Announcement

Collapse

Get more Tips, Specs and Technical Data!

Did you know... this Forum is a service of the Studebaker Drivers Club? For more technical tips, specifications, history and tech data, visit the Tech Tips page at the SDC Homepage: www.studebakerdriversclub.com/tips.asp
See more
See less

stude vs. fords 289

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • stude vs. fords 289

    I have a friend with a 67 mustang who thinks it's the same
    as Studebaker's 289. I need some input as to the technical
    differences between the two, so I can [shut him up].
    Any help would be appr. JNP

  • #2
    studebaker used a 90 degree V (wide), ford used a 60 degree V (narrow) for starters.
    Rob

    Comment


    • #3
      Well, nothing other then a standard bolt or two will interchange, show him a picture.


      Studebaker On The Net
      http://stude.com
      Studebaker News Group
      http://groups.google.com/group/alt.autos.studebaker
      Arnold Md.
      64 Daytona HT
      63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk
      63 GT Hawk
      63 Avanti R1/AC
      63 Avanti R2 (Sold)
      63 Daytona HT
      63 Lark 2 dr.
      62 Lark 2 door
      60 Lark convert
      60 Hawk
      57 Silver Hawk
      53 Starliner
      51 Commander
      JDP Maryland

      Comment


      • #4
        I always thought the Ford looked heavier, but I suppose the Studebaker 289 is heavier. True?

        On earlier Studebaker 289s, weren't there 4 valve cover bolts per side? I don't think Ford ever used 4 per side.
        "Madness...is the exception in individuals, but the rule in groups" - Nietzsche.

        Comment


        • #5
          Well, you'll notice one major difference if you try overboring the cylinders in each brand of "289" by .080 or .093! The Ford will never run again. Or even .030.--one Ford buff I knew swore it would cause a 289 w/aftermarket cam, etc., to run warm unless you bought a new HD radiator as well. I figure one reason some people get their wires crossed on this issue is: since Studebaker used Chevy 283s in 65-66, they illogically conclude that the 289's must've been Fords as well. So, can anyone clarify this--- the Avanti used a 304 International engine, right? [:0][8]

          Comment


          • #6
            Why bother dealing with a self taught automotive know it all? If your buddy can't tell the difference between engines with unique valve cover shapes and bolt locations and ignition distributors at different ends of the engine, then all the rest of the differences will not impress him. I just smile and say "I did not know that" when such nonsense comes up. If that leaves them less than satisfied, I then ask: "So, you have never seen a Studebaker V8 have you?" I usually add the comment that just because two engines coincidentally share the same displacement number that doesn't mean that a single engine part interchanges.

            Thomas

            New Stude guy! Long time hot rodder
            '63 Avanti R2 4 speed with interesting plans

            Comment


            • #7
              You could mention that Ford used the 352 Packard engine in 58.


              Studebaker On The Net
              http://stude.com
              Studebaker News Group
              http://groups.google.com/group/alt.autos.studebaker
              Arnold Md.
              64 Daytona HT
              63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk
              63 GT Hawk
              63 Avanti R1/AC
              63 Avanti R2 (Sold)
              63 Daytona HT
              63 Lark 2 dr.
              62 Lark 2 door
              60 Lark convert
              60 Hawk
              57 Silver Hawk
              53 Starliner
              51 Commander
              JDP Maryland

              Comment


              • #8
                quote:Originally posted by Cruiser[So, can anyone clarify this--- the Avanti used a 304 International engine, right?
                You mean the 304 was not an AMC? [}]


                Guido Salvage - "Where rust is beautiful"

                Studebaker horse drawn buggy; 1946 M-16 fire truck; 1948 M-16 grain truck; 1949 2R16A grain truck; 1949 2R17A fire truck; 1950 2R5 pickup; 1952 2R17A grain truck; 1952 Packard 200 4 door; 1955 E-38 grain truck; 1957 3E-40 flatbed; 1961 6E-28 grain truck; 1962 7E-13D 4x4 rack truck; 1962 7E-7 Champ pickup; 1962 GT Hawk 4 speed; 1963 8E-28 flatbed; 1964 Avanti R2 4 speed; 1964 Cruiser and various other "treasures".

                Hiding and preserving Studebakers in Richmond, Goochland & Louisa, Va.
                Join me in removing narcissists, trolls, self annoited "experts" and general idiots via the Ignore button.

                The official SDC Forum heel nipper ���

                �Middle age is when your broad mind and narrow waist begin to change places.� E. Joseph Cossman

                For every mile of road, there are 2 miles of ditch. ���

                "All lies matter - fight the kleptocracy"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Yes, it was the 352 Packard Police Interceptor. [8]Rammler used the international engine,too, only they made it alot smaller.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I used to have a ford HP289 crank that was stored next to a Stude 289 crank. The Stude looked like a big block crankshaft next to the little ford crank. Quite a difference in size and weight!

                    53commander HDTP
                    53 Champion HDTP
                    61 Cursed Purple Hawk
                    64 Champ long bed V8
                    64 Champ long bed V8
                    55/53 Studebaker President S/R
                    53 Hudson Super Wasp Coupe

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      quote:Originally posted by imitiday

                      I have a friend with a 67 mustang who thinks it's the same
                      as Studebaker's 289. I need some input as to the technical
                      differences between the two, so I can [shut him up].
                      Any help would be appr. JNP
                      JP was EXACTLY right, show him a picture! [^] That's worth 1000 words! Ford [8] guys aren't too smart anyway! ([:I] I hope the 40 or so years I spent around Ford fumes didn't effect uhm, effect, 'er, ah..... lessee, (don't tell me), somebody's been effected... What was I talking about? [)] )

                      Sonny
                      http://RacingStudebakers.com
                      Sonny
                      http://RacingStudebakers.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        quote:JP was EXACTLY right, show him a picture! That's worth 1000 words! Ford guys aren't too smart anyway! ( I hope the 40 or so years I spent around Ford fumes didn't effect uhm, effect, 'er, ah..... lessee, (don't tell me), somebody's been effected... What was I talking about? )
                        We're just glad you ended up in the right place. I was born with the Studebakeritis disease. Hope they never find a cure!

                        Also, one way to really make him hush is show him some proof (TW?) of Mr. Ted Harbit's drag racing winnings. I'm sure he's blown the doors of plenty of Furd 289's. [8D]



                        Comment


                        • #13
                          quote:Originally posted by mbstude

                          quote:JP was EXACTLY right, show him a picture! That's worth 1000 words! Ford guys aren't too smart anyway! ( I hope the 40 or so years I spent around Ford fumes didn't effect uhm, effect, 'er, ah..... lessee, (don't tell me), somebody's been effected... What was I talking about? )
                          We're just glad you ended up in the right place. I was born with the Studebakeritis disease. Hope they never find a cure!

                          Also, one way to really make him hush is show him some proof (TW?) of Mr. Ted Harbit's drag racing winnings. I'm sure he's blown the doors of plenty of Furd 289's. [8D]
                          Yep, that's an EASY way to show him the difference! Have him line up against a similarly equipped 289 Stude and show him that! [8)]

                          Aw heck, that might be too hard on a Ford guy, I hate to see grown men cry. Take pity on him, here's a bunch of pictures where you can point out the differences. http://racingstudebakers.com/coppermine/index.php

                          Sonny
                          http://RacingStudebakers.com
                          Sonny
                          http://RacingStudebakers.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Chevy used a 302 engine in 1969 for the true Z28's. Ford also has a 302...and now Ford and G.M. are talking merger??!! I smell a rat!!![:0]

                            South Bend, Indiana

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Tell him that Studebaker made the 289 for Ford for many years and his engine is actually a Studebaker designed engine not a Ford. Studebaker sold Ford the rights and tooling to make the engine in 1964 so technically his Mustang does have a Ford engine in it. Let him tell his Ford buddies that one and see what happens.

                              Dan White
                              64 R1 GT
                              64 R2 GT
                              Dan White
                              64 R1 GT
                              64 R2 GT
                              58 C Cab
                              57 Broadmoor (Marvin)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X