Bought a shell truck no engine or tranny for 200 its 1960 f100. Of course stock they came with 223 272 and 292. But around here where I live in Montana I can't find one for s###. However there is a running 289 from a Mustang for cheap closer than I could find the straight or the y blocks? Would a 289 be a very bad choice for a 1960 f100 2wd? Would it be sufficient or doable? would rather find one close than travel 5 6 700 miles but I will if I have to. Just trying to fix it up a little not looking to make it a show piece. If it would work I think it has the 5 bolt pattern what would give me more choice in transmissions the 289 or y blocks?

Was also thinking about a 390? they are alot available, would a 390 be a good choice?

Thanks,
Jason Henry

 

Kind of decided that I want the 390 in the 1960 Y block configured f100. I've heard y to 390 is bolt in deal but I'm skeptical. What would y block truck to 390 swap take to accomplish? What choice of transmission would I have with a 390?

Thanks,
Jason

 

Sorry, long day today so short answer. Check out Julie’s (Julies Cool F1) gallery. In my sometimes not so humble opinion, the 289 would be just fine, much lighter and with all due respect to Julie, maybe a little bit newer design. More and cheaper performance parts are available for the 289.

 

A 289/302/351/460 is a fine choice and for which speed equipment is very plentiful while your transmission choices also include an automatic overdrive.
That being said there something about a 390/428 that really rings my bell.....

 

Hey Old F1! Actually, I've used BOTH. My 55 had a 289 in it and it was a great motor ( I had a 3 speed overdrive on it) . The installation was simple and parts were plentiful. Plenty of power as I used to tow my boat with it down to Coyote Lake when I lived in Sunnyvale!

In my 51 I have a 390 and it's a little harder to get parts for - stupid things like heater hose nipples, etc. It's quite something - wanna check out conditions in the bed, just floor it, and you'll be there.

The 390 presented a few more space and clearance challenges, but has quite a bit of get-up-and-go!

390 with a C6 or a 289 with a C4 - like Morris said, you can't go wrong either way. Have you considered a 351W with a C6? Might be the best of both worlds!

 

The 390 in that series of truck goes in with stock parts. I think they started putting 352's into those trucks around 1962 or so. You'll need the bellhousing with 'ears' and a FE front cover that takes the front motor mount.

 

Before you buy that 289 check whether it is an early one or a late one. The late ones take the same bell housing bolt pattern as the 302. The early ones have are different. I am getting ready to drop a 289 or 302 with AOD in my son's 60 F100. I have decided to go with a 3.25 9 inch from a 69 F100.

 

Re-read what 60F100 wrote.
If the 289 is a 5 bolt pattern you will be severely limited to what you can use for a trans.
Other than that the 289 is a sweet engine unless you are wanting a torque monster.
A 390 is always a good option.

 

whats a good transmission that will work with a 390 besides the auto c4 c6's. What various tranny's that will fit and work? I'm kind of partial to manual stick shifts.

 

The 390 is a bit of a beast. If you're using a bellhousing with 'ears' like a stock 352 would use, I think you might be limited to transmissions like the T18 four speed with granny low, the top-loader HD 3 speed, the Clark 5 speed and similar.

What kind of use are you going to give this truck?

 

Just fixing her up to drive around town once in a while maybe use for a couple of hauls. My daily driver is a newer 1996 ford Ranger 2.3 2WD not really looking for gas mileage or commutability. I'm sure the auto c6's are the popular choice, I just prefer manual stick shifts.

 

What he said.

The 5 bolt pattern 289 was only used thru 8/22/64 with the 3 speed manual, Borg Warner T-10 4 speed and the C4.

The waterpump used with this block is aluminum, as is the timing cover.

These parts are not the same as the 6 bolt block.

btw: Is IT a 289?

Since it's from a 1965 Mustang assembled before 8/23/1964, it could be a 260 as this engine was also available in these early Mustangs.

 

Well originally it was a 289 I was looking at from a mustang but now I'm moving towards a 390 and trying to decide what transmission to use. c6 seems to be the favored choice but i am partial to manual stick shift so i'm just flip flopping all over the place.

 

Your manual trans options are many with the 390.
The FE block was very popular in pickups from 1965 through 1976 and cars 1957 through 1970 I believe so about any trans used during that period was seen behind one excluding some of the lighter ones built for the smaller cars with 6's.

 

The seller claimed it was a 289, but how would you know that's correct?

Only the bore is different, the stroke is the same (2.87").

1965 Mustang's were introduced 4/23/64 and thru 8/22/1964 came with: 170 & 200 I-6's, 260 2V's, 289 2 & 4V's and the Hipo 289.

After 8/22/1964, the 170 and the 260 engines were dropped, as was the 5 bolt engine.

This reminds me...that on sale day...352's and 360's magically become 390's.

221/260's on sale day, magically become 289's...or 302's!

btw: Is it a 390? The stroke is 3.78" if it is.

If the stroke is 3.50"...it's a 352 or 360.