I think the problem is piston to connecting rod clearance. In Monroe's book
he talkes about being unable to put a 302 crank in a 289 without using 302
pistons and rods. 302 rods would probably fit into a 260 but I kind of
doubt that the pistons would.
Just a guess.
Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Moore" <ARADO7@peoplepc.com>
To: <JHef101@aol.com>; <tigers@autox.team.net>; <shutchin@netjets.com>;
<drmayf@teknett.com>
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: 260 Mods...The other side
I feel naked and alone. However, I have maintained the originality of my
Tiger including drive train, wheels and trim rings with religious fervor. It
is history. The performance is quite adequate for me. If I want high
performance I climb aboard my Triumph 1200..Regards, Gary
----- Original Message -----
From: <JHef101@aol.com>
To: ""DrMayf"" <drmayf@teknett.com>; <tigers@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 6:34 PM
Subject: Re: 260 Mods...
> I seem to recall that the cylinder walls are not deep enough in a 260 to
accomodate that long of a stroke. Is that true anyone?
>
> Jeff Hefner
> 64 B9470028
> 65 Mustang FB
> 56 T-Bird
|