Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Tigers\]\s+Factory\s+289\s+in\s+Mk1\.\.\.\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Tigers\]\s+Factory\s+289\s+in\s+Mk1\.\.\.\?\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: Allan Ballard <allanballard@att.net>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 13:23:52 -0500; "Sunbeam Tiger Limited Edition Extra," a book compiled by RM Clarke (Brooklands Books, Surrey)... reprints a July 2001 article from Classics -- "Sunbeam Tiger restoration Project." On page 116, the r; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00199.html (7,813 bytes)
2. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: "Smit, Theo" <Theo.Smit@dynastream.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 12:56:25 -0600; My Tiger (B382002705) is the second-last Mk1(A) Tiger. It came to me with a worked-over five bolt 289. Unfortunately, many (all?) of the original engine ID tags were long gone by the time I got it, s; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00200.html (10,545 bytes)
3. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: Allan Ballard <allanballard@att.net>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 14:16:51 -0500; The Tiger II gearbox isn't a HEH-B with holes to match either a 5 or 6 bolt Allan worked-over five bolt 289. Unfortunately, many (all?) of the original engine ID tags were long gone by the time I got; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00201.html (10,974 bytes)
4. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: Steve Ralsten <sralsten111@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 11:22:28 -0800; a engine anything to be have have HEH-E. the while assemblies. the Was sole please or http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/sralsten111@gmail.com ______________________________________________; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00202.html (11,834 bytes)
5. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: Allan Ballard <allanballard@att.net>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 14:23:05 -0500; The Tiger II gearbox isn't the HEH-B wide ratio with extra holes in order to fit to either a 5 bolt or 6 bolt block? Allan Ballard MK1-a Tiger SIV Alpine worked-over five bolt 289. Unfortunately, man; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00203.html (11,019 bytes)
6. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: " Ron Fraser" <rfraser@bluefrog.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 16:03:07 -0500; This is a case of; what did he really mean by that? Too much has been written about the Tiger which is conjecture rather than factual. I have done the same; written what I thought correct when I shou; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00207.html (11,389 bytes)
7. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: "Robert Jaarsma" <jaars@emailmv.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 20:16:54 -0500; The window sticker of my Tiger 9470858 was publiced on the TE/AE Rootes Review of April 1998. It has no dealer mentioned, p.o.e. Boston and added on "Installation of competition Cobra 289 engine. Pr; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00213.html (8,047 bytes)
8. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: Tony Somebody <achd73@yahoo.com>; Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 18:31:21 -0800 (PST); Robert- is the orginal engine still in the Tiger? http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/achd73@yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Tigers@autox.team.net Donate: http://ww; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00215.html (9,030 bytes)
9. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: PhastPhill@aol.com; Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 07:57:48 EST; back in the day I worked in a garage that did alot of performance work on Fords. We had a couple of customers with Tigers If they wanted a fast Tiger we did not use the260 just built them a strong 28; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00244.html (7,761 bytes)
10. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: "Bob Hokanson" <tgrrr@peoplepc.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:15:17 -0800; But didn't Caroll Shelby convince Rootes it would be better to use 260's in the LeMans coupes? I'm sorry, sarcasm is not very becoming of me. _______________________________________________ Tigers@au; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00250.html (8,421 bytes)
11. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: Steve Laifman <slaifman@socal.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:10:22 -0800; I got lost in that "go-around". I believe that Bob Hokanson was biting his tongue in his cheek when he wrote that reply, I believe, as a joke. Shelby had NOTHING to do with which Ford engine he got f; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00267.html (9,841 bytes)
12. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: "jim" <jim@island.net>; Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 07:53:39 -0800; I think Bob's comment was to do with the Lemans coupes specifically... NOT the production cars... I was just reading about Shelby's LeMan's efforts in 1963/4 and it appears that he in fact was using; /html/tigers/2011-01/msg00274.html (10,769 bytes)
13. Re: [Tigers] Factory 289 in Mk1...? (score: 1): Author: Allan Ballard <allanballard@att.net>; Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 05:38:35 -0400; The engine certainly is scarce, especially if it hasn't been over bored too The engine is stronger than the 260. I found that parts are more available. If it has been over bored too much, sleeving is; /html/tigers/2011-05/msg00178.html (13,141 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]