Idk if this has been discussed but im just looking for a quick answer...why does the 1968 mustang 289 2v only have 195hp when the 1967 289 2v has 200hp...just wondering why it lost 5 hp

 

theres no 289 in 1968
they introduced teh 302

 

no thats not true...they only made them in the really early 1968 then switched to the 302 for the rest of the year

 

so explain the 67 302s out there with matching numbers.

 

i did...i said for the early part of 68 they had 289...then the later part they had the new 302...wanna know where i read this from here https://mustangforums.com/timeline/1968-ford-mustang/

right from this very own website...look all the way down under Powertrain and Performance you see this

289 c.i.d
The 289 cid boasted 195 horsepower and was the '60s most popular engine. It was powerful, provided easy maintenance, and was light. This engine did not make it all the way through the 1968 model year because towards the end of the year it was replaced by the 302.

 

so one website explains everything there is to know about mustangs eh?


listen i dont think you understand how Ford assembly lines worked back in 1967 and 1968. there are mustangs out there with brakes meant for fair lanes or clutch linkages meant for comets.

back then a lot of the parts were interchangeable and if they ran out in the parts bin on the line they would pull from what ever they had in the building.

and just because a book says something or a website does not make it the golden rule.

and I AM TELLING YOU there are 67s out there with 302s that i have seen with my eyes, the build sheets, the window sticker and the letter from ford verifying the vin.


go read the website more power to you.

the power difference is probably due to additional vacum lines or to detune it in preparation for the release of the 302 which would allow ford back in 1968 to advertise five additional HP over the 289.

 

There were no 302's in the 67 model year, but there were 2V 289's in 68.1968 was the last production year of the C code 289 2V, mostly to get rid of all the 289 parts laying around.

There is no such thing as "matching numbers" as far as most Mustangs are concerned. Very few got partial VIN stampings on the blocks, and most of those were K code,Shelby, or Kar Kraft cars. Usually the best you can get is 'date code correct.'

The hp reduction was likely due to altered smog equippment (68 was the first year for mandatory smog equipment outside CA)and testing procedures. To my knowledge, all other parts of the engine remained the same.

 

okay thats all fine and well how they made car back then but i figure if i can trust one website for info it would be this website...i dont doubt there 67 with 302 but then why would you doubt theres 68 with 289? either way the question wasnt about that i just wanted to know why it seemed to loose 5 hp for no reason

 

okay i understand that there are no" 302s" in 67.

there are cars out there with special engines in them maybe special ordered. idk.

i saw a 67 gt coupe with a 302 in it with the verifying information.

there are no certainties with these cars.

 

i have a 68 mustang and it came with the 302 block but they called my car a 289 dont know why.
but the crank and the everything else in the engine isof aoriginal 289 but with a 302 block.
I thought that was weird.
About the horsepower loss just forget about it
Throw in a bigger cam and some nice heads and you wont be worrying about that 5 horsepower loss.