I've seen some that really fly at the drag strip ! Favorite Ford is a 60 Falcon with a built 289.
289 vs 318 ..... Ford vs Mopar
- Thread starter 318willrun
- Start date
-
I've known reliable sources to put over 200k on 289's. I will say this, the Ford cylinder wall will wear to the point (and that point is much sooner than the 318) you'll be using a edge reamer to remove the pistons. No comparison in the cylinder wall, mopar for the easy win.
I beaten the hell out of plenty of small block Fords, 289, 302, and 351W, plus a couple of Clevelands and never grenaded one, yet. I have blown up a 350 Chevy, a 318 and a 440 Mopar.
So probably close to the same power. I'd think the 340 would have an edge.
More torque likely.
351W? I've had my share. Dogs compared to Mopars 340. The 302 hi output was a fun screamer. But seemed like you were going faster than actual. I gave up on Fords quickly and long ago. Besides, did they purposefully try to make their cars ugly? Galaxy, Fairlane, LTD.. They did better with their compact/pony with Mustang and Cougar. They even ruined Thunderbird?
Ah-Ha !!! I didn't want to be the one to say it, just wait'n for somebody else to point that out. Yes, the Ford used a little better gear (I believe the Fairlane above was 3.08) than the 2.76 geared Duster's. The 289 was a very short stroke and needed a touch better gear. However, the Dusters would take the 289's in the 60 ft by a fender, but the 289's would wind and pull back around. I think the larger CFM carb played tribute.
Dan the man
Well-Known Member
Ford never had a supercharger version of the 289 for the general public. I don't consider the Hertz option as it was a limited run.
Oldiron440
Well-Known Member
My 64 Fairlane and 289 ran 14.0s at 98 mph with a 600 vs, fords equivalent to Edelbrock performer intake, a small cam and Hooker headers. My daughter ran it for three years when she was in college. The C4 was setup to shift at 5600 rpm so she just ran it in drive. Suprising performance from a mostly stock car.
Last edited:
Topless69
Well-Known Member
The Fords were also lighter than A bodies of the day, and I agree their gearing was set up for acceleration.
Back in '67 a friend of mine had a beautiful Red '65 Fastback Mustang 289 4 speed with a Cobra kit (and there were several offered); intake, heads, pistons etc and that thing was lethal.
I still do not understand Ford thinking? In the mid 60s they had the 427 platform. More than just a formidable engine program. Even developed a SOHC cam hemi version. (That was heavy with tuning difficulties, but certainly potential is there.) They scrap the 427 program for their 429-460. On the performance front boat anchors. So they then say. "Hey, you'll love the Boss 429?" Under performed for any drag race thus street war platform. So they. "We got this. Try the 428 CJ?" Better engine. But in '68? Late to the game. And that's their big blocks. Their small block program was even more chaotic in my opinion.
Doesn't a member here have one of those Norms SC Demons?
Plymouth 65
I'll be in the shop
Mid 60's fastback Mustang's with a 289 HP is one of my favorite Furds. I Love my Mopars, but other manufacturers made some good one's too! 65'
aaronk785
Well-Known Member
My friends 65 had that POS green dot valve body so you couldn't control the shift. That thing was a joke.
Cruise-O-matic. Yes, you CAN control the shifts. When racing, you start in "Low", hold it till you want to shift then upshift and it hits "2nd", then you pull it back to "Low" and hold 2nd as long as you wish before going back up into 3rd.
aaronk785
Well-Known Member
He could never get the hang of it. We changed it out for a 67 vb with a shift kit. Much better.
aaronk785
Well-Known Member
Correction. His car was a 4bbl 289 but not the 271hp version. I earlier said it was a 2bbl. Sorry.
Funny, though, my '64 Rambler is set up with about the same kind of shifting - almost like a Ford.
Rat Bastid
Dunamis Metron
This^^^^and if you get the stroke much longer than 3 inches you have way more load on the unsupported bore at the bottom of the stroke.
Dan the man
Well-Known Member
There was a automotive manufacturer in the '60's that had factory supercharged engines for the general public, it was a domestic car company, Studebaker, they offered supercharged V/8's with dual carter 4 barrels, the ones that I remember were the golden hawk and the avanti, if memory serves me right the avanti had a 304 CID and the hawk was a 289 on no it wasn't a Ford 289. Studebaker was simply way ahead of their time.
Rat Bastid
Dunamis Metron
The heads on the 385 series Ford’s make the FE heads look like the junk they are. Ford got the canted valve wedge head and used it. Chrysler had the Hemi and wasn’t smart enough to leave that for the power adder guys and then move forward with a canted wedge head.
And the bore centers are farther apart than they are on the BBC and BBM.
You bet... the Studebaker's had supercharged V8's. Some of them early 50's Studebakers ran circles around the Fords, Chivies, and Dodges of the early 50's.
-
