As a Gen X'er that graduated high school in 1992, I have to say, for me, there is no better sounding combination than a 5 liter Foxbody with a set of OG 40 series Flowmasters on it. It is a sound that I can literally recognize from probably a half mile away, maybe more! It's pure music!
Many years ago I bought a '62 Fairlane Sports Coupe 2 door w/ a blown 221 , 3 spd. (first car). It was on the list to be scrapped , I paid 25 bucks for it , 2 friends and I pushed it to my parents house ,probably a mile .The motor was junk , so I saved up a couple hundred bucks over the summer and found a 351 Windsor and a top loader 4 spd. out of a '69 Torino GT . It took a little bit to get it in , but I loved that car . Now , there's a friend of mine that's wants to get rid of some stuff and has a '63 Falcon Sprint , he didn't say no when I asked about it , I'll be working on getting it this week .
Ford had a Head that made a big difference if installed on a 289 or 302, They were the True GT40 head that was made for the Lemone race, when the 427 was ban. The heads had. 1.90 intake valves and 1.60 exhaust.. They were basically the same as the 1969 351 Windsor heads but with cleaner ports and smaller combustion chambers. They were sold over the counter listed in the Ford Muscle parts catalogue. Ford sold a bunch of go fast parts for the Small block ford right at the local ford store back in the olden days.
I really love the 302 cubic inch Windsor engine. It's the first engine I had ever rebuilt. I had very little knowledge of engine specs back in the 1980's, but I knew I had one of the better ones with closed combustion chamber cylinder heads. I would like to point out one thing that you keep saying that actually causes confusion. When the term small block gets used to indicate Ford engines, at times they mean just a 302 cubic inch or a 5.0 liter engine. But, I've discussed engines with people who think any 351 is a small block Ford. Well, they just group them all together like they are the same type of engine. I ask them which 351 engine? They say a small block. I say 351W or 351C, 351M? They didn't even know. I don't use the other guy's terms for Fords. I identify them like Ford did. No confusion, unless you aren't a Ford enthusiast. Here's some of Ford's engine families: Windsor, Cleveland (335 series) FE, 351M and 400 ( 335 series), 429 and 460 (385 series), etc... No small or big block confusion. If you like using the term small block, then you can be sure that it'll make Ford guys like me ask which engine you mean?
Kinda gotta ask what engine when it’s a small block or big block Chevy as well. Just ford uses dif terms while most people have stuck with chevs small block big block scheme
@KidxChaos01 but when they simply say 351 small block. It is not clear. It's too easy to misunderstand what they mean. But it's just easy enough to use the specific engine name Ford gave it. No questions after that.
@@rolliehunt5173well with more context in the ford families its honesty much less simple seeing as their apart of the 335 family and the term Windsor is sort of the same as using the term small block on it. Theirs 3 versions of the same engine so no matter what family you call it you will still end up getting the question which 351? A 351c obviously isn’t a Windsor same as the 351m
@KidxChaos01 a Ford enthusiast, does not use those terms. We say which engine family in the first place. It's because of the other guys' misuse of a term that means absolutely nothing in Ford engine families. It's an argument that goes in circles. Ford block sizes do not always correlate with cubic inches like the other guys. There are 3 different blocks that are not interchangeable in any form in 351 cubic inches. One block is interchangeably used for the 351 and 400 cubic inch engines. So, saying you have a small block 351M and then say you have a big block 400. It's a contradiction. Man, I have heard all of this mixed up terminology used by the younger car guys when talking about Ford engines. They are so determined to hold their ground. All they do is show their ignorance.
@ “ford enthusiasts” most def use those terms you don’t see how pretentious that sounds but it does, most ford guys are going to use small block big block terms. Now sure it would be better if they were to be more specific of the motor especially these because of the widely dif versions. But to act like the small block big block terms don’t for the most part work within fords motors is willful ignorance. Pointing out the Frankenstein 351m is a bit strange too. A big block modified with small block components is obviously where the contradicting comes from. And again you’re using the Windsor term as if it’s a legit name for a ford family line of engines when it isn’t. So you’re doing exactly what you’re complaining about.
A few years ago I squeezed a warmed over 302, a 4 speed RAN transmission with a 3.00 open rear end into a 73 Opel GT. It took a lot hammer work and “body stiffening” but it was definitely “FAST”. Need I say more? I wish I still had it.
I have a 72 F-100 with a 302,great power great on fuel,T-18,Holley 2 barrel, factory exhaust manifods dual exhaust with crossover pipe,3:00 ratio axle original paint long wide bed, definitely show its age with a few battle scars origina grey base hubcaps. Every time I drive it I always get thumbs up,and offers to sell it,still has the drumbrakes a smooth engaging clutch,I had it since 88,I probably have it haul me to the cemetery when the time comes,yes I am a small block Ford fan.
A high school friend - we were in the moonshine capital of the south - was fond of his '64 Fairlane, pale yellow 2-door with a post. He built the 289 with his brother's help and he and I had some memorable rides. One of the first was a blast down a lightly travelled road where we encountered a driver observing the speed limit. Not one to be hindered my buddy stuck 2nd and ran it to near redline. Straight pipes. "How fast did we get" I asked. "Hundered n' fifteen. Not bad fer sacundt."
Sounds like you just needed to learn how to build engines better- there aren't many inherent advantages of the SBF to SBC other than the factory cast cyl heads with the two centre cyl's creating a hot spot in the head from having those two exhaust valves side by side... Chevy's are easy to make power with and used to be A LOT cheaper to build than a Ford or a Mopar
Reality is the Camaros ate Mustangs for breakfast, particularly the 289s. Ask anyone who was street racing, late 60s through mid70s. That might have changed when the 5.0 Fox bodies came out, and got quicker by the mid 1980s. But in the 'classic' muscle car era, 289/302s (non Boss) were pretty much boat anchors. Sure the 289 Cobra was fast, but never seen. Yes the GT40 Mark 1 was (and is) a rocket. But the average 289 Mustang driver watched Camaro & Chevelle taillights.
I've got a 1965 Mustang Convertible I've owned since 1978. I had a friend who raced cars at Bonneville who rebuilt the engine in the 1980s. We had to bore it out .060 (so its a 298 now). Forged pistons, lots of work on the crank, rods and heads. Revs to 7,000 and sounds great. :-)
Ford built millions of them. I built dozens of them. 260s thru 351s. Street and race. Light and tight dimensions. Priority oiling. Dist. up front. Stable timing. Factory Ambidextrous pistons. Symmetric ports. Cylinder heads and aftermarket support galore. Competitors used to laugh at the Windsor Ford Series Small-blocks. Not anymore! My favorite aspect all in... The staccato exhaust note of a properly tuned 1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8 Windsor.
@philkuusisto1558 - My Dad bought new a '68 Galaxie 500 XL hardtop with a 390 2bbl. hooked to a C-6 trans. Even with the 2bbl and burning reg. gas it produced 265hp and 390 torque. The C-6 had a stirrup shift on the console and you could shift it manually from 1st to 2nd then 3rd, holding it in each gear as long as you could. I got 60mph in first and the tires chirped when I hit 2nd! We (Dad and I) put 100,000 miles on the car with ZERO problems other than a failed ignition switch. It was a 2dr. fastback and was a fun car to play with.
@Loulovesspeed Nice story. My 390 had a 4bbl and a 4 speed . Rear end was geared high so it barried the speedometer needle with more to go. Dangerous but fun.
~20 years ago, we missed an opportunity for a 289. We had done the Challenge, and were looking for a new car. Found an Alfa 2600 with a 289 in it for challenge money. Should have gotten it- could have made two cool Challenge cars with it- V6 Alfa 2600 and some other small Ford with that 289 stuffed into it. That would have been a fun pair of cars to bring to Florida and have fun with.
I Love the Ford V8’s as well, my first V8 car was a 1970 Mercury Cougar with the 351 Cleveland engine, awesome car with plenty of power and Ooh that V8 sound/rumble!
Also a big fan of the legendary 289 HiPo. and the 289 in general. IMO, the 289 is actually preferred over the 302 that debuted in 1968, because, even though there are only 13 cubic inches difference, there is a not so commonly known fact that Ford stroked the 289 to get 302 cubic inches, but however, with the stroking came a different length rods, changing the stroke-to-rod ratio that I believe is significant with regards to smoothness and revving.
Being in the UK, the classic engine over here is the Rover V8, which was originally the Buick 215. It was in British cars from Rover, Triumph, TVR, Land Rover, and lots of other manufacturers and volume expanded over the years from 3.5 litres to 3.9, 4.0, 4.4, then 5 litres. Now no longer in production but still rated as one of the best engines on this side of the pond. I must admit though, I've always fancied a hippo 289....
While the run-of-the-mill 302 used shorter connecting rods, with the piston's commpression height being the same as the 289, the connecting rods in the Boss 302 were the same length as the 289: 5.15".
Picked up a 1968 Mercury Montego GT with a J Code 302 in it late 90's. Drove the crap out of that car. Beat on the 302. Took it all. Paid for the car by Street racing in about 6 months. Sold it and still regret it. Love the 289, but, that J Code 302 was a champ!
Been running Fords for the last 25 years. During that time I've owned nine 302s, four 460s and a 351W. None of the 302s failed; the 351W didn't last 6 months, and the four 460s were all in one single truck in a six-month period before I had to abandon it. I have had to replace one tired 302 after it had been absolutely cooked from losing all the coolant, but I was able to wait five years before doing so. I'll stick with my 5.0s.
I just made a comment about this. I graduated high school in 1992 and 5.0L Mustangs were all the rage. Personally I think a 5 liter with the OG 40 series Flowmasters is probably one of the greatest sounding engine exhaust combos in the history of all automotive..,That isn't hyperbole! I seriously miss my old Foxbody. I also had a 91 Thunderbird Supercoupe with the 3.8L factory supercharged engine and a 5 speed. I beat myself up for selling that one all the time. Really miss that car.
I love my 347 Stroker in my 2,400 lb. Factory Five Cobra! Loppy idle, and tons of torque kick in at 3,000rpm. With just a 570cfm carburetor, I get a respectable 16mpg on the freeway.
I was born and raised a MOPAR guy aand have had them from the slant 6 to 440s, but i love Ford's 289s. My '67 Galaxie 500 had one, but I also had a '66 Series 1 Sunbeam Tiger with a 260 that was also quite.good.
My first car was a 64 Comet Caliente, with a 4 bbl 289 (not the hypo) and a C4. My personal opinion is that the 289 is the best all-round Ford small block. It liked to rev, made excellent power and responded well to upgrades.
2001 Explorer and Mountaineer was the last to use the Windsor. I still own the one we bought new in April of 2001 as the new 2002 Explorers were hitting the market. The reason I wanted it? That small block Ford engine. 270k and still going strong!!
In the Cobra Daytona Coupe, it saw its highest output @ 390 HP with 4 Weber carb setup! It lead all the GT40s for a good portion of the race and helped it to reach 197 mph finishing 4th overall at Le Mans, with the late, great Bob Bondurant at the wheel! RIP Bob.
I’ve had a 292 Y block, a 389 GTO, a 340 Dodge Demon,302 fox body ex. Chp, Shelby GT 500 Mustang, and just about finished a 77 Nova with a BP 383. Nothing compares to an American made V-8
I run a 289 in my 67 FB with close ratio top loader 9" locker 4:11 gears. The 289 has 12.5 : 1 dome pistons light weight rods big 2.02 valves solid lifter cam with a lot of lift, spin it 8500 rpm all the time. I can out run just about everything I come across. Guys think the old mustangs can't run with today's cars until they try a hot little 289 no stroker here man. Just like Shelby intended 289
What are the Ford small-block's advantages over the Chevy - other than being narrower and lighter, and thus easier to squeeze into small cars? From what I understand, the Ford has a smaller displacement, smaller valves, requires more work and money to make into a high-performance runner, and the parts situation is trickier and may require an expert to sort out. NOTE: I'm not a Chevy guy. But the Chevy is the overwhelming choice - even in Fords - and I wonder why. Other than coming out in 1955, and thus getting a 7-or-8-year head start.
With all the stroker kits and and aftermarket heads these days, the only advantage the small block chevy has left is the five head bolts per cylinder.... that and evidently, the orange paint, according to chevy guy reasoning... Edit; Plus the Ford is a hundred pounds lighter than the SBC...
IF you are talking about a short deck 289 302 style engine the word torquey does not apply! Can be made to produce good power with high rpm torque is not a major thing. Want torque, use a 351 tall deck. They make more torque, 351 Cleveland even more. 351 400M even more. Little tiny engine very short stroke and rods. Currently building a 347 with CHI 3V heads, 600hp is the aim but it will ne 100ft lbs and more shy of the long rod Clevo lump it is replacing. People extolling the virtues of 70s 289 302s. They all go glunk glunk glunk as he piston skirts are in the pan! Late 80s, 90s engine a vast improvement. Better iron, better finished and far better pistons.
C H E V R O L E T : Causes Headaches Eventually, Very Rarely Occurs Leaving Engine Together. That's what the letters stand for. Stop being a Boob, Bob.
Sorry bud... The Chevy is a cheap imitation of smallblock Ford.. The smallblock Ford won the 24 hours of Lemans twice..1968 and 1969. Chevy didn't have the reliability or power to conquer Ferrari or Porche
But anyway you must mean, "Cracked Heads Every Valve's Roasted Oil Leaks Every Time". Or is it "Cheapest Heaps Ever Virtually Runs On Luck Every Time" Figured I better get that in before someone starts in on the ford acronyms😅
As a Gen X'er that graduated high school in 1992, I have to say, for me, there is no better sounding combination than a 5 liter Foxbody with a set of OG 40 series Flowmasters on it. It is a sound that I can literally recognize from probably a half mile away, maybe more! It's pure music!
Many years ago I bought a '62 Fairlane Sports Coupe 2 door w/ a blown 221 , 3 spd. (first car). It was on the list to be scrapped , I paid 25 bucks for it , 2 friends and I pushed it to my parents house ,probably a mile .The motor was junk , so I saved up a couple hundred bucks over the summer and found a 351 Windsor and a top loader 4 spd. out of a '69 Torino GT . It took a little bit to get it in , but I loved that car . Now , there's a friend of mine that's wants to get rid of some stuff and has a '63 Falcon Sprint , he didn't say no when I asked about it , I'll be working on getting it this week .
I totally agree. The 289 has got to be the most understated engine to ever set so many records.
Ford had a Head that made a big difference if installed on a 289 or 302, They were the True GT40 head that was made for the Lemone race, when the 427 was ban. The heads had. 1.90 intake valves and 1.60 exhaust.. They were basically the same as the 1969 351 Windsor heads but with cleaner ports and smaller combustion chambers. They were sold over the counter listed in the Ford Muscle parts catalogue. Ford sold a bunch of go fast parts for the Small block ford right at the local ford store back in the olden days.
I really love the 302 cubic inch Windsor engine. It's the first engine I had ever rebuilt. I had very little knowledge of engine specs back in the 1980's, but I knew I had one of the better ones with closed combustion chamber cylinder heads. I would like to point out one thing that you keep saying that actually causes confusion. When the term small block gets used to indicate Ford engines, at times they mean just a 302 cubic inch or a 5.0 liter engine. But, I've discussed engines with people who think any 351 is a small block Ford. Well, they just group them all together like they are the same type of engine. I ask them which 351 engine? They say a small block. I say 351W or 351C, 351M? They didn't even know. I don't use the other guy's terms for Fords. I identify them like Ford did. No confusion, unless you aren't a Ford enthusiast. Here's some of Ford's engine families: Windsor, Cleveland (335 series) FE, 351M and 400 ( 335 series), 429 and 460 (385 series), etc... No small or big block confusion.
If you like using the term small block, then you can be sure that it'll make Ford guys like me ask which engine you mean?
Kinda gotta ask what engine when it’s a small block or big block Chevy as well. Just ford uses dif terms while most people have stuck with chevs small block big block scheme
@KidxChaos01 but when they simply say 351 small block. It is not clear. It's too easy to misunderstand what they mean. But it's just easy enough to use the specific engine name Ford gave it. No questions after that.
@@rolliehunt5173well with more context in the ford families its honesty much less simple seeing as their apart of the 335 family and the term Windsor is sort of the same as using the term small block on it. Theirs 3 versions of the same engine so no matter what family you call it you will still end up getting the question which 351? A 351c obviously isn’t a Windsor same as the 351m
@KidxChaos01 a Ford enthusiast, does not use those terms. We say which engine family in the first place. It's because of the other guys' misuse of a term that means absolutely nothing in Ford engine families. It's an argument that goes in circles.
Ford block sizes do not always correlate with cubic inches like the other guys. There are 3 different blocks that are not interchangeable in any form in 351 cubic inches. One block is interchangeably used for the 351 and 400 cubic inch engines. So, saying you have a small block 351M and then say you have a big block 400. It's a contradiction.
Man, I have heard all of this mixed up terminology used by the younger car guys when talking about Ford engines. They are so determined to hold their ground. All they do is show their ignorance.
@ “ford enthusiasts” most def use those terms you don’t see how pretentious that sounds but it does, most ford guys are going to use small block big block terms. Now sure it would be better if they were to be more specific of the motor especially these because of the widely dif versions. But to act like the small block big block terms don’t for the most part work within fords motors is willful ignorance. Pointing out the Frankenstein 351m is a bit strange too. A big block modified with small block components is obviously where the contradicting comes from. And again you’re using the Windsor term as if it’s a legit name for a ford family line of engines when it isn’t. So you’re doing exactly what you’re complaining about.
A few years ago I squeezed a warmed over 302, a 4 speed RAN transmission with a 3.00 open rear end into a 73 Opel GT. It took a lot hammer work and “body stiffening” but it was definitely “FAST”. Need I say more? I wish I still had it.
I have a 72 F-100 with a 302,great power great on fuel,T-18,Holley 2 barrel, factory exhaust manifods dual exhaust with crossover pipe,3:00 ratio axle original paint long wide bed, definitely show its age with a few battle scars origina grey base hubcaps.
Every time I drive it I always get thumbs up,and offers to sell it,still has the drumbrakes a smooth engaging clutch,I had it since 88,I probably have it haul me to the cemetery when the time comes,yes I am a small block Ford fan.
A high school friend - we were in the moonshine capital of the south - was fond of his '64 Fairlane, pale yellow 2-door with a post. He built the 289 with his brother's help and he and I had some memorable rides. One of the first was a blast down a lightly travelled road where we encountered a driver observing the speed limit. Not one to be hindered my buddy stuck 2nd and ran it to near redline.
Straight pipes.
"How fast did we get" I asked.
"Hundered n' fifteen. Not bad fer sacundt."
I was a loyal Chevy guy and those dang Fords made life hell for me. I could win one every now and then though. I am now a Ford guy. I hate losing
Sounds like you just needed to learn how to build engines better- there aren't many inherent advantages of the SBF to SBC other than the factory cast cyl heads with the two centre cyl's creating a hot spot in the head from having those two exhaust valves side by side... Chevy's are easy to make power with and used to be A LOT cheaper to build than a Ford or a Mopar
Reality is the Camaros ate Mustangs for breakfast, particularly the 289s. Ask anyone who was street racing, late 60s through mid70s. That might have changed when the 5.0 Fox bodies came out, and got quicker by the mid 1980s. But in the 'classic' muscle car era, 289/302s (non Boss) were pretty much boat anchors.
Sure the 289 Cobra was fast, but never seen. Yes the GT40 Mark 1 was (and is) a rocket. But the average 289 Mustang driver watched Camaro & Chevelle taillights.
I've got a 1965 Mustang Convertible I've owned since 1978. I had a friend who raced cars at Bonneville who rebuilt the engine in the 1980s. We had to bore it out .060 (so its a 298 now). Forged pistons, lots of work on the crank, rods and heads. Revs to 7,000 and sounds great. :-)
Ford built millions of them. I built dozens of them. 260s thru 351s. Street and race.
Light and tight dimensions. Priority oiling. Dist. up front. Stable timing. Factory Ambidextrous pistons. Symmetric ports.
Cylinder heads and aftermarket support galore.
Competitors used to laugh at the Windsor Ford Series Small-blocks. Not anymore!
My favorite aspect all in... The staccato exhaust note of a properly tuned 1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8 Windsor.
Love the Ford V8s. Had a 65 Galaxy convertible with a 390, what a tough engine,,,and it took a beating from me and held up with no problems.
@philkuusisto1558 - My Dad bought new a '68 Galaxie 500 XL hardtop with a 390 2bbl. hooked to a C-6 trans. Even with the 2bbl and burning reg. gas it produced 265hp and 390 torque. The C-6 had a stirrup shift on the console and you could shift it manually from 1st to 2nd then 3rd, holding it in each gear as long as you could. I got 60mph in first and the tires chirped when I hit 2nd! We (Dad and I) put 100,000 miles on the car with ZERO problems other than a failed ignition switch. It was a 2dr. fastback and was a fun car to play with.
@Loulovesspeed
Nice story. My 390 had a 4bbl and a 4 speed . Rear end was geared high so it barried the speedometer needle with more to go. Dangerous but fun.
~20 years ago, we missed an opportunity for a 289. We had done the Challenge, and were looking for a new car. Found an Alfa 2600 with a 289 in it for challenge money. Should have gotten it- could have made two cool Challenge cars with it- V6 Alfa 2600 and some other small Ford with that 289 stuffed into it. That would have been a fun pair of cars to bring to Florida and have fun with.
I had a 289 2-V in a ‘64 Ranchero. Smooth, powerful, never let me down. I’d like to have another one.
I had the same 289 2V in a '66 Mustang. Put a 144,000 miles on it before I sold it. Great little power plant!
I Love the Ford V8’s as well, my first V8 car was a 1970 Mercury Cougar with the 351 Cleveland engine, awesome car with plenty of power and Ooh that V8 sound/rumble!
I had the 1970 Cougar XR7, awesome car
Still have my 92 F 150 5.0L only has 107,xxx miles on it😊
Also a big fan of the legendary 289 HiPo. and the 289 in general. IMO, the 289 is actually preferred over the 302 that debuted in 1968, because, even though there are only 13 cubic inches difference, there is a not so commonly known fact that Ford stroked the 289 to get 302 cubic inches, but however, with the stroking came a different length rods, changing the stroke-to-rod ratio that I believe is significant with regards to smoothness and revving.
A HiPo 289 is the best!
Being in the UK, the classic engine over here is the Rover V8, which was originally the Buick 215.
It was in British cars from Rover, Triumph, TVR, Land Rover, and lots of other manufacturers and volume expanded over the years from 3.5 litres to 3.9, 4.0, 4.4, then 5 litres.
Now no longer in production but still rated as one of the best engines on this side of the pond.
I must admit though, I've always fancied a hippo 289....
If you're driving to the redline the 289 HiPo is the way to go. The 302 is the better engine for the street.
While the run-of-the-mill 302 used shorter connecting rods, with the piston's commpression height being the same as the 289, the connecting rods in the Boss 302 were the same length as the 289: 5.15".
Picked up a 1968 Mercury Montego GT with a J Code 302 in it late 90's. Drove the crap out of that car. Beat on the 302. Took it all. Paid for the car by Street racing in about 6 months. Sold it and still regret it. Love the 289, but, that J Code 302 was a champ!
Usually a 289 outlasted the the car that it was installed in at the factory 😊
Been running Fords for the last 25 years. During that time I've owned nine 302s, four 460s and a 351W. None of the 302s failed; the 351W didn't last 6 months, and the four 460s were all in one single truck in a six-month period before I had to abandon it. I have had to replace one tired 302 after it had been absolutely cooked from losing all the coolant, but I was able to wait five years before doing so. I'll stick with my 5.0s.
The 289 hypo was just a cam job.had a 67 Fairlane. Found out later they ran out of cams on the line.but they had rv cams.always loped at a light but
I have a 65 Tiger, but I built it a new engine around a 1964 5 bolt 289 block. Stuck a 302 crank in it and Ford GT-40X heads. Been a super engine!
I have a 83 Mustang GT 5.0. It sounds fantastic with flowmaster exhaust
I just made a comment about this. I graduated high school in 1992 and 5.0L Mustangs were all the rage. Personally I think a 5 liter with the OG 40 series Flowmasters is probably one of the greatest sounding engine exhaust combos in the history of all automotive..,That isn't hyperbole! I seriously miss my old Foxbody. I also had a 91 Thunderbird Supercoupe with the 3.8L factory supercharged engine and a 5 speed. I beat myself up for selling that one all the time. Really miss that car.
I love my 347 Stroker in my 2,400 lb. Factory Five Cobra! Loppy idle, and tons of torque kick in at 3,000rpm. With just a 570cfm carburetor, I get a respectable 16mpg on the freeway.
Ran a "Sunbeam Tiger" HiPo 289 through "Laguna Seca" Monterey CA.
Took my 302 up to 331 roller cam , trickflow heads 750 holly and paxton supercharge.
I was born and raised a MOPAR guy aand have had them from the slant 6 to 440s, but i love Ford's 289s. My '67 Galaxie 500 had one, but I also had a '66 Series 1 Sunbeam Tiger with a 260 that was also quite.good.
My first car was a 64 Comet Caliente, with a 4 bbl 289 (not the hypo) and a C4. My personal opinion is that the 289 is the best all-round Ford small block. It liked to rev, made excellent power and responded well to upgrades.
Don't forget the Boss 302 and Boss 351 and the Cleveland family in general 😂
Great explanation. Well done.
Good video. Great info. Thanks for posting.
2001 Explorer and Mountaineer was the last to use the Windsor. I still own the one we bought new in April of 2001 as the new 2002 Explorers were hitting the market. The reason I wanted it? That small block Ford engine. 270k and still going strong!!
Why have a Acea as your frontpiece ?
I've had a 221, 260, and several 289s. I actually still have a 260 and a '64 289, and a '65 K code 289
The 289 is my favorite. The 1965 GT350, Cobra Daytona, GT40...
In the Cobra Daytona Coupe, it saw its highest output @ 390 HP with 4 Weber carb setup! It lead all the GT40s for a good portion of the race and helped it to reach 197 mph finishing 4th overall at Le Mans, with the late, great Bob Bondurant at the wheel! RIP Bob.
I totally love my 347 Ford in my 47 Tudor!
I've heard apposing claims about which companies developed the thin wall construction engine block. Did ford or gm develop these blocks first?
I’ve had a 292 Y block, a 389 GTO, a 340 Dodge Demon,302 fox body ex. Chp, Shelby GT 500 Mustang, and just about finished a 77 Nova with a BP 383. Nothing compares to an American made V-8
I run a 289 in my 67 FB with close ratio top loader 9" locker 4:11 gears. The 289 has 12.5 : 1 dome pistons light weight rods big 2.02 valves solid lifter cam with a lot of lift, spin it 8500 rpm all the time. I can out run just about everything I come across.
Guys think the old mustangs can't run with today's cars until they try a hot little 289 no stroker here man. Just like Shelby intended 289
My 67 fastback came factory with a 390 4speed
A 289 has a beautiful song the Sbc sounds like the campfire scene in blazing saddles
The 444HP 302 in my Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca is outrageous.
What are the Ford small-block's advantages over the Chevy - other than being narrower and lighter, and thus easier to squeeze into small cars? From what I understand, the Ford has a smaller displacement, smaller valves, requires more work and money to make into a high-performance runner, and the parts situation is trickier and may require an expert to sort out.
NOTE: I'm not a Chevy guy. But the Chevy is the overwhelming choice - even in Fords - and I wonder why. Other than coming out in 1955, and thus getting a 7-or-8-year head start.
With all the stroker kits and and aftermarket heads these days, the only advantage the small block chevy has left is the five head bolts per cylinder.... that and evidently, the orange paint, according to chevy guy reasoning...
Edit; Plus the Ford is a hundred pounds lighter than the SBC...
The 351 was in the Mustang in 1971. The 302 was fuel injected in 1986.
The 390 and the 460 and the straight 6 are the best
and they are Ford engines
IF you are talking about a short deck 289 302 style engine the word torquey does not apply! Can be made to produce good power with high rpm torque is not a major thing. Want torque, use a 351 tall deck. They make more torque, 351 Cleveland even more. 351 400M even more. Little tiny engine very short stroke and rods.
Currently building a 347 with CHI 3V heads, 600hp is the aim but it will ne 100ft lbs and more shy of the long rod Clevo lump it is replacing.
People extolling the virtues of 70s 289 302s. They all go glunk glunk glunk as he piston skirts are in the pan! Late 80s, 90s engine a vast improvement. Better iron, better finished and far better pistons.
There is nothing sexier under the hood than a 392 Firepower/ Firedome!
So, for the last 60 years hot rodders have been doing it wrong, interesting. Every ford I owned had a Chevy mill.
No. This is why im building a thirty over 460 big block. Thank you Edelbrock!
This engine was so good Chevy copied it to build the LS V8
289s are easier to drag around the machine shop. Also, they fit early Jeeps easier than Chevys.
They’re very light, which is what you want
"New" in that it learned a lot from the small block Chevy.
Anyone who says that flowmasters sound good haven't heard MAC or couldn't get their hands on a full MAC system
and the GT500 is a big block car
Your commercial sucks !
no, the engine people want is the SBC !!!!!!!!!!!!
With modern aftermarket parts it doesn't really matter which block you go with.
The first cobras came with a truck motor 221 cubic inch with a two barrel They are worth a small fortun.Fifty were made.i
@@gregwilson4741 The first 75 Cobras used the 260 motor.
Not this people! sorry Charlie
@@oneninerniner3427 dummy
They’re Junk…….Get a Chev………
C H E V R O L E T : Causes Headaches Eventually, Very Rarely Occurs Leaving Engine Together. That's what the letters stand for. Stop being a Boob, Bob.
Sorry bud... The Chevy is a cheap imitation of smallblock Ford.. The smallblock Ford won the 24 hours of Lemans twice..1968 and 1969. Chevy didn't have the reliability or power to conquer Ferrari or Porche
Well to be fair the original 265 mouse came out in what 1955?
But anyway you must mean, "Cracked Heads Every Valve's Roasted Oil Leaks Every Time". Or is it "Cheapest Heaps Ever Virtually Runs On Luck Every Time"
Figured I better get that in before someone starts in on the ford acronyms😅
Nope, they're not!😂