240 to 289 conversion
Ford Parts Specialist
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 88,826
Likes: 784
From: Simi Valley, CA
Originally Posted by Mil1ion
You have enough points. I don't ask for them 
Maybe that's why I have less than I should have ?
Maybe that's why I have less than I should have ?
I just added a coupla more.
Postmaster
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,166
Likes: 2
From: wi
i personaly like the 240 also,but i do remember being 16 and that240 is so uncool and id probably would of put a v-8 in mine also. 240 and 289 share the same bell (theres that one odball with 5 bolts but not likly easy to find) the flywheel will bolt up also but dont use it as it has a different balence then the 289-302. 302 exaust is the same also so you could get headers for a 302 truck and itll be the same. the ONLY things you will need to get for this swap that your truck dont have is ofcorse the 289 flywheel/clutch,engine/frame stands, engine mounts,exaust manifolds or headers and a radiator all for a 302 truck. all this can be found yet a junk yards in trucks as new as 79
Tuned
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 340
Likes: 8
From: Rock Hill, SC
I first installed a 289 in my 69 F100 and there was a huge power difference between the 289 and the 240. I had to use a truck 11" flywheel for a 302 because the car flywheel with the 289 wouldn't work with the truck bellhousing or clutch. I had to take the radiator to have a three flu core installed also because it always ran hot with the 2 row core. The 240 radiator has tanks big enough to accept the larger core because it was offered as some HD option.
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Guys, I really appreciate your help, but We've decided against the '71 with the 6 cyl. With the engine conversion, bodywork required, and initial cost of the truck, we just decided to find another one. We have purchased a '78 with a 351M that needs no immediate body work for the same price as the '71 that needed body work and an engine swap. The '78 has it's share of problems, too, but that's for another forum.
Thanks again,
Hal Davis
Thanks again,
Hal Davis
