EMC 289

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Elroy
Pro
Pro
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:46 pm
Location:

Re: EMC 289

Post by Elroy »

Excellent 289 btw Mummert!
Carnut1
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4659
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 6:32 pm
Location: Melbourne fl.

Re: EMC 289

Post by Carnut1 »

Elroy wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 12:22 pm
Carnut1 wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 12:14 pm Those two sets of 289 heads are still at Terry Walters shop awaiting DV to dyno test them. Obviously not at the top of his to do list.
You could/should test them yourself///that way you know////a 289 or 302 shortblock could be done for a reasonable amount I would think/////you could probably tool one up in your sleep///do you have a dyno local
The ones I built in the 90's were a bit milder than this 220 cfm with 1.94" valves, 11/1 comp, 286/228/112 .544' lift hyd roller, eddie rpm, ceramic coated chambers, pistons, and valves. 7000rpm, shift.
Servedio Cylinder Head Development
631-816-4911
9:00am - 9:00pm EST
User avatar
Mummert
Expert
Expert
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:24 am
Location: El Cajon CA

Re: EMC 289

Post by Mummert »

Lets keep the thread bicker free guys.
Mummert Machine and Development 4 stroke hp
Mummert Y-blocks
dondon
Member
Member
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 6:30 pm
Location:

Re: EMC 289

Post by dondon »

I've always liked 289's, as far as hp what did the old 289 super stock engine make? (like Kip Martin) I know they had a big roller cam but small 470 cfm carb and ported heads. Just curious, how big was your carb? Your build is ford viagra.
BILL-C
Expert
Expert
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:57 pm
Location: Oakville, CT
Contact:

Re: EMC 289

Post by BILL-C »

hoffman900 wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:59 am Bill-C,

How does this engine compare to the road race engines you build with these heads?
The FIA european spec 289's that we build will typically have either production 289 head castings or the better C6FE heads, depending on the chassis engine is going into. We run 11.25 CR compared to EMC max of 10.5. FIA mandates correct vintage heads and blocks, flat tappet cam and lifters,stock type rockers-- NO ROLLERS ALLOWED!The only intakes allowed are the stock Shelby's,performer rpm,or webbers. Obviously, this makes it tougher to make reliable power. Typical output is 380 tq and 450 hp with production passenger car heads and 20+ more with the GT-40 C6FE heads. In USA 289 engines we are allowed to use the better 351W and C6FE heads and high compression ratio.500+ hp common. Some sanctioning bodies like SVRA allow aftermarket iron heads and roller valvetrains.580+ hp achieved with proper budget B production 289's .Performer RPM intake still required.T/A 310 cid versions 600+ with dual plane, 620+ with Vic Jr. Because of the way the rules are written, we never build any 289's with C5AE production heads and roller valvetrains. If we did, power in the 500 neighborhood is possible. Peak hp would occur at a higher rpm than scored by EMC though.
Carlquist Competition Engines
SchmidtMotorWorks
Vendor
Posts: 11003
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:30 am
Location: CA

Re: EMC 289

Post by SchmidtMotorWorks »

Are the head castings required to be 1968 or older, or do they just need to come from a family that started before 1968?
Helping to Deliver the Promise of Flying Cars
PackardV8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 7619
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 2:03 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: EMC 289

Post by PackardV8 »

BILL-C wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:19 pm Some sanctioning bodies like SVRA allow aftermarket iron heads and roller valvetrains.580+ hp achieved with proper budget B production 289's
FWIW, does SVRA police their rules particularly stringently? I was at one race and saw a beautiful clone of a '69 Trans Am Mustang pulling the field by several car lengths down the straight and I could hear the engine was a NASCAR takeout and not a stock head 302". When I asked to one racer I knew, he said since SVRA participation had been dropping, they weren't looking to kick anyone out. As long as it sort of looked period correct, they would let them run pretty much anything. T/F ?
Jack Vines
Studebaker-Packard V8 Limited
Obsolete Engineering
User avatar
Mummert
Expert
Expert
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:24 am
Location: El Cajon CA

Re: EMC 289

Post by Mummert »

The engine had to be entered as an entity. This engine was entered as 1965 289. Replacement blocks were allowed, stroke +/- 015" heads must have 1965 casting numbers. The engine was chosen because of the heads. I prefer them over the 351w stuff for 300ish inch engines. The windsor head is worth a couple cfm over 289 heads but the 351w chamber is hard to deal with on small flat top engines. 68' 302 4 barrel are good stuff but tough to find, the rest of the 302 were not as good as the 289 heads.
Mummert Machine and Development 4 stroke hp
Mummert Y-blocks
User avatar
Mummert
Expert
Expert
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:24 am
Location: El Cajon CA

Re: EMC 289

Post by Mummert »

GARY C wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 1:08 am
Mummert wrote: Wed Oct 09, 2019 12:20 pm This is a bad pic but it shows or best score of 2513 at westech with weiand Xcellerator vs our best scoring run of 2520 at EMC with the Air Gap.
Pk hp Air Gap 446 xcellerator 451
Very cool build, any ideas on the strange dip between 5000 and 5600?
The JE dyno cell was using 4" steel flex about 8ft aside. When testing at westech we used 5ft aside or nothing but collecter extensions. This had very different effects on the engine from the hit to the TQ pk. After that very little to none. My geuss is that the 8' flex tube was just tuning harmonically a bit different than what we tested.
Mummert Machine and Development 4 stroke hp
Mummert Y-blocks
SchmidtMotorWorks
Vendor
Posts: 11003
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:30 am
Location: CA

Re: EMC 289

Post by SchmidtMotorWorks »

Mummert wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:36 am The engine had to be entered as an entity. This engine was entered as 1965 289. Replacement blocks were allowed, stroke +/- 015" heads must have 1965 casting numbers. The engine was chosen because of the heads. I prefer them over the 351w stuff for 300ish inch engines. The windsor head is worth a couple cfm over 289 heads but the 351w chamber is hard to deal with on small flat top engines. 68' 302 4 barrel are good stuff but tough to find, the rest of the 302 were not as good as the 289 heads.
So you couldn't run a head from 1969 that had a different chamber?
Something in the rules gave me the impression that the family had to start before 68, but maybe a later head could be used.

What characteristics would you look for in a platform if you had to choose a different one?
Helping to Deliver the Promise of Flying Cars
User avatar
Mummert
Expert
Expert
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:24 am
Location: El Cajon CA

Re: EMC 289

Post by Mummert »

cv67 wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 12:05 pm xcelerator vs rpm...what was done to the rpm?
Just noticed the xcelerator is still sold whats your opinion of it for a hot st car in general?
How would it compare to a team G? Like older stuff.
As delivered they are fun manifold, will give you a choppier idle and have a bit of a distinctive hit when they come on. But,,, they are small. They are not as good as an Air Gap. If you are decent hand with a grinder and have a weekend to mess with it you can make 400hp ish. The particular manifold here has a week worth of work in it,
It wasn't legal but a vic jr, and a couple of pounds of welding rod and I think you could build a hell of a 289 manifold. Then I saw a pic of the plenum on the new AFR manifold and from what I can see they might be on to something.
Mummert Machine and Development 4 stroke hp
Mummert Y-blocks
User avatar
Mummert
Expert
Expert
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:24 am
Location: El Cajon CA

Re: EMC 289

Post by Mummert »

SchmidtMotorWorks wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:55 am
Mummert wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:36 am The engine had to be entered as an entity. This engine was entered as 1965 289. Replacement blocks were allowed, stroke +/- 015" heads must have 1965 casting numbers. The engine was chosen because of the heads. I prefer them over the 351w stuff for 300ish inch engines. The windsor head is worth a couple cfm over 289 heads but the 351w chamber is hard to deal with on small flat top engines. 68' 302 4 barrel are good stuff but tough to find, the rest of the 302 were not as good as the 289 heads.
So you couldn't run a head from 1969 that had a different chamber?
Something in the rules gave me the impression that the family had to start before 68, but maybe a later head could be used.

What characteristics would you look for in a platform if you had to choose a different one?

I read the rules the way you did, but when it came down to final application approval it had to be Stock Eliminator legal heads and stroke. I initially sent in my application for the 65' head with the 302 stroke, but they flagged it and we had to change it.


Honestly I wouldn't choose a different engine for these rules. Valves running down the center of the bore, squish to bore ratio, 20 degree valve(good for the time), air flow potential per inch, the heads ability to damn near dead tumble at 1/2 lift. I did and still do feel that per inch power would be tough to beat.
Mummert Machine and Development 4 stroke hp
Mummert Y-blocks
hoffman900
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 3445
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm
Location:

Re: EMC 289

Post by hoffman900 »

PackardV8 wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:23 am
BILL-C wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:19 pm Some sanctioning bodies like SVRA allow aftermarket iron heads and roller valvetrains.580+ hp achieved with proper budget B production 289's
FWIW, does SVRA police their rules particularly stringently? I was at one race and saw a beautiful clone of a '69 Trans Am Mustang pulling the field by several car lengths down the straight and I could hear the engine was a NASCAR takeout and not a stock head 302". When I asked to one racer I knew, he said since SVRA participation had been dropping, they weren't looking to kick anyone out. As long as it sort of looked period correct, they would let them run pretty much anything. T/F ?
They check them pretty close.

A top running SVRA BP (which are built by Bill-C), are as he described in that 580hp+ package. They also have done a tone of tike on the Spintron, etc and run them out to 8000rpm or so (plenty of in car online under ‘Cobra Automotive’).

The sound is likely the exhaust, which are Calvin Elston built tri-ys feeding into a single 3” tailpipe. They’re smaller than what most here think should be run, but it works with the way Calvin builds them.

A real NASCAR engine would have 250hp+ over what they run.

I think one thing people have to remember is that all 580hp+ engines aren’t the same. No doubt they are pretty fat under the curve. You can find the header specs for those engines on here and Bill has shared some details elsewhere over the years. You can also take a look at the Cobra Automotive catalogue to get an idea of what they’re doing.
-Bob
BILL-C
Expert
Expert
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:57 pm
Location: Oakville, CT
Contact:

Re: EMC 289

Post by BILL-C »

PackardV8 wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:23 am
BILL-C wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:19 pm Some sanctioning bodies like SVRA allow aftermarket iron heads and roller valvetrains.580+ hp achieved with proper budget B production 289's
FWIW, does SVRA police their rules particularly stringently? I was at one race and saw a beautiful clone of a '69 Trans Am Mustang pulling the field by several car lengths down the straight and I could hear the engine was a NASCAR takeout and not a stock head 302". When I asked to one racer I knew, he said since SVRA participation had been dropping, they weren't looking to kick anyone out. As long as it sort of looked period correct, they would let them run pretty much anything. T/F ?
Was car a blue fastback # 23?
Carlquist Competition Engines
hoffman900
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 3445
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:42 pm
Location:

Re: EMC 289

Post by hoffman900 »

BILL-C wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:35 pm
PackardV8 wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:23 am
BILL-C wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:19 pm Some sanctioning bodies like SVRA allow aftermarket iron heads and roller valvetrains.580+ hp achieved with proper budget B production 289's
FWIW, does SVRA police their rules particularly stringently? I was at one race and saw a beautiful clone of a '69 Trans Am Mustang pulling the field by several car lengths down the straight and I could hear the engine was a NASCAR takeout and not a stock head 302". When I asked to one racer I knew, he said since SVRA participation had been dropping, they weren't looking to kick anyone out. As long as it sort of looked period correct, they would let them run pretty much anything. T/F ?
Was car a blue fastback # 23?
In-car:
-Bob
Post Reply