283 vs 289!! (longest VS thread?)
[:0][:0][:0][:0]
0
-
289 by a long shot
302 vs 327 3270 -
289 hypo with twin 4's[:p] 0 -
Blue Oval 0 -
2 of the best small blocks ever.
If you are a Ford man...289
If you are a chevy man...283
Simple, huh.0 -
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Ford_Windsor_engine#5.
A high-performance version of the 289 engine was introduced late in the 1963 model year as a special order for Ford Fairlanes and Mercury Comets. The engine is informally known as the "HiPo" or the K-code (after the engine letter used in the VIN of cars so equipped). Starting in June 1964, it became an option for the Mustang.
The HiPo engine was engineered to increase performance and high-RPM reliability over standard 289 fare. It had solid lifters with hotter cam timing; 10.5:1 compression; a dual point, centrifugal advance distributor; smaller combustion chamber heads with cast spring cups and screw-in studs; low restriction exhaust manifolds; and a bigger, manual choke 595 CFM carburetor (std 289 4v was 480 CFM). The water pump, fuel pump, and alternator/generator pulley were altered; fewer vanes, extra spring, and larger diameter respectively; to help handle the higher RPMs. Even the HiPo's fan was unique. Bottom end improvements included thicker main bearing caps and balancer, larger diameter rod bolts, and a hardness tested and counterweighted crankshaft, all for high-rpm reliability. The HiPo carried SAE gross ratings of 271 hp (202 kW) @ 6000 rpm and 312 lb?ft (423 N?m) @ 3400 rpm.
The HiPo engine was used in modified form by Carroll Shelby for the 1965-1967 Shelby GT350, raising rated power to 306 hp (228 kW) @ 6000 rpm through use of special exhaust headers, an aluminum intake manifold, and a larger carburetor. The Shelby engine also had a larger oil pan with baffles to reduce oil starvation in hard cornering. Shelby also replaced the internal front press-in oil gallery plugs with a screw-in type plug to reduce chances of failure.
From 1966 to 1968, Shelby offered an optional Paxton supercharger for the 289, raising its power (on Shelby GT350s) to around 390 hp (291 kW).
The K-code HiPo engine was an expensive option and its popularity was greatly diminished after the 390 and 428 big-block engines became available in the Mustang and Fairlane lines, which offered similar power (at the expense of greater weight) for far less cost.0 -
289 0 -
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
"283= THE MOUSE THAT ROARED"!!
Where...[8)], In a vaccuum?! [:D][:D][:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
quote:Originally posted by kimi
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
"283= THE MOUSE THAT ROARED"!!
Where...[8)], In a vaccuum?! [:D][:D][:D]
YEP,, the vacuum behind my Nova II that sucked your Mustang down the strip!![:p][:p]
Okay, Fish...show me a factory mid-size chevy that can hang with this Bolt! [:D] BTW, bring your own iron lung. [:D][:D][:D]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzkEviShBUw0 -
289 every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
The 260 V8 was kind of a rare Ford small block but how many of you have heard of the Ford 221 V8?0 -
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
Pfffffff
[;)] Have a great 4th, Fish!0 -
quote:Originally posted by JasonV
289 every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
The 260 V8 was kind of a rare Ford small block but how many of you have heard of the Ford 221 V8?
Not I said the fly, and me neither said the skeeter. [:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by JasonV
289 every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
The 260 V8 was kind of a rare Ford small block but how many of you have heard of the Ford 221 V8?
If you want a rare Ford small block, try to find a 255 Windsor that was in the F-100s from 1980 to 1981.0 -
283 Hands down the winner.
Chevy got the valve train angles correct back in '55 with the 265.
Ford's were good but still 2nd rate.
A small block FORD simply can't be made to flow like a SB Chevy.
We won't even talk about the other guy's small block.0 -
The sb Ford is what the sb Chevy would have been had Chevrolet continued to develop the block.
It is simply an updated and improved sb Chev.
Note that I am not referring to head development, but to block development.
The sb MOPAR is a great engine that was never developed to the extent of either of the other two.
Doug0 -
Hello Jason V I was the one on the 63&1/2 Falcon post that stated I thought. That the first Falcon had 2 different 6 CYL. and the first V8 was a 221 Cubic inch. I would like to see it in print if I am wrong. What was the smallest B BLOCK MOPAR and what Carb setup did it have and what year[?]
EDIT Mopar Bblock was 350 Cubic inches with Duel Carter AFB 4 barrel. in 1958 loved those metering rods you could Fine Tune easier and all from the top no gas running out the float bowls onto hot engine[^] [:D]0 -
It depends on how you define a small block MOPAR.
If you use the first instance of the bore centers being used, it would be the 241 cu. in. 1954 Dodge truck.
If you define it as the first use of thin-wall casting on the block, it would be the 1964 273.
As to the 221... it was originally referred to as the "Fairlane V-8", and first put in the Fairlane series of Ford compact cars, in 1962.
I had one.
There is also some interesting trivia about the 260...
Doug0 -
quote:Originally posted by JasonV
289 every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
The 260 V8 was kind of a rare Ford small block but how many of you have heard of the Ford 221 V8?
Me, my parents first new car was a 63 ford station wagon with a 221 in it. That motor gave my dad fits after few miles.0 -
I have been out of racing for some time,,but my 67 small block 283 punched out to 292? Camaro beat the hell out of those small block Fords,,,I was running low 12 and they would push high 13s I think 0 -
283 with power glide [;)] MOPAR 273 was a good motor... 0 -
289 has a great racing heritage as it was the platform that dominated Indy racing mid 60's thru the 70's 0 -
Ok, I'll try to clear something up. "Valve train" isn't just what's in the head, it starts with the cam and lifters/tappets moves on to the angle of the pushrod and then to the head.
FORD small blocks like the 289 had an inferior lifter angle when compared to the Chevy. Mopars are a distant 3rd.
If FORD is a better design, why are NASCAR engines (all brands) ALL using Chevy angles?
Bore centers/wall thickness/etc doesn't translate into breathing and better breathing is what makes power, all other things being equal.0 -
fishkiller..........289, all day, everyday! My uncle leased his cars from Ford and when Ford came out with the 1965 1/2 Mustang in the 271HP model, he leased one for my 19 year old cousin. Man, what a little beast that car was. I had just graduated from college and we did nothing but cruise around Beckley WV looking for 283's to chew up for lunch and dinner. That little burgandy 2+2 Mustang was the hit of the town! Four on the floor and tach on the steering wheel, it was a hoot to drive and what a chick magnet! The saddest day was when he had to turn it in at the end of the lease year. Wasn't a 283 in anything that could touch it. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
[:0][:0][:0][:0]
There is no 'verses' to it. They were both designed by the same person. When Duntov designed the small block Chevy there were some problems, and Ford ask him to designed their small block (221,260,289) he simply took the older Chevy design and engineered the flaws out of it.
History is really interesting if you take the time to learn it![;)]0 -
i live on HYWY 289 in TX does that count[:D] 0 -
OK Cost per HP 283 VS 289 Which can you get more for less.
Its us cheap folks who go for the 283.0 -
FOR WHAT USE.
guess it wouldn't matter to me any way so I'm going with 283 just because if what it is (CHEVY)
I DON'T PREFER ANYTHING LESS THEN 396 ANYWAY0 -
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
[:0][:0][:0][:0]
There is no 'verses' to it. They were both designed by the same person. When Duntov designed the small block Chevy there were some problems, and Ford ask him to designed their small block (221,260,289) he simply took the older Chevy design and engineered the flaws out of it.
History is really interesting if you take the time to learn it![;)]
Do you have a source for this info?
Duntov was a consultant with FORD BEFORE he worked at GM (1953). He burned some serious bridges at FORD by going to work at Chevy. Ed Cole headed the group that designed the Chevy 265 and Duntov retired from GM in 1975. When was it that he, Duntov, designed the FORD small block?0 -
Dating yourselves! 0 -
quote:Originally posted by iceracerx
Ok, I'll try to clear something up. "Valve train" isn't just what's in the head, it starts with the cam and lifters/tappets moves on to the angle of the pushrod and then to the head.
FORD small blocks like the 289 had an inferior lifter angle when compared to the Chevy. Mopars are a distant 3rd.
If FORD is a better design, why are NASCAR engines (all brands) ALL using Chevy angles?
Bore centers/wall thickness/etc doesn't translate into breathing and better breathing is what makes power, all other things being equal.
If the block doesn't matter - your implication - why has there never been a successful Chevrolet Indy engine, or a successful Chevrolet F-1 engine ??
Both dominated by small BLOCK Fords, for decades ??
As to NASCAR, if I recall correctly, when NASCAR was more about racing than advertising money, few Chevy big blocks reached the winners circle in those years.
Why are the SBCs used in NASCAR today?? - because of the previous post by grumpygy - they are cheap to build, and as long as the rules PREVENT any other block from being used, of course they are the weapon of choice.
But, as usual, I admit to the minuscule possibility that I could be wrong.
Doug0 -
It is funny watching guys get upset over cars and guns. Ever have a guy tell you he bought a POS. No way! He would die and go to hell before he admitted it. The Mecury Comets and Ford Fairlanes had a 221 in 1962. The 63 1/3 Sprint had a 260, not a 221 or 289. Chev. had a 283 with 283HP FI in 1957.
Oh, Arkus Duntov produced the hemi Ardun Ford heads as a way to increase the horsepower on the Ford trucks. Don't remember why, but Ford didn't buy the idea and they became Ford flathead hotrod parts. Duntov did not develop the smallblock Chev. He did have a big hand in increasing the horsepower after it was introduced.
The Ford Indy car program relied on Lotus for their engine development and chassis. Chev. did not have a factory engine program for Indy.
Butch0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
161 comments