1972 - 289 An Option Back Then?

[BlueOvalGuy]

Hello everyone!
Looking at a number of possible new to me options including a '72. Seller says that it has an original 289. I've asked for the vin and so forth but found this forum and have been taking in all that I can in a short amount of time. My understanding was you could either get a 170 or 302 in '72. Am I wrong?

Also, if I was to consider having a professional install power steering and disc brakes (so wife could drive), am I absolutely killing the value of an uncut example?

Thanks for the help!

 

[Apogee]

You are correct. Ford only produced the 289 from 1963 though 1967 IIRC, so all '72 EB's should have 302's at that point if it had a V8.

Aside from a concourse-type restoration, power steering and power disc brakes would only help the value with most transactions IMO, especially for a buyer who intended to drive it and not park it in a collection as an "investment". If I could have about 7 different EB's, one for every day of the week, one might be all original just for giggles, but the rest would all have power steering and disc brakes.

 

[BlueOvalGuy]

Awesome. Thank you!

 

[CowboyGrin]

My ‘68 has a 289. The 302 replaced the 289 in ‘69 but I read somewhere that the 289 and 302 were both available a short time, maybe early in ‘69 model year. Regardless, ‘72 was all 302.

Hard to tell them apart, so easy mistake. A PO might have put 289 heads on the 302.

 

[75Denver]

I had the same thoughts regarding adding disk brakes and power steering. In the end, I'm the one driving it. Safety first followed by comfort. Let me tell you...the first full-circle turn after installing PS was like the first drive as a teenager! I was grinning hard. Keep all of your original parts and if you ever sell (or want to go back), they'll be there waiting.

 

[okie4570]

289 was 66-68, 302 was 69-77. 289 and 302 didn't overlap during 68/69 production.

 

[El Kabong]

My '68 has a 289. The 302 replaced the 289 in '69 but I read somewhere that the 289 and 302 were both available a short time, maybe early in '69 model year. Regardless, '72 was all 302.

Hard to tell them apart, so easy mistake. A PO might have put 289 heads on the 302.

That matches my experience on other fomoco products. My 68 Cougar (factory 4bbl carb, dual exhaust, power windows, not an xr7, but lots of bells & whistles) had a 302. My stepmom's 68 Cougar (2bbl carb, single exhaust, crank windows, plain jane interior) had a 289. I think they were using up old 289 stock into 68. I'm not sure if it was a production date thing, or if the cheaper model Cougars got the 289. I always thought 68 was the transition year from 289 to 302.

We also parted a wrecked 67 289 Cougar, fwiw.

 

[m_m70]

Keep all of your original parts and if you ever sell (or want to go back), they'll be there waiting.

this! Oh and you'll love the upgrades!!

 

[Cohammer]

Should be able to check the aluminum engine tag most of the time if it is still attached . I am running a 1966 289 C with power steering and front disc brakes and automatic transmission in my 74 . Was that way when I bought it and enjoy driving it .

 

[Broncobowsher]

Up to 67 was only the 289.
'68 both engines existed, depending on the model, built date, maybe even the option box was to which engine you would get.
'69 all the 289 were gone, all you could get was a 302. Until 1980 when the second smallest and absolutely the worst small block came out, the 255. Thankfully that died really fast and the 302 lived on for a couple more decades.

 

[okie4570]

Up to 67 was only the 289.
'68 both engines existed, depending on the model, built date, maybe even the option box was to which engine you would get.
'69 all the 289 were gone, all you could get was a 302. Until 1980 when the second smallest and absolutely the worst small block came out, the 255. Thankfully that died really fast and the 302 lived on for a couple more decades.

We're talking bronco 289/302 availability, are you?
Edit: nvm I see what you're saying now.

 

[BlueOvalGuy]

Thank you everyone! I'm getting that much smarter by the minute. I appreciate the sharing of knowledge!

 

[ep67bro]

I know in mustangs you could get a 289 or 302 in 68. I had a late 67 and it was a 289 friend had a early 68 and it was a 289 and another guy had a late 68 and it was a 302. Ford was just using up what they had. I had a late 68 bronco I am pretty sure had a 302 I cant remember for sure.

 

[DirtDonk]

Cars got first dibs on many running changes. Trucks and especially Broncos got things like new engines a little later.
My understanding (which could be a mis-remembered memory) was that the earliest '69's still came with 289's and that the 302 came in shortly after as a running change.

And wasn't there some confusion back in the day because either some of the new 302's had catings marked "289" somewhere? Or was it the other way 'round with later 289's getting a "302" cast into them? Lifter valley maybe?

Running changes are the bane of our existence, but also a source of lots of fun going back and forth finding out new stuff.

Paul

 

[okie4570]

If anyone has a 68' vin with a G for 302, or a 69' with a N for 289 please post a vin pic thanks.

 

[sprdv1]

Hello everyone!
Looking at a number of possible new to me options including a '72. Seller says that it has an original 289. I've asked for the vin and so forth but found this forum and have been taking in all that I can in a short amount of time. My understanding was you could either get a 170 or 302 in '72. Am I wrong?

Also, if I was to consider having a professional install power steering and disc brakes (so wife could drive), am I absolutely killing the value of an uncut example?

Thanks for the help!

Welcome aboard man!!!