Listers,
Here is Bob Mannel's response to my inquiry about the possible existence of
a variant C4OE-B head, i.e., not the HiPo head, and with no "289" marking.
Bob Palmer
rpalmer@ucsd.edu
robertpalmer@paulhastings.com
rpalmerbob@adelphia.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert P. Mannel [mailto:BobMannel@compuserve.com]
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 5:48 PM
To: INTERNET:rpalmerbob@adelphia.net
Subject: C4OE-B versus -A
Bob,
Monroe's book contains many many errors in casting numbers.
I have chased down many a casting number that was to be the exception, but
always found the owner incorrect. The person with the claim, does he still
have the heads available for examination? Without them he can make his
claim indefinitely.
In 1964 there were only six head casting numbers:
C4OE-A for the 260, which had no "289" and no year marking (oval)
C3OE-E or C3OE-F for the 289 HiPo in early 64 which had "289" marking
(small)
C4OE-B for the 289 HiPo in late 64 which had "289" and "64" marking (large)
C3AE-F for the 289 non-HiPo in early 64 which had "289" marking (triangle)
C4AE-C for the 289 non-HiPo in late 64 which had "289" and "64" marking
(large)
I have found one exception, but it was a pre-production engine from Ford
engineering. The head was C3OE-F for the 289 HiPo with the "289" marking
but no year mark. The strange part was that the chamber was large rather
than small. It was cast in November 1963 and was likely being used to test
the casting for the large chamber. The head was covered with XE
experimental numbers.
It is always risky to suggestion that someone has things confused, but when
the evidence is presented, I have found that to be true in each case I have
been associated with. The only exception is the one above, and I own that
engine!
Regards, Bob Mannel
|