

    wagesofsin Official Lurkologist

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    597
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Location:
    sarasota, florida
    Vehicle:
    74 challenger , 73 'cuda , 72 challenger , 74 barracuda
    theres a shoe for every foot, be prepared to watch alot of tryons.(in other words, alotta opinions)honestly even.
     
  3. dkstuck

    dkstuck Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    3,249
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    118
    Location:
    Latrobe Pa (Pgh)
    Vehicle:
    72 Maverick in drag
    302 and a 289 air cleaner sticker for the classic look!

    Me thinking 302 easier an cheaper to come by, wasn't in the Maverick, let the 60 restorers keep the 289's.

    You can make power from both, an run them forever.
     
  4. don graham

    don graham MCG State Rep

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,800
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    302
    Location:
    arizona city, az.
    Vehicle:
    70 mav, 71 grabber, 73 Comet, 2004 f-250 crew cab diesel, 2001 f-250, 2004 explorer, 2007 Gold Wing trike.
    i go with dave. 302. every cubic inch helps.:)
     
  5. igo1090

    igo1090 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    706
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    catonsville, md
    Vehicle:
    75 maverick, 93 tbird tube car
    i started with 289s & later went to 302s & 351s. go with the 302. the 289 parts that are unique can be hard to find, the main caps are very slightly weaker (except K block), easier to get good 302 rods,& why give up the 13 cu inches?
     
  6. T.L.

    T.L. Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    4,187
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Colorado
    Vehicle:
    '73 Maverick 2-door, V-8
    I'd rather have a 302. Do the same mods to 302 and it'll smoke the 289...
     
  7. chip_gilkey

    chip_gilkey Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Trimble, Ohio
    Thanks for your opinions guys, i figure ill go with the 302, its cheaper and im not rich. The only thing i was thinking about was the maverick would be more unique with the 289 in it. what do you think?
     
  8. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    They are pretty much the same.
    The way I look at it is:
    1 hp per cubic inch is an easy goal.
    Which do you want easy... 289hp or 302hp?

    Dave
     
  9. grbmaverickmo

    grbmaverickmo That Maverick Guy

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,255
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Aquashicola, PA
    Vehicle:
    70 grabber.71 4dr v-8 stick.72 Sprint
    I have had a few good runnin 289`s. But 302`s are easier to find and match parts. I have a 289 with 351 heads in my car now.
     
  10. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    My uncle has the same thing.
    The engine has took a lickin and is still tickin after about 20 years or better.
    He just ported his W heads, after all these years, he bought them new from the Ford parts counter. C9 heads and paid like 30 bux each assembled and in the box!
    Anyway, I don't see a big difference, none really.
    His car is fast like you would expect from a 302, looks like a 302, and sounds like a 302...
     
  11. 69GT

    69GT Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    60
    Location:
    Fresno
    Vehicle:
    72 Grabber Maverick.
    Go with a 5.0. H.O. Motor found in Mustang and some Lincoln Mark VIIs from 85-92. They are easy to convert to carburation and you will not find 289s lying around the local junk yards with forged pistons and roller cams. You also cant complain about the 5.0s one piece rear main seal that doesnt have the perpetual oil drip common to older Ford small blocks. I think their heads and rods are better too. But that depends on what you consider better... Good luck.

    P.S. Make sure it's an H.O. Motor if you find it in another Ford aside from a Mustang. It should be on the plate (5.0 H.O.) on the upper manifold if it's a fuel injected model. There are fuel injected imposters that have cast pistons and less power in some of the other Ford and Mercury full size cars. I think they only have 5.0. over a black background on the plate of a non H.O. Hope this helps...
     
  12. stmanser

    stmanser Looking for a Maverick

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    Davenport, Iowa
    why go with 302 hp.. when 360 hp is just as easy... lol
     
  13. 69GT

    69GT Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    60
    Location:
    Fresno
    Vehicle:
    72 Grabber Maverick.
    I'd be cool with 302 HP at the rear wheels :)
     
  14. ratio411

    ratio411 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    6,060
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Pensacola
    Vehicle:
    1972 Sprint and 1975 Maverick
    302/C4 with 378 fwhp = 302 rwhp.

    or 1.25 hp per cubic inch...
     
  15. 69GT

    69GT Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    60
    Location:
    Fresno
    Vehicle:
    72 Grabber Maverick.
    Hey my AFR 185s just showed up for my D.S.S. 306 short block :) with the 5-speed and the Comp 274HR cam I might make that. Only 9:1 compression though for possible supercharging later....
     

Share This Page