Hey everyone! I have a 68 that i recently found out (helza) has a 74 302 motor and c 4 trans Im not to worried about it being original serial # 8F91C583883 The marti report shows it was built on july 10th 1968 with a 289 2v I dont get that! They were even less than 2 months away from the 69 production! shouldnt have been a 302?
original motor question? 289?
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
The very plain 68 non-XR7 cougars (I had one at one time) received the 289 motors. There are several theories on why the 289 was used in these plain Jane Cougars and they have been discussed on this and other Cougar forums. Just know it was not and is not unusual.
Joined
·
6,980 Posts
As far as entry level engines go:
1968 Mercury Cougars, approximately 23% came with the C code 289-2V engine.
1968 Ford Mustangs, approximately 29% came with the T code 200-1V engine.
Conversely, in the 1968 Ford Mustang, approximately 54% came with the C code 289-2V engine.
So what does it all mean? the 289-2V is a perfectly acceptable engine, although most descriminating Mercury Cougar buyers opted for more power!
1968 Mercury Cougars, approximately 23% came with the C code 289-2V engine.
1968 Ford Mustangs, approximately 29% came with the T code 200-1V engine.
Conversely, in the 1968 Ford Mustang, approximately 54% came with the C code 289-2V engine.
So what does it all mean? the 289-2V is a perfectly acceptable engine, although most descriminating Mercury Cougar buyers opted for more power!
Joined
·
646 Posts
make that crank and pistons and rods. Can't just swap the crank.
Joined
·
391 Posts
Mid-year '68s with the standard (non-decor) interior will have a 289 instead of a 302. My '68, which has a build date of July 17th, is so equipped.
Joined
·
238 Posts
This is interesting. I have an original 1968 standard Cougar where the VIN abd body code both point to a 302-2V engine but the air cleaner sticker reads 289. I have been researching to determine which engine is really in the car. Thoughts are that the sticker may have been replaced at one time or that a 289-2V was dropped in in place of the 302-2V due to lack of 302 engines. I just would have thought that the codes would have been adjusted at the factory prior to shipment. I haven't pulled the starter off to look at the engine code on the block but even then I have heard that that is not conclusive. Some have said that you actually need to measure the stroke or look at the cam.
Joined
·
238 Posts
This is actually a good idea. I know that they used some 302 blocks early on and bored them for 289 so finding a 302 stamp on the block is not for sure but the heads are a different thing.
Same bore on a 289 and 302, you would have to measure stroke. The heads should be stamped as C7XR7 says, assuming they are original. Mine is a 67 with a 289, block is stamped 302. I thought I read that the PN on the block is the same for the 289 and 302. I know it's original as I know the original owner and have all the paperwork. Is it possible the 302 stamped in the block is just a coincidence?
Joined
·
17 Posts
not that it matters much, I have a stock, all original C code, 289, 2V, build date Jan3 1968, San Jose; had 302 air cleaner decal but eventually replaced valve cover gaskets and voila: stamped in head is 289 just like photo above. I think these were leftover motors from 1967 cougars, 'Stangs, as 302 came out in '68 but usually reserved for more luxurious XR7 with AT, PS, AC, PWER brakes and windows. Mine is a 3 speed floor like a Mustang. For years it perplexed me; its stamped in the head. The Vin code tag next to the dipstick was actually accurate as was the VIN # assignment. The decal was false. Again no big deal, madras blue color (only '68) and non-issue, original period Cragers gets many a thumbs ups while driving. Snagged Driver Dream prize @ a Hemmings cruise-in.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!