289 vs 302

Wasn't there also a D4 casting of the 302?

Yes there was a D4 302. The 302 blocks are very similar to the 289 but I think the 302 has deeper cylinder skirting on the block for the longer stroke. StuK

the 302 has

i'm not real sure. i'm running a 302 block with 289 innards and heads. the bore is the same the stroke was different, so it may have longer cylinders. anybody have a 289 block to measure? mines on the stand right now. Chip

C code 1968 289's were actually C8 casting 302 blocks with the 289 recip assembly like your set up. Bore is the same and the deeper skirting didn't bother the shorter stroke crank and rods of the 289. It was mentioned on the BB NG that you have problems if you try to make a 347 using a 289 block. You can't stroke it that much as you don't have enough cylinder to stop the pistons having problems at BDC. StuK

problems if you try

What about making 347 strokers with the '68 289??? If it's the same block it shouldn't be a problem right? Just wanna make sure I got it right in my head.

Yep, you can use the '68 C code "289" because it IS a 302 block, it even has

mine is a 68 302 block with 65 innards. i'm not sure there is much cylinder length difference since the 302 stroke is only 0.13" longer than a 289. Chip

So it's possible to build a 400hp na 331 stroker out of a '68 289? Can it be done for less than $5k??