[Tigers] good 289 for a rebuild?

[genepadgett at comcast.net]

Ron, 

Back several years ago I was considering rebuilding my 260. I was having problems finding oversized pistons, especially any at a reasonable price to go with a rebored block. Is there a good source for them? What about with a higher compression ratio piston? I seem to recall I would have had to have Janes custom make something for me. And they would have been expensive. Compared at least to what I could get readily available for a 289. It just seemed that rebuilding a 289, especially warming it up a bit, would be more cost effective that doing the same thing with a 260 and produce more bang for the buck in the process. I readily admit it was many years ago that I was looking at this. 

Would you mind sharing the details on what would constitute a higher HP 260 that was never rated by Ford? I see valve sizes and a 164 HP rating in the shop manual. Would the higher powered 260 you mentioned have the same size exhaust valve as the 289 size in the manual? The manual says the intakes for the 260 and 289 are the same. 

Thanks , 

Gene 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Fraser" <rfraser at bluefrog.com> 
To: "Tom Pappenhagen " <pappentl at aol.com>, tigers at autox.team.net 
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 3:49:06 PM 
Subject: Re: [Tigers] good 289 for a rebuild? 

Tom 
It is always best to have the Block casting number which is above 
the starter. The second set of numbers there is the date code also good 
information. The block casting number will tell you immediately what 
block you have and what year it is. 

I'm conducting a Original Tiger Engine Study with respect to the 
Ford casting numbers and date codes. I will gladly help you with any those 
number to determine exactly what you have for an engine. 

Personally I see no reason not to rebuild the 260 block unless it is 
totally shot. I know many people look at the 164 HP spec for the 260 and 
immediately want to upgrade to the 289. The 164HP rating only applies to 
the early 260 with small intake valves. The later 260 with larger intake 
valves was never rated by Ford but I'm sure it is in the 185 HP realm. Also 
Alex Gabbard build up a 260 with a stroker kit and a bunch of other goodies 
resulting in around 350 HP, not bad for a 260. 

Yes the 289 could make a good rebuild. If the intake manifold is 
set up for a road draft tube you will need to buy a plate with a threaded 
hole for the brake booster vacuum for that location. If your not going to 
use the stock intake manifold then never mind that. All the parts from the 
260 should bold right up to the 5 bolt 289. 

Ron Fraser 


-----Original Message----- 
From: tigers-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:tigers-bounces at autox.team.net] 
On Behalf Of Tom Pappenhagen 
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 4:03 PM 
To: tigers at autox.team.net 
Subject: [Tigers] good 289 for a rebuild? 


My Tiger is coming home from the paint shop on Tuesday!! 





I'd like to build a 289 to replace the 260. My nephew found an early 289 
from a fairlane ('62 or '63), would that be a good 289 to rebuild? It 
should be a 5-bolt and work with the original trans, correct? TIA. 





Tom 


''65 mk1 
_______________________________________________ 

tigers at autox.team.net 

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html 
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive 
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums 
Unsubscribe: 
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/rfraser@bluefrog.com 




----- 
No virus found in this message. 
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2437/5223 - Release Date: 08/25/12 
_______________________________________________ 

tigers at autox.team.net 

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html 
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive 
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums 
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/genepadgett@comcast.net