

© Copyright 1995 thru 2008 - The Mustang Works™. All Rights Reserved.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
![]() |
#9 |
Knuckle-Basher
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Stockton, CA
Posts: 249
|
![]() Hmmm...I'm definately keeping the original 289 block unless, god forbid, it's cracked or something. But I doubt that very much.
If I can keep the stock heads and just have them worked on AND get 300hp at the flywheel along with the other upgrades, that would be good enough for me. I don't plan on racing, I'm scared to death of damaging this car since I restored it and it's in such great shape. I just figure why not beef it up a bit since I'm itching to rebuild it anyway. (I think it's fun. I was raised on Legos, what can I say...) Also, I know some people at work that have run C4s just like mine that have stood up to just over 300 horses and haven't run into any problems over the years. I might actually be leaning towards this simply because I wouldn't have to change my transmission and differential. I don't have a whole lot of money to throw around, I'm a college student, after all. ![]() On a different note, I've heard I can get 4 speed autos from Ford that look exactly or almost exactly like the old C4s. Are these the transmissions in the old 5.0s? |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1968 engine numbers, 289 or 302? | andybud | Classic Mustangs | 5 | 09-11-2003 12:14 PM |
raced a Supra Twin Turbo | Stang35th | Stang Stories | 63 | 08-23-2003 12:36 AM |
Rebuilt Engine Problems | sleeperstang | Classic Mustangs | 6 | 05-08-2003 10:19 AM |
Engine rebuilding advice | starrparker | Classic Mustangs | 7 | 08-26-2001 06:21 PM |
Very bad experience with Engine Dynamics of San Jose CA | JAGraff | Racer's Club House | 0 | 05-12-1999 02:27 AM |