I recently changed the heads on my Tiger. It is a late Mk1A.
The heads that came off are lying on the floor of my shop.
The casting number is C4OE . Thats it. No -A or -B.
I assume these are "-A" revision heads. I do not know the provenance of my
Tiger. I do know the engine is a 260 but I cannot swear these are original
heads ore engine.
Erich
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>
To: "Doug & Rett Leithauser" <dleit@worldnet.att.net>
Cc: "Tiger List" <tigers@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 9:47 AM
Subject: RE: 260 cylinder heads
> Doug,
>
> I hope you aren't completely regretting having brought this subject up. It
> has been, for me, an interesting excursion and maybe helpful insofar as
> bringing attention to some largely overlooked information, especially the
> existence of the C4OE-A 260 heads used on at least some of the Tiger 260
> engines. A possible explanation for the general lack of documentation of
the
> "A" heads is given by Mannel:
>
> "So, when Ford geared up for 1964 production, it recast the 260 V8 heads
to
> take the 289 valves while keeping the chamber volume and shape the same as
> on the 1962/63 260 heads. The 260 heads using the early 289 valves were
> identified by the C4OE-A casting number. Unfortunately, Ford never made
this
> fact known through its shop manuals. It was only included in the master
> parts catalogs where accuracy on interchangeability of service parts was
> essential."
>
> The lack of general availability of the correct casting number may explain
> why this mistake in Monroe's book has propagated so widely without being
> recognized. I don't think there is any question at this point of the
> existence of the C4OE-A heads, so at the very least, Monroe's book has an
> error of omission. And, until we have some strong evidence otherwise, I
> think both the evidence and logic point to the C4OE-B heads being HiPo and
> only HiPo heads. The problem with the description of your heads is that it
> doesn't fit any documented heads, Monroe's or Mannel's. For example,
neither
> Monroe nor any other reference that I am aware of show 260 heads with a
289
> combustion chamber profile. I'm also not sure in what regard you think
that
> Mannel is "incorrect", now that the information he presents has been
> confirmed. On the other hand, although understandably skeptical, he is
> willing to entertain the possibility that you have a set of heads that he
> hasn't documented.
>
> It would be nice to have some definitive resolution to this controversy.
> Short of removing one of your heads, all I think you can do is look for
> "289" cast on your heads, probably in two places: under the valve cover
and
> below the exhaust ports per Tom Brandt's posting. This, of course,
wouldn't
> be definitive, but would be very suggestive. When was your Tiger built?
> Maybe later Tigers used different heads. I think it would be really cool
to
> find that at least some Tigers did have unique heads, but until we have
some
> harder evidence I remain unconvinced.
>
>
> Bob Palmer
> rpalmer@ucsd.edu
> robertpalmer@paulhastings.com
> rpalmerbob@adelphia.net
|