• Welcome to ClassicBroncos! - You are currently viewing the forums as a GUEST. To take advantage of all the site features, please take a moment to register. It's fast, simple and absolutely free. So please join our community today!
    If you have problems registering or can't log into your account, please contact Admin.

1969 Broncos with 289's

jamesroney

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
2,596
Loc.
Fremont, CA
Have we solved the 1969 year model Bronco 289 unicorn question?

Has anyone produced a VIN higher than U15NLD82000?

I continue to see the persistent notion that there were 69 Broncos with 289's, but have yet to see a Marti or VIN confirming it. Of course there are vins higher than D82000...but they are "G" code 302's. Looking for an "N" code 289.

I did try the search, but never got an answer. Thanks for any help.
 

toddz69

Sponsor/Vendor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Messages
11,205
Have we solved the 1969 year model Bronco 289 unicorn question?

Has anyone produced a VIN higher than U15NLD82000?

I continue to see the persistent notion that there were 69 Broncos with 289's, but have yet to see a Marti or VIN confirming it. Of course there are vins higher than D82000...but they are "G" code 302's. Looking for an "N" code 289.

I did try the search, but never got an answer. Thanks for any help.

I still see assertions of that from time to time as well. Haven't seen any VINs or Marti's to prove it though!

No help but I'm still in the camp that they don't exist.

Todd Z.
 

ntsqd

heratic car camper
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,953
Loc.
Upper SoKA
Is it known when the last 289 was officially built? I have my guess, but I'm going to sit on it lest it become more of the legend.
 

Broncobowsher

Total hack
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Messages
37,065
Is it known when the last 289 was officially built? I have my guess, but I'm going to sit on it lest it become more of the legend.
That might get fuzzy. Officially 1968 was the transition year. Should be last one built in '68. But if you consider warranty supply, I bet there were some made for a year or two after. Not for production, but for warranty. One of the more famous ones is the Boss 302 blocks. While only '69 and '70, there is a '71 block. It was a warranty engine or parts room 'crate' replacement engine.
 

Jakedog

Bronco Guru
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
1,010
I wonder if this question has ever come up on classic mustang forums.
 

JGbronc

Contributor
Bronco Maniac
Joined
Mar 30, 2007
Messages
6,387
Loc.
Hytop, Alabama
I’m also in the camp that they don’t exist. The 302 seemed to be a spot on year model change along with the larger parking lamps. Electric wipers however were more of a early-mid year change.

For what it’s worth, I owned GLD83188 a few years ago.
 
OP
OP
J

jamesroney

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
2,596
Loc.
Fremont, CA
That might get fuzzy. Officially 1968 was the transition year. Should be last one built in '68. But if you consider warranty supply, I bet there were some made for a year or two after. Not for production, but for warranty. One of the more famous ones is the Boss 302 blocks. While only '69 and '70, there is a '71 block. It was a warranty engine or parts room 'crate' replacement engine.
So you bring up an interesting topic, and if forces me to clarify some definitions. Unfortunately I do not "own" the internet, but if I ever write a book...the last hundred pages will probably be dedicated to a glossary of what I mean.

So you are absolutely correct as to service blocks, and warranty items. BUT there is a huge difference in how things are managed with respect to logistics. Your example of the B2 block is true, but the vastly more famous one is the C8AE-6015-H side oiler 427 block. That thing was in production until at least 1973, and you can argue that the Pond blocks (which are due in December BTW) are still being cast.

Moreover, there is a "crate engine" vs service block distinction as well. But as long as the part is active in MRP, there is no trigger for a last time build. As part of the product lifecycle management process, someone would of course manage the inventory levels when the part goes obsolete. For the 289 block, it would be superceded by the later 302 block, so no reason to do an inventory build. But for the Boss block, or the side-oiler block, those are managed. I am VERY reluctant to call anything from the 60's and 70's a "Crate engine" because of course those didn't exist until Ford Motorsport started selling compete engines in the parts department. Back then, warranty engines were managed separately, and are generally configured in a short-block, long-block, or "engine" configuration...but never came complete. Every GPD rebuild I ever saw either didn't have the accessories, or the accessories were wrong. And I can indeed confirm that early produt lifecycle warranty engines were in fact brand new "in the crate." But over time, the supply would get diluted with recycled cores. Obviously this does not apply to warranty "campaigns" where something was wrong.

As far as the "last 289" built, @ntsqd is asking a vague question. Are we talking 289 engines, or 289 engine blocks, or motor vehicles with a 289 cubic inch engine installed? For the purpose of my sanity, I consider the 289 to be the CAR with the 289 engine in it. And it8 is abunduntly clear that the EPA certificate on the 289 cubic inch engine expired in 1968. So it would be illegal, and highly unlikely that Ford would sell an uncertified 289 V8 after 31-Dec-1968. Now as far as selling a 289 vehicle after the model year change in August...it is legal, and possible, but unlikely and logistically unreasonable. You can see this effect in the P's and Q's from 1972.

So let's talk 289 blocks. What exactly is a 289 block? Well, it's whatever Mother Ford decided it was. And in 1967, the C8OE-6015-A block was a "289" block. IDGAF if the block was cast with the giant letters "302" in the lifter valley. That means absolutely nothing (yet). The giant letters "352" were cast on the front of most every FE from 66-72. Those letters mean nothing definitive necessarily, sometimes. Yes, the C8OE-6015-A block was used in 1967 289 automobiles. Yes, it was cast in Cleveland. Yes, it was also used in the 302. No it was not a 302 block (yet). Yes, the design group intended for it to be deployed in the 1968 model year. and yes...when the exact same block is filled with a 3 inch stroke crankshaft, it is a 302 block. So yes, there is a period of overlap in august of 1967 where you could have that lump of iron knocked out of a sand cast mold, and it was a 289 block, and the one right next to it 46 seconds later was a 302 block. And yes, it was coming from the Cleveland Foundry to the Cleveland Engine Assembly line and then to Dearborn, Metuchen, San Jose, Atlanta, and many other assembly lines. And yes, some are going to get ahead of others within that very narrow window.

@Jakedog this question comes up all the time on the Mustang side. They are worse, and more wrong than here. The nice thing about Bronco owners is that they are ususally modest, reserved, practical, reasonable and honest. The Mustang side has two camps. The liars, and the truthtellers. Unfortunately, you can't tell one from the other, and often the truth-tellers are wrong. My original post is the result of a Mustang forum question. Because some knucklehead insisted that the 289 was gone in 1968, replaced by the 302. And everyone knows that's not exactly true. Because the C code 2V-289 persisted until the end of 1968 production. And the J-code 4V-302 was availabe for the entire 1968 production. BUT once you step out of Mustang, and into Bronco...or worse, 1968 Mercury Montego Export...the unicorn 2V-302 enters the chat.
 
OP
OP
J

jamesroney

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
2,596
Loc.
Fremont, CA
I’m also in the camp that they don’t exist. The 302 seemed to be a spot on year model change along with the larger parking lamps. Electric wipers however were more of a early-mid year change.

For what it’s worth, I owned GLD83188 a few years ago.
I'm guessing D83188 was a 302?
 

ntsqd

heratic car camper
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,953
Loc.
Upper SoKA
I meant whole engines, not blocks or parts or whatever else.

As I understand these sorts of things the way that it should have gone down is that once the decision to move to the 302 was made an audit of 289 specific parts would have been made, a forecast for how many 289's were still needed was made, including warranty inventory, and compared against the parts audit. Any remaining parts needs be met, and then all 289 specific parts production turned off and converted to 302 parts production. That wouldn't give a finite, definitive end to 289 production, but it should be an only couple of months window.
I'll bet that something like that process was attempted, how well it was followed is anyone's guess.

At one point in time the Howard's Cams Special was raced in Super Comp with one of those '71 Boss blocks in it. The car had two Boss 302's, one was pulled out of a Mustang after the owner's wife cracked a piston skirt from detonating it (I have that piston sitting on my desk: DOZE-6110-A) and replaced with a normal 302. The other was a very late warranty crate engine (at least a long-block and might have been more than that, but I never saw it in the crate) that the local dealership wanted off their '75 inventory and made the car owner (a mechanic in their employ) a killer deal on it. Why they even had it was a mystery.
 
OP
OP
J

jamesroney

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
2,596
Loc.
Fremont, CA
I meant whole engines, not blocks or parts or whatever else.

As I understand these sorts of things the way that it should have gone down is that once the decision to move to the 302 was made an audit of 289 specific parts would have been made, a forecast for how many 289's were still needed was made, including warranty inventory, and compared against the parts audit. Any remaining parts needs be met, and then all 289 specific parts production turned off and converted to 302 parts production. That wouldn't give a finite, definitive end to 289 production, but it should be an only couple of months window.
I'll bet that something like that process was attempted, how well it was followed is anyone's guess.

At one point in time the Howard's Cams Special was raced in Super Comp with one of those '71 Boss blocks in it. The car had two Boss 302's, one was pulled out of a Mustang after the owner's wife cracked a piston skirt from detonating it (I have that piston sitting on my desk: DOZE-6110-A) and replaced with a normal 302. The other was a very late warranty crate engine (at least a long-block and might have been more than that, but I never saw it in the crate) that the local dealership wanted off their '75 inventory and made the car owner (a mechanic in their employ) a killer deal on it. Why they even had it was a mystery.
Gotcha, but the 302 did not "replace" the 289 from the perspective of the "whole engine." The 289 and the 302 were unique entities, and were built concurrently. So your presumption of a "decision to move" as a single point in time is not how it was planned, or executed.

Just like there was no "decision to move" the 360 to the 390. They are two different engines that share many parts and were built concurrently for several years. In model year 1968, you could order a 2V289, or a 4V302 in a Mustang. The same is not true for the Bronco. You could only order a 6 or an 8. If you ordered the 8, you got a 289 in 68, and a 302 in 69.

My Boss302 had its D0ZE-6015-A block in it, and had a crooked vin stamp, and that rev-limiter was unplugged. I miss that car.
 

Attachments

  • enginevin.jpg
    enginevin.jpg
    111 KB · Views: 77
  • enginert.jpg
    enginert.jpg
    165.7 KB · Views: 83
  • leftfront.JPG
    leftfront.JPG
    163.8 KB · Views: 82

Yeller

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
7,688
Loc.
Rogers County Oklahoma
I have nothing to contribute other than enjoying the history lesson and drooling over a fin pony car🤤

that says a lot coming from a very non pony car guy, only a few exceptions, Boss 302, 428 Twister Special, and a few specific Shelby's.
 

ntsqd

heratic car camper
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,953
Loc.
Upper SoKA
Gotcha, but the 302 did not "replace" the 289 from the perspective of the "whole engine." The 289 and the 302 were unique entities, and were built concurrently. So your presumption of a "decision to move" as a single point in time is not how it was planned, or executed.

Just like there was no "decision to move" the 360 to the 390. They are two different engines that share many parts and were built concurrently for several years. In model year 1968, you could order a 2V289, or a 4V302 in a Mustang. The same is not true for the Bronco. You could only order a 6 or an 8. If you ordered the 8, you got a 289 in 68, and a 302 in 69.

My Boss302 had its D0ZE-6015-A block in it, and had a crooked vin stamp, and that rev-limiter was unplugged. I miss that car.
So there was no replacement plan, they just started making 302's not having stopped making 289's. Were there not any adults in charge, or did the zoo's residents run it as they saw fit?
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
51,616
Were factory intake manifolds ever cast with the displacement visible? Like the aftermarket manifolds were?
Just wondering if anyone just saw that on their engine (or maybe it had a replacement Edelbrock 4bbl intake) and made the assumption that because it said "289" on the intake, that it was indeed a 289.
Seems at least an occasional plausible scenario.

Paul
 

Broncobowsher

Total hack
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Messages
37,065
Edelbrock is known for putting an embossed 289 on non-emissions Performer intakes. But 302 embossed on EGR equipped 'smog' engines. They interchange.
 

CaptainAwesome

New Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2026
Messages
10
I'll see if I can't find the old thread, but the vintage mustang forums had some knowledge on this.
From what I recall there were 3 places making the 289 and 302s, when they swapped over to 302 they used some 289 parts that were the same. There are some number matching Mustangs that have 302s in them where the casting on say under the intake manifold says it's a 289, and vice versa.
My understanding is things were a little more willy-nilly and if you had parts left over where the only difference was a number in the casting, things got used where ever. The only sure fire way to know is to measure the stroke.


Hence my 302 is missing 2 numbers in the casting number on the block. It just reads 'C8 6015-B"
Every other block I've ever seen has 2 more digits, like C80E, not just C8. The date of assembly stamped on the front is from 1968.
And I can't find anyone who knows anything about that.
 

bosshoff

Sr. Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2004
Messages
726
I have a 67 that will be my retirement restoration project. It’s 289 rumbles nicely in my clapped out 73. Interesting read, btw.
 
Top