Head Choice for 289

Discussion in 'General Ranchero Help' started by colnago, Mar 16, 2019.

  1. colnago

    colnago In Fourth Gear

    Messages:
    412
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    Okay, I'm still looking at options for a 289 build. I've been reading how the GT40 and GT40P are great heads, and how E7TE are okay heads, but I assume these are if you're building a 302. So, what if I only want a 289? Should I pass on these heads (any or all), and stick with the C5AE and C6AE heads? Should I simply build a 302 instead? The only "real difference" is crank and connecting rods, right? Or, should I find a block that's been specifically cast for a 302, so the cylinder walls can accommodate the longer stroke?

    This will only be for a daily driver, and maybe to spank the Camaro in the next lane.

    Joseph
     
  2. Dyno

    Dyno In Third Gear

    Messages:
    175
    Location:
    Croydon, Pa
    The Gt 40 heads are ok but watch out for header fitments, raised exhaust ports think more affected on P's but don't remember exact details.
    Look at the offshore heads in my opinion, like powermaxx for the money not a bad head at a decent price.
    289 vs 302 I'd take 289. 302 has longer bores at bottom to stabilize piston at high rpm.
    If you have to buy block go 351W better potential for power easy bolt in. Oh and bonus all bowtie guys will still think it's a 302! Nice for track or street.
     
  3. colnago

    colnago In Fourth Gear

    Messages:
    412
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    Is the 351W any bigger, physically? My 'chero is a 1964, and things are a bit snug as it is. If it's any bigger, I'm not sure I can squeeze it into the engine bay.

    My other ride is a 1967 F250. I can sit on the fender, and have my feet inside the engine compartment. Night and day difference!

    Joseph
     
  4. burninbush

    burninbush In Maximum Overdrive

    Messages:
    8,273
    Location:
    near SF
    Yes, it's wider by about 2" or so. (Deck height is 9.5 inches for a 351W vs 8.2 inches for a 302.)
     
    Dyno likes this.
  5. Dyno

    Dyno In Third Gear

    Messages:
    175
    Location:
    Croydon, Pa
    Yep Bb is correct an inch wider per side that's why it takes different headers. Not sure but seem to remember Hedman offering headers for these swaps years ago.
    Tight fit for sure. But $ for $ nice bang for buck.
    Your car do it your way.
     
  6. Doc76251

    Doc76251 In Third Gear

    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Virginia Beach, VA
    I'm doing similar math right now on my 351W. It's going to be a 408W stroker, my World Jr. Heads while nice are not going to flow enough for the CI's so they will be available when/if the build starts. Take your 289, bore it 30 over and STROKE it baby!

    Cheers,

    Doc
     
    colnago likes this.
  7. colnago

    colnago In Fourth Gear

    Messages:
    412
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    Right now, I'm just trying to figure out what options I have for doing it my way. That's one of the benefits, and curses, of the SBF. Everything (to a limit) is mix-n-match. If I do a rebuild, I am almost guaranteed to have a Frankenmotor that works. Or, I can ask a lot of stupid questions, get a little smarter from the forum members' answers, and have a hope of having an engine that performs.

    Joseph
     
  8. Dyno

    Dyno In Third Gear

    Messages:
    175
    Location:
    Croydon, Pa
    Plenty of options. Have you checked how many bell housing bolts you have early 289's only had 5 later stuff has 6 bolts. Could help decision or limit options unless you want to change trans also.
    Not an often remembered spot when starting engine swaps, we all tend to think of common stuff. Recently ran into this on a early mustang had forgotten up to that point.
     
    colnago likes this.
  9. colnago

    colnago In Fourth Gear

    Messages:
    412
    Location:
    Ridgecrest, CA
    I currently have a 6-bolt housing on a C4. I was hoping to snag an AOD with a 302, but the guy wanted to keep the AOD. Right now, I'm looking at a 289 with a 6-bolt rear, to snug up to the current slushbox. I will probably keep the cartruck as a 289, although I just ran across a 260. I was tempted, but then I would need to find a 5-bolt housing for the C4. Not impossible, but from what I read, I really wanted to stay with the 289.

    It's not like a Ranchero is a desirable platform that commands a premium price (like a @#$%^&* POS Mustang, or (worse) a @#$%^&* POS Chevy), so I don't have to stay original. Like you said, make it my own! I'm just looking at all of the options right now.

    Joseph
     
  10. Dyno

    Dyno In Third Gear

    Messages:
    175
    Location:
    Croydon, Pa
    Good it was just a thought on the early ones that hit me on bell housing bolts. Myself never cared for the AOD, though understand desire to cut rpm at highway speeds. The 289 always worked well just a good engine. wouldn't recommend a stroker with one due to short skirt and piston rock,besides that leaves more $ for top end mods where the power is made anyway. Air in air out make it flow.
    Get the best heads , intake ,exhaust you can afford. Cam personally prefer split pattern cams with 6-8 degrees more duration on exhaust. JMO
     
  11. *RD*

    *RD* In Maximum Overdrive

    Messages:
    1,477
    Location:
    Upstate New York
    Agree on building a stroker off a 351w block. You could wven get a set of chi or afd heads like I did for my 410 cleveland stroker build. If you did that you would then have your self a clevor, nice flowing heads like you see on the cleveland, but a newer updated block of the windsor.
     
  12. RancheroRandy

    RancheroRandy In Fourth Gear

    Messages:
    491
    Location:
    NC
    I bounce around all these ideas and options all the time. Putting a 351 involves at the very least cutting/modifying the shock towers a little (which I had done on a previous '62 I owned) if you want headers? I'm also in the market (well, almost) for putting in an AOD...fortunately my trans tunnel brace has already been removed (and divots banged-in which makes me wonder what was done to it in its "previous" life?) which is also what should be performed otherwise you run into clearance problems or have funky driveshaft/pinion/universal joint angles. I prefer mine to be able to go around corners as well as straight ahead and have good low end/mid-range torque, so the added weight of a 351 precludes that even with aluminum heads. 347s can be built to have fairly good longevity (I've talked with a few guys who use them for road racing) so that is the direction I am headed hopefully, along with replacing my power-robbing C6 with an AOD. Mucho dinero, as usual, is the limiting factor.... My first step is to replace the heads/cam/valve train and I have been impressed by what I have learned about Promaxx heads....
     
  13. kaytbugsdad

    kaytbugsdad In Second Gear

    Messages:
    42
    I'm running a set of 1974 351W heads that have had some port work done on them...… They seem to work better than the stock heads that were original to the car, and the headers bolt right in the same place.....
     
  14. 5.0 Chero

    5.0 Chero Bahumbug Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,721
    Location:
    Prunetucky California
    bolt holes are larger 1/2 vs 7/16 and you should be running bushings to make up the difference
    https://www.summitracing.com/parts/tfs-51400419/overview/
     
  15. kaytbugsdad

    kaytbugsdad In Second Gear

    Messages:
    42
    yep, ARP makes a very nice set that I'm using.....
     

Share This Page