Looking for a roller cam recommendation for a 289

[Anewway]

Has anyone built a roller cam 289?
I'm looking for a roller cam for my 289 with 9.3-1 compression, ported iron heads with bigger valves.
Best would be a cam with under .500 lift as I still have the press in studs. I'll be using link bar roller lifters so that should open up more options than retro-fit cams.

 

[bronco italiano]

go to comp cams website and pick out the smallest roller cam conversion kit. I think it is

Magnum 206/206 Hydraulic Roller Cam K-Kit for Ford 221-302​

 

[jamesroney]

Has anyone built a roller cam 289?
I'm looking for a roller cam for my 289 with 9.3-1 compression, ported iron heads with bigger valves.
Best would be a cam with under .500 lift as I still have the press in studs. I'll be using link bar roller lifters so that should open up more options than retro-fit cams.

I'm running link bar rollers on my 289 with the 89-93 Mustang 5.0 cam. I have a 5 bolt 289 in my Sunbeam Tiger, and couldn't upgrade to a 5.0 block.

By the way, you can put the rotating assembly from your 289 into an 8.2 deck roller cam block and get factory style hydraulic roller for "free." (you will want to machine the flange and knurl off your rear main seal journal.) then you get a 28oz, 289 with a single piece rear main, and factory style hydraulic rollers. Only thing missing is the clutch pivot boss in the casting.

Of course if you are going to do that in a Bronco, why not just run a 5.0 shortblock?

 

[lars]

I'm running link bar rollers on my 289 with the 89-93 Mustang 5.0 cam. I have a 5 bolt 289 in my Sunbeam Tiger, and couldn't upgrade to a 5.0 block.

By the way, you can put the rotating assembly from your 289 into an 8.2 deck roller cam block and get factory style hydraulic roller for "free." (you will want to machine the flange and knurl off your rear main seal journal.) then you get a 28oz, 289 with a single piece rear main, and factory style hydraulic rollers. Only thing missing is the clutch pivot boss in the casting.

Of course if you are going to do that in a Bronco, why not just run a 5.0 shortblock?

Mmmm, Tiger. My departed hangar neighbor had one that he had owned forever, presumably still has it. I know next to nothing about it except I helped him put a new starter in it once. Wanted to ask him to let me drive it, never got up the nerve He was/is a double below the knee amputee, somehow he was able to manage the clutch, but about all he ever did was drive it up and down the taxiway to warm up the engine. It had some sort of built 302, thus not 5 bolt. Was your 5 bolt issue wanting to keep the original block, or bell housing, or....?

 

[jamesroney]

Mmmm, Tiger. My departed hangar neighbor had one that he had owned forever, presumably still has it. I know next to nothing about it except I helped him put a new starter in it once. Wanted to ask him to let me drive it, never got up the nerve He was/is a double below the knee amputee, somehow he was able to manage the clutch, but about all he ever did was drive it up and down the taxiway to warm up the engine. It had some sort of built 302, thus not 5 bolt. Was your 5 bolt issue wanting to keep the original block, or bell housing, or....?

Great question. The Tiger was factory with a 5 bolt 260, and uses a unique hydraulic clutch slave cylinder and bracket. The hot ticket back in 1966 was to take the 5 bolt 289 and upgrade it to 289 Hipo specs. Then it was a bolt in for the tiger to retain the bell and clutch. Turns out that the toploader in the Tiger was a narrow pattern, so it all bolts up nice. Fast forward to 2022, and my 1965 289 is forged piston, balanced and blueprinted, with boss 302 rods and 10:1 flat tops. Can’t throw THAT away…. Drop in a factory 5.0 cam, and a pair of AFR 165’s and just hang on!
I’ve got two Tigers now, so I’m selling the blue one. You should buy it. That would keep you from “fixing” your non-broken Bronco! (Assuming your airplane is done…)

 

[lars]

Great question. The Tiger was factory with a 5 bolt 260, and uses a unique hydraulic clutch slave cylinder and bracket. The hot ticket back in 1966 was to take the 5 bolt 289 and upgrade it to 289 Hipo specs. Then it was a bolt in for the tiger to retain the bell and clutch. Turns out that the toploader in the Tiger was a narrow pattern, so it all bolts up nice. Fast forward to 2022, and my 1965 289 is forged piston, balanced and blueprinted, with boss 302 rods and 10:1 flat tops. Can’t throw THAT away…. Drop in a factory 5.0 cam, and a pair of AFR 165’s and just hang on!
I’ve got two Tigers now, so I’m selling the blue one. You should buy it. That would keep you from “fixing” your non-broken Bronco! (Assuming your airplane is done…)

And now that we've thoroughly hijacked the OP's thread, here's more... would love to see those cars in person. Alas, I suspect that any reasonable asking price would be far beyond my sorta retired means. Worth noting is that I always consider my Bronco "broke" so I have endless excuses to fix it, though it's running pretty well these days. And sadly while my airplane is "done" (sure) I am working nearly full time on another that I should never have gotten involved with in the first place. Though it will be a hoot to fly all the test cards when it's done, before it goes to its new owner, and before my alleged partner gets qualified to fly it. Meaning I don't have to share. Revenge will be sweet.

 

[Broncobowsher]

The press in studs are a hard one to get around. Roller cam is known for having a much more aggressive ramp rate and gets more valve open time in the same duration. That means more valve spring rate, which a roller cam doesn't care about. But the rest of the valve train does. Add to that trying to get the powerband where you want it. The best recomendations I got for getting a mild cam was from Howards Cams. There advise was spot on for a smaller cam than I picked out myself for a build.

As for the 5-bolt block hijack, I got one of those sitting in my garage right now. I thought it was going to be a 260 but once I got it home I found it was a 221. Last of the 3 years they made it.

 

[lars]

The press in studs are a hard one to get around. Roller cam is known for having a much more aggressive ramp rate and gets more valve open time in the same duration. That means more valve spring rate, which a roller cam doesn't care about. But the rest of the valve train does. Add to that trying to get the powerband where you want it. The best recomendations I got for getting a mild cam was from Howards Cams. There advise was spot on for a smaller cam than I picked out myself for a build.

As for the 5-bolt block hijack, I got one of those sitting in my garage right now. I thought it was going to be a 260 but once I got it home I found it was a 221. Last of the 3 years they made it.

Now all you need is an old Falcon to put it in.

 

[nvrstuk]

Great question. The Tiger was factory with a 5 bolt 260, and uses a unique hydraulic clutch slave cylinder and bracket. The hot ticket back in 1966 was to take the 5 bolt 289 and upgrade it to 289 Hipo specs. Then it was a bolt in for the tiger to retain the bell and clutch. Turns out that the toploader in the Tiger was a narrow pattern, so it all bolts up nice. Fast forward to 2022, and my 1965 289 is forged piston, balanced and blueprinted, with boss 302 rods and 10:1 flat tops. Can’t throw THAT away…. Drop in a factory 5.0 cam, and a pair of AFR 165’s and just hang on!
I’ve got two Tigers now, so I’m selling the blue one. You should buy it. That would keep you from “fixing” your non-broken Bronco! (Assuming your airplane is done…)

I'm PM'ing you about the Tiger. Thanks

 

[nvrstuk]

After running fairly radical cams in press in stud heads for years, I noticed that 4 of the studs were slowly pulling out.

Old guy story...

So in my younger days of fixing things "right" w/o any money I had one option. Weld em in!

I had driven to my parents and it was the week b4 Christmas and I needed to get home (120 miles).

This was b4 I really knew how to weld. A good friend of my Dad's was a FT welder by trade. Called him, disassembled the heads, took the heads over and the next night I was running.

I had the almost equivalent of screw in studs for the price of head gaskets!

Ran those heads for years afterwards.

 

[roundhouse]

The press in studs are a hard one to get around. Roller cam is known for having a much more aggressive ramp rate and gets more valve open time in the same duration. That means more valve spring rate, which a roller cam doesn't care about. But the rest of the valve train does. Add to that trying to get the powerband where you want it. The best recomendations I got for getting a mild cam was from Howards Cams. There advise was spot on for a smaller cam than I picked out myself for a build.

As for the 5-bolt block hijack, I got one of those sitting in my garage right now. I thought it was going to be a 260 but once I got it home I found it was a 221. Last of the 3 years they made it.

Years ago we owned a four door 62 Mercury Meteor , think it was an extended wheelbase version of the fairlane , anyway it had the 221 with a three in the tree . At the same time we also owned a two door 63 meteor with thw 260 and two speed automatic , with factory bucket seats and console, power steering , power brakes and AC

 

[Anewway]

great stories fellows.

I have narrowed it down to the following:

The one bronco italiano recommended. 31-412-8
this a reduced base circle cam?
206/206 duration at .050" lift
.480/.480 lift
110 degrees of lobe separation

A Mustang 5.0 cam
210/214 duration at .050" lift
.0444/.0444 lift
115 degrees of lobe separation

comp cams 35-512-8
206/212 duration at .050" lift
.480/.480 lift
114 degrees of lobe separation

I guess they are all very similar.

 

[schmidty1913]

great stories fellows.

I have narrowed it down to the following:

The one bronco italiano recommended. 31-412-8
this a reduced base circle cam?
206/206 duration at .050" lift
.480/.480 lift
110 degrees of lobe separation

A Mustang 5.0 cam
210/214 duration at .050" lift
.0444/.0444 lift
115 degrees of lobe separation

comp cams 35-512-8
206/212 duration at .050" lift
.480/.480 lift
114 degrees of lobe separation

I guess they are all very similar.

Which cam did you go with. I am looking for a roller for my 289 as well

 

[Anewway]

I was considering the 35-512-8 cam but posed this question on the Don Terrell Speed Talk site and the consensus was a cam with similar duration and around .500" lift but with 110 lobe separation.
This is the closest one that meets those specs. Howards Cams 220315-10
I'm also currently talking with Jones cams about having them custom grind one.

 

[DirtDonk]

What were the reasons given for recommending the 110 Lobe Center rather than another one?
And what sort of induction and exhaust will you be putting on this engine?

 

[Anewway]

I went down the rabbit hole trying to understand this and it seems most torque is produced at this LSA for the specs of my engine.
The David Vizard formula for calculating LSA:
LSA = 128- (CID/8/Intake Valve Diameter X .91)

I'm not sure how well this works for a fuel injected motor though as they may require a wider LSA.

I'm using an Autolite 1.08 carb on a Weiand Street Warrior Intake. Headers of some kind, have not picked any yet.

 

[Anewway]

 

[schmidty1913]

I was considering the 35-512-8 cam but posed this question on the Don Terrell Speed Talk site and the consensus was a cam with similar duration and around .500" lift but with 110 lobe separation.
This is the closest one that meets those specs. Howards Cams 220315-10
I'm also currently talking with Jones cams about having them custom grind one.

Just talked to a summit support guy and he said that 35-512-8 cam won't work in a 289?

 

[Broncobowsher]

Just talked to a summit support guy and he said that 35-512-8 cam won't work in a 289?

Correct and incorrect.
As a direct drop in, won't work. The block doesn't support the factory roller lifters.
But with the correct retrofit lifters it can work.

Go talk directly with Comp cams. Summit tech support is good, but they only read what the book tells them. Not full experts on the products.

 

[Redbark]

I went down the rabbit hole trying to understand this and it seems most torque is produced at this LSA for the specs of my engine.
The David Vizard formula for calculating LSA:
LSA = 128- (CID/8/Intake Valve Diameter X .91)

I'm not sure how well this works for a fuel injected motor though as they may require a wider LSA.

I'm using an Autolite 1.08 carb on a Weiand Street Warrior Intake. Headers of some kind, have not picked any yet.

What cam did you finally choose, and which lifters are you running? Are you pleased with the result?