Fellas, I need to buy a new flywheel for my 1965 289/T10 that are going back in their original home, my '65 ranchero. It has the 6-bolt aluminum, wide-pattern bellhousing. I know that I need either a 157-tooth or a 164-tooth with a 28oz imbalance. I'm hoping that one of you ford gurus can tell me which flywheel I need based on this information. I hate asking to be s****-fed information but I did do some searching and the more I read the more confused I got. I can't seem to get a straight answer on which flywheel would have come on the car from the factory with my engine/trans combo. Any suggestions for a mating clutch that will hold ~350 tq/hp and is suitable for daily driving would also be a welcome bonus. Thanks in advance for an help! -Chris
I am not a Ford guru. Just a broken down old mechanic. My first thought is that the 289 should be internal ballance. That being the case I would think that a neutral ballance flywheel is what you are chasing. That said there are a ton of people on the board who live to troll me so even someone who does not know will do the research to do just that. Funny thing I was just looking at flywheels about an hour ago while sitting in the reading room. I had to laugh because they are cheaper new than they are used. Were it me I would pick up the phone and call my favorite catalog speed shop, give them my info and have them send me a fly wheel and a "stock" clutch. Done deal.
I know the late 5.0 flywheel is 157 but everything I found for the early 289 was 164, the 302 and 351 of 1968 were 257 so I don't know. I have little faith in my three sources...
So do you have an existing one? What are the casting numbers on it? Do you have the original clutch and pressure plate? How about dimensions on those (i.e. clutch disc diameter)? The Ranchero could have different options. For instance my 1964 260 had a 10.4" clutch, which was a "heavy duty" option.
So, here’s the problem: The 302 that is presently in the ranchero was ‘loaned’ to me by my pops until I got the 289 built. And the bellhousing in question is currently bolted between the 302 that’s coming out and the T10 that’s staying in. And the car is in winter storage for now. And I’m not too bright and didn’t take any pictures of the dang thing when we were throwing the 302 in the car. I can pull her out and put her on the lift to grab some measurements and maybe try to find casting numbers, but I can’t pull the motor until the 289 is ready to get swapped in (can’t tie up a bay in my pop’s shop with an immobile car). I’m hoping that the measurements and photos in the link Chucky sent me will allow me to figure out what I need…
What did the bellhousing come out of? The only thing I am finding for 289-302 is the 157 tooth flywheel thru 79.
If the bellhousing is the OEM '65 unit, you have a 157 tooth flywheel. You'll need the 28oz balance version. I'd recommend a 10.5" Centerforce dual-friction clutch for less pedal effort. The 157 and 164 flywheels each use a dedicated bellhousing with the starter slightly relocated to allow proper engagement. The link in post 5 shows the differences.
Thank all of you so much for the help. I crawled under the car today and I found the casting number on the attached picture. I read this number as “C5DA-6394-A” Based on what yinz guys are telling me, I’m betting I’m looking for a 157-tooth flywheel but I’m going to try and cross reference the casting number to a flywheel tonight. Thanks again!!
McLeod MTF75 Steel Flywheel 157T 0oz With 28oz/50oz Weights Manual Trans Small Block Ford 1965-1995 (cjponyparts.com) hello, this flywheel comes with bolt on weights. or if you happen to have an 289 now, you can fit a 5.0 later and not have too much fuss. why did the balance change? 1m 2m crank = early did the physical shape of the cranks change - and the firing order ?
The balance change came about when Ford lightened the 302 crankshaft. The reason for this is a bit murky; it may have been when they were weight-cutting for fuel economy, for saving money in the casting, or allowing the motor to rev up easier, or all of the above. The 50oz crank has visibly smaller counterweights compared to a 28oz version. Supposedly there's about 8 pounds difference, basically the same effect as using a lightened flywheel. But more external weight was needed for balance. Adding the weight further away from the crank centerline reduced the amount of total weight needed, so that's why a relatively small increase of 22oz was enough to balance it. The firing order change is interesting... The 351W always used the 'late 302' firing order, supposedly for crankshaft harmonic reasons, but for years there were no aftermarket cams available with that firing order. Not even Ford offered one though their 'Muscle Parts' program; they offered 289-type cams only and simply said to switch firing orders if changing cams. So which firing order you use doesn't seem to be a big deal. I ***ume that the change in the 302 was for the same reason Ford used that order in the 351W, better harmonics to reduce crankshaft stress and/or vibration. FWIW, I installed a 50oz late 302 reciprocating ***embly into a '64 5-bolt 289 block with the 289 cam/firing order and ran it for nearly 100K miles with no ill effects, so it doesn't seem matter all that much. And installing the late crank in the early block is a bolt-in, with just a couple of things that need noting. One, the late crank is designed for the one-piece rear seal and lacks the 'oil slinger' flange. I had zero issues with leaks, so you can ignore that IMO. The other is the front damper. If you have a three-bolt-pulley damper and don't want to change the front dress, you'll need an aftermarket damper with both patterns. Or find a Ford marine damper, they did make a three-bolt damper for boat use with the correct 50oz balance. This will need some minor machine work to allow the pulley to fit.
The Jalopy Journal
