tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 289's

To: FHSLOTH@aol.com
Subject: Re: 289's
From: hoftiger <hoftiger@cinci.infi.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 21:05:40 -0400
Now this is interesting. I had a 260 in my Tiger. I pulled it and put in a 289
bare block that I bought at a junk yard. I used the heads, crank, rods, etc. off
the 260 along with the transmission and bellhousing. I used the starter off my
260 as well. Where would the difference in the starters show up. Not apparently
just with the block as my situation would indicate.

Curt Hoffman

FHSLOTH@aol.com wrote:

> WHEN I REPLACED THE STARTER MOTOR ON MY MK1 A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, I ASKED THE
> PARTS MAN AT MY LOCAL STORE FOR A STARTER FOR A 289, THINKING THAT HE WOULD
> NOT HAVE A STARTER FOR A 260..
>
> AFTER FIGHTING WITH IT FOR AN HOUR, I WENT BACK AND COMPLAINED THAT HE HAD
> GIVEN ME THE WRONG STARTER. HE CHECKED HIS PARTS BOOK AND SAID IT WAS THE
> CORRECT ONE. I TOOK THE OLD STARTER WITH ME AND WE COMPARED THE PHYSICAL
> DIMENSIONS OF BOTH.
>
> IT TURNS OUT THE 260 STARTER MOTOR IS SHORTER IN THE STROKE OF THE GEAR THAT
> ENGAGES THE FLYWHEEL, AND THE HOUSING AROUND THIS GEAR HAS A THINNER WALL
> THICKNESS THAN THAT FOR THE 289. NO WONDER I COULDN'T FORCE IT IN PLACE.
>
> MY PARTS GUY (WITH 25 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THE BUSINESS) ALSO SAID THE 289 HAD
> A DIFFERENT OIL PUMP ASSEMBLY.
>
> HE DID HAVE THE 260 STARTER IN STOCK, IT WAS CHEAPER THAN THE 289 MOTOR, AND
> FIT RIGHT IN PLACE.
>
> I DON'T KNOW IF THIS HELPS WITH THE 260/289 DEBATE, BUT IT IS ONE AREA IN
> WHICH I FOUND A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BLOCKS.
>
> FRED BAUM
> 9470768 MK1




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>