This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============0631637100144895874==
boundary="------------090404090508070305030909"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------090404090508070305030909
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 5/24/2015 9:18 PM, Smit, Theo wrote:
> Hi Ron,
> Certainly that is the case now ? if one had the original block for a
> given Tiger, it would be worth it to sleeve the block if necessary in
> order to preserve the originality for a stock restoration, rather than
> putting in a 289 for ?appearance-correct? restoration.
>
> In the past, though, I?m sure lots of the 260?s were removed and
> discarded even if they were running fine, just to get the extra cubes
> available in a 289 or 302.
>
> For what it?s worth regarding serial numbers, build sequence, etc: My
> Tiger is the second-last Mk1A by VIN, and I still have the original
> HEH-E gearbox for it with the correct (per TBON) ID number. A previous
> owner substituted a 5 bolt 289 for the 260 at some point and the
> original engine was gone long before I got the car. It was built after
> they had started the Mk2 production line, presumably to use up Mk1A
> parts? and drivelines. Any story about late Mk1A Tigers with factory
> 289?s ignores the fact that the Mk2 Tigers had 6 bolt 289?s and wide
> ratio HEH-CF (or HEH-B?) gearboxes, and the Rootes production line
> would (should?) never have been supplied with 5-bolt 289 engines
> paired with close ratio HEH-E gearboxes unless Ford made a major mistake.
>
> Cheers,
> Theo
>
> Date: Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 11:47 AM
> To: 'Tod Brown' <todbrown@roadrunner.com
> Subject: Re: [Tigers] Tiger on eBay (michael king)
>
> Message
> Tod
> Just because they say it is a 289 doesn't make it so.
> I did not look so I can't say for sure on this Tiger but the only way
> to know to be sure is by the block casting number.
> IMO it is a shame to change out an original 260 engine unless it broke
> badly.
> Ron Fraser
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Tigers [mailto:tigers-bounces@autox.team.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Tod Brown via Tigers
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 24, 2015 10:47 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Tigers] Tiger on eBay (michael king)
>
> And, of course, it has a 289.
>
> Interestingly(at least to me), this car's serial number is only 10
> after mine (2394 vs. 2384).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tod
> B382002384LRXFE
> TAC 864
> original rivets
> original engine
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the
> sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contain information that may
> be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you have received this
> email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the
> message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this
> communication (including attachments) by someone other than the
> intended recipient is prohibited. Thank you.
Theo:
Despite the rumors to the contrary, I tend to agree with Ron's
conclusion that there were never any MkIA's provided with 289's from the
factory. There certainly have never been any documented cases of such
and the evidence from your car of it being a 260 (originally) with the
HEH-E gearbox bears this conclusion out. I find it very interesting that
the build date on yourcar is after the startup of MkII manufacture. It
doesn't seem that there is any other logical explanation for such cars
to have the 260/HEH-E combination except to use up existing stock. Of
course, the operational word here is "logical". There is an awful lot of
history regarding Tiger production that we just don't know and maybe
never will. At the same time, things do gradually come out, even after
fifty years. Some recent investigations by Graham Vickery in England and
Buck Trippel in the Rootes archives and elsewhere hold some promise of
new discoveries. Stay tuned!
Cheers,
Tod
--------------090404090508070305030909
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/24/2015 9:18 PM, Smit, Theo wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:D187CFCF.1C1E8%25theo.smit@garmin.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div>Hi Ron,</div>
<div>Certainly that is the case now ? if one had the original
block for a given Tiger, it would be worth it to sleeve the
block if necessary in order to preserve the originality for a
stock restoration, rather than putting in a 289 for
?appearance-correct? restoration. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In the past, though, I?m sure lots of the 260?s were removed
and discarded even if they were running fine, just to get the
extra cubes available in a 289 or 302.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For what it?s worth regarding serial numbers, build sequence,
etc: My Tiger is the second-last Mk1A by VIN, and I still have
the original HEH-E gearbox for it with the correct (per TBON) ID
number. A previous owner substituted a 5 bolt 289 for the 260 at
some point and the original engine was gone long before I got
the car. It was built after they had started the Mk2 production
line, presumably to use up Mk1A parts? and drivelines. Any story
about late Mk1A Tigers with factory 289?s ignores the fact that
the Mk2 Tigers had 6 bolt 289?s and wide ratio HEH-CF (or
HEH-B?) gearboxes, and the Rootes production line would
(should?) never have been supplied with 5-bolt 289 engines
paired with close ratio HEH-E gearboxes unless Ford made a major
mistake.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cheers,</div>
<div>Theo</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt;
text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none;
BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT:
0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid;
BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span>Tigers List <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tigers@autox.team.net";>tigers@autox.team.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>"<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rfraser@bluefrog.com";>rfraser@bluefrog.com</a>"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rfraser@bluefrog.com";>rfraser@bluefrog.com</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Sunday, May 24,
2015 at 11:47 AM<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>'Tod Brown' <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:todbrown@roadrunner.com";>todbrown@roadrunner.com</a>>,
Tigers List <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tigers@autox.team.net";>tigers@autox.team.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: [Tigers]
Tiger on eBay (michael king)<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<title>Message</title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015">Tod
</span></font></div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015"></span></font> </div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015"> Just because they say
it is a 289 doesn't make it so.</span></font></div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015"></span></font> </div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015">I did not look so I can't
say for sure on this Tiger but the only way to know to
be sure is by the block casting number.</span></font></div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015"></span></font> </div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015">IMO it is a shame to change
out an original 260 engine unless it broke
badly.</span></font></div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015"></span></font> </div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" size="2"><span
class="734594217-24052015">Ron Fraser</span></font></div>
<blockquote style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<div dir="ltr" class="OutlookMessageHeader" align="left"
lang="en-us"><font face="Tahoma" size="2">-----Original
Message-----<br>
<b>From:</b> Tigers [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tigers-bounces@autox.team.net";>mailto:tigers-bounces@autox.team.net</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Tod Brown via Tigers<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, May 24, 2015 10:47 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tigers@autox.team.net";>tigers@autox.team.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Tigers] Tiger on eBay (michael
king)<br>
<br>
</font></div>
<font face="Arial">And, of course, it has a 289. <br>
<br>
<font face="Arial">Interestingly<font face="Arial"> (at
least to me), this car's serial number is only 10
after mine (2394 vs. 2384).<br>
<br>
<font face="Arial">Cheers,<br>
<br>
<font face="Arial">Tod<br>
<font face="Arial">B382002384LRXFE<br>
<font face="Arial">TAC 864<br>
<font face="Arial">original rivets<br>
<font face="Arial">original engine</font><br>
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</span><br>
<hr>
<font color="Gray" face="Arial" size="1"><br>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contain
information that may be confidential and/or legally privileged.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the
sender by reply email and delete the message. Any disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of this communication (including
attachments) by someone other than the intended recipient is
prohibited. Thank you.<br>
</font>
</blockquote>
<font face="Arial">Theo:<br>
<br>
Despite the rumors to the contrary, I tend to agree with Ron's
conclu<font face="Arial">sion that there were never any MkIA's
provided with 289's from the fac<font face="Arial">tory. There
certainly have never been any documented cases of such and the
evidence from your car of it being a 260 (originally) with the
HEH-E gearbox bears this conclu<font face="Arial">sion out. I
find it very interesting that the build date on your<font
face="Arial"> </font>car</font></font></font></font> is
after the startup of MkII manufacture. It doesn't seem that there is
any other logical explanation for such cars to have the 260/HEH-E
combination except to use up existing stock. Of course, the
operational word here is "logical". There is an awful lot of history
regarding Tiger production that we just don't know and maybe never
will. At the same time, things do gradually come out, even after
fifty years. Some recent investigations by Graham Vickery in England
and Buck Trippel in the Rootes archives and elsewhere hold some
promise of new discoveries. Stay tuned!<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Tod<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------090404090508070305030909--
--===============0631637100144895874==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tigers@autox.team.net
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/mharc@autox.team.net
--===============0631637100144895874==--
|