[Tigers] "Numbers Matching" engine for Sunbeam Tigers

[Tom Parker]

On my Tiger, 1967 Mark 2 built @ December 1966 the date code on the engine
is about a month earlier. That'd the one on the block below the left
cylinder head. I can't say if the engine's listed on the build, but the
engine is not (as far as I know, and this applies generally to Ford
engines) serial numbered. I can't absolutely swear it's the original engine
because I bought the car nine years later, but I can guarantee it was in
the car when I bought it.  Ron Frasier's doing a study on Tigers that
includes date codes. Ron: any thoughts?


On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:12 PM Tom Witt via Tigers <tigers at autox.team.net>
wrote:

> >>>BUT... you cannot claim that a specific engine IS definitely the
> original.<<<
>
> I would disagree. An original owner can know (and swear) that the engine
> is original. In a court of law a witness does matter. There may not be
> confirming numbers but all those numbers (could) prove is that the engine
> is original. There is an order of evidence with the goal of originality.
> Not the goal of “matching numbers.”  So, yes, it CAN be claimed that an
> engine is original because the original owner has that knowledge.  The
> question is, does the buyer believe the seller??? The doubt of the buyer
> does not preclude the fact that a specific engine is in fact the original
> known to be so by the seller.
>
> Tigers have no stamped body ID. The same “engine originality” argument
> presented - if applied to the body shell would mean no Tiger can be
> confirmed as original (a TAC inspection not withstanding). Hence some
> degree of faith is placed on the evidence that the body shell has the
> appearance of being originally a Tiger though no (non-removable) ID
> markings are evident.  And as much as a said faith is placed in the TAC
> inspection findings, so should a fair faith be placed in a sworn statement
> that an engine is original by an original owner.
>
> Just so there is no confusion, I do agree that the term “matching numbers”
> is a questionable term regarding Tiger’s, - but not necessarily
> untruthful.  By that I mean that the removability of the valve cover (ID)
> does not in and of itself mean the engine (and its removable ID) is not
> original.   And it does not eliminate the applicability to say the Tiger
> and its engine are “definitely the original.”
>
> *From:* Bill Waite via Tigers <tigers at autox.team.net>
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 18, 2018 5:24 PM
> *To:* tigers at autox.team.net
> *Cc:* rtscolgan at yahoo.com
> *Subject:* [Tigers] "Numbers Matching" engine for Sunbeam Tigers
>
> If you do a search on various Tiger forums, you will find that there is
> literally no such thing as a "numbers matching" Tiger insofar as the engine
> is concerned.  The basic reason?  Individual engine numbers were never
> stamped on original Tiger blocks.  A given engine might have the proper
> valve cover identification number for a specific engine, but that valve
> cover can be placed on any engine.  The only thing that can be established
> for certain is if a specific engine is NOT the original.  Why?  Because the
> casting dates on the engine can only show if the engine "could" be original
> (or just a replacement carefully selected to match up with the build
> date).  If the casting date is not correct, then the engine is definitely
> not the original engine.
>
> The truth: let's say you buy a Tiger from the original owner (or
> documented second owner, etc).  It is possible (based on casting dates,
> etc) that the engine could be original.  In some cases, that is likely very
> true.  BUT... you cannot claim that a specific engine IS definitely the
> original.  Only that it is not the original.  You can prove it "might be"
> the original... but not that it is original.
>
> An advertisement that claims "numbers matching" for a Tiger cannot apply
> to the engine.  It can be established that a given Tiger has a specific
> transmission tag  number or a differential number that could be the
> original, but a given engine cannot be claimed for any Tiger.  Only that it
> "could be" the original.
>
> Hipo 289's were the first small block engines that Ford identified with
> VIN numbers (individual engine numbers).  Tigers were not originally
> produced with Hipo 289's.
>
> Bill
> Grand Rapids, MI
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> <#m_-790615989124956840_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
>
> tigers at autox.team.net
>
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/tigers
>
> Unsubscribe:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/tkparker1941@gmail.com
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://autox.team.net/pipermail/tigers/attachments/20180821/b3d88fe7/attachment.html>