Something for you 289 guys...B2 Motorsports 331/347 SBF

[B2 Motorsports]

I posted this on Club Cobra...thought it may be of interest for some of you here.

I've been contacted several times about doing a SBF that would appear period correct for the Cobra guys with 289/289 FIA cars.

We can do this several ways:

1. Use a 289 block, use a 302 crank or a 331 crank.
2. Use a 302 block, use a 331 or 347 crank.
3. Use a Dart 302 block, use a 331 or 347 crank.

For the most practical (and cost effective) way of attaining this, we'll concentrate on #2. Since it's the inside that counts, it would be hard to throw open the hood and know that it's really not a stock stroke 289 or 302 in there anyway.

If you're set on authenticity, then we can certainly find a 289 block to use as a foundation. If you're set on cubic inches and horsepower/torque, then a Dart block would fill the needs there.

Again, concentrating on #2....

This would be the same combo as our normal 331/347 engines, but we would use the RHS iron heads, a Blue Thunder intake, an air cleaner with 289 decals, and offer the customer their choice of valve covers. I can work with the customer in determining what level of appearance they want to achieve.

*Fully machined production 302 block. Bored/honed with torque plates, square decked, fitted with ARP main bolts, align honed, cam bearings/freeze plugs installed.
*Clevite main/rod bearings
*Comp Cams hydraulic roller camshaft
*Scat crankshaft
*Ford Racing timing set
*Ford Racing fuel pump eccentric
*ARP cam retainer bolts
*ARP camshaft bolt
*Scat forged I-beam rods
*Probe forged pistons
*Hastings moly rings
*New timing cover
*New timing pointer
*Professional Products harmonic balancer
*ARP balancer bolt
*Stock replacement water pump
*Felpro gasket set
*RHS cast iron cylinder heads
*Ford Racing hydraulic roller lifters
*Comp Cams lifter spider
*Trick Flow pushrods
*Comp Cams rocker arms
*Blue Thunder dual plane intake
*Melling oil pump/oil pump drive
*ARP oil pump/pickup bolts
*T-sump oil pan/pickup/dipstick
*MSD distributor with polymer distributor gear
*Distributor clamp
*Carter mechanical fuel pump
*Valve Covers
*Autolite spark plugs
*MSD plug wires
*PCV valve/hose
*Holley 4bbl carb
*289 Air cleaner/filter
*Stock Ford pulleys, alternator bracket, accessory drive belt
*Water neck/thermostat
*100A 1-wire alternator
*Exterior bolt kit
*Fuel line from pump to carb
*RAM pilot bearing
*CVR gear drive starter included
*Rotating assembly balanced
*Fully assembled
*Motorcraft oil filter
*Dyno tested
*Build sheet with all specs provided
*Build pictures provided
*Dyno results and dyno video provided

$8999

FE's are available for you big block guys!

[Slither]

Brent, As you know, I am fond of the idea of a real '64 289 engine for my car (I have one located). Those Webers look way cool!

I am curious about the stroker possibilities with the 289 platform. Is it possible for you to compare and contrast the the mechanics of stroking the 289 vs. the 351W, which has been remarkably successful.

Now I am not asking about performance, but stuff like rod ratio, pin position as it relates to the oiling rings, % of the piston height that travels below the cylinder skirt, piston slap, excess wear, side loads, etc. Since you're an ME, I'm wondering if you have looked at this to determine safe stroking of the 289... a lot of discussion suggests that the 289 is a NO-STROKE platform. Yet, there are those who have done it or say that it is no problem.

I guess my question is something like, "Can the 289 be stroked as successfully as the 351W has been, and if so, what is the result?" Is there a basic geometric difference between the two that makes one work better for stroker applications?

Thanks

[RJacobsen]

I'm a little confused as to why you would want to stroke a 289 block :confused: It is basically identical to the 302 block. if you want a stroked motor the 302 block is a better starting point. If you want authenticity then keep the 289 engine. or better yet de-stroke the 302 into a 289 and have fun with the high RPMs [thumb]

[Slither]

The 302 has the wrong date code;), and is not really an option for my interests. I'll stick with the W, or if I change horses I'll do a 289. Thus the reason for my questions. Stroking it would give a little more performance while keeping the period correct look and correct date.

[B2 Motorsports]

I don't know if I would call it "successful" or not, but of course you can snag a lot more cubes with a Windsor block because the decks are so tall. Let me see if I can address some of your bullet points...

1. Rod length/stroke ratio: I really don't place much emphasis on rod ratios. There are myriads of factory combos out there with rod ratios all over the place, so a lot of things "work."

2. Oil rings in the pin bore: A lot of these big stroke engines have to use short compression heights on the pistons because of the stroke and the rod length. When you play with some of the short deck blocks, the pistons get REALLY short...347's are around 1.090" C/H, a 402 LSX engine uses a 1.030" piston with a 6.200" rod, etc. Shoot, even my 552BBF has the oil rings in the wrist pin bores.

This really isn't a concern. In most cases when you're faced with this scenario, piston manufacturers use a support ring. This ring locates itself by a little nipple in the cut out where the wrist pin is and gives a "foundation" for the oil rings to sit on.

This is VERY common with 347's, and some long stroke 400 SBC combos. Just remember how many 347's there are running around with the oil rings in the pin bores. These engines are extremely popular in the 5.0 Mustang crowd, but yet you don't see them running around with excessive noise from piston slap, or smoking from the incapacity to seal the rings.

Would an engine like this run 100000 miles? I doubt it...especially with a carb setup. However, do you need it to?

3. Piston side loads: I wouldn't worry about this unless you were dealing with a block that has a very thin wall structure, like a Clevleand. It's not uncommon to find a Cleveland block with a wall thickness of about .100" BEFORE you have to clean it up! Using a 4" stroke with a high compression ratio on a bored, unfilled Cleveland block probably isn't too good of an idea. However, on a nice walled block like a Windsor or 289/302, I don't put much concern on it.

I'm going to back all that up with this: these are toys, not daily drivers. Sure, they need to last a long time and make power, but how many Cobras see 50000 miles? How many see 20k?

In your case Paul, I wouldn't care a bit to use a 289 block. Would I stroke it to a 347? Probably not. The cylinder skirts are generally shorter in a 289 block. I wouldn't mind, however, to go with a 331 combo. There is actually quite a bit of difference in .150" of stroke (347 = 3.400", 331 = 3.250"). This lets the piston be .085" taller when you use a 3.250" stroke and 5.400" rod versus a 3.400" stroke and 5.315" rod. More compression height = more stability at BDC. For the return of investment on a 331 vs 347 engine on the street, it's not worth it on a 289 platform.

In my eyes, your situation would basically boil down to: how much power do you want?

If you want a lot of horsepower and torque, then you're going to get it easier from a 408ci engine. 500-550hp isn't an issue, depending on the camshaft and cylinder heads. On a 331/347, there again, 500-550 isn't an issue, but you REALLY have to go deep on the cam/cylinder heads, which would make for a not-so-fun street engine. However, 400-425 streetable horsepower would be fairly easy to achieve with the smaller engine.

I think deep down, you want the period correctness of the 289 block and I don't see anything wrong with that.