Wait..., I think I have solved the whole matter (LOL):
Ford refuses to sell Rootes 289's because they need them for their own
production (Mustangs especially). Thus, they offered Rootes 260's at a good
price. This helped Rootes because they didn't want to invest in additional
289 testing.
Ford was happy to sell an obsolete, non-competitive engine size. Rootes was
happy to get engines that were cheaper both in initial cost and also not
needing additional testing (heat/torque issues).
All this made Shelby happy because his 289 Cobras stood out from the 260
Tigers.
As Archie Bunker says, "Case Closed Edith!" :-)
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: " Ron Fraser" <rfraser@bluefrog.com>
To: "'Thomas Witt'" <atwittsend@verizon.net>; <tigers@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 11:50 AM
Subject: RE: [Tigers] More cubes for Tiger
> Tom
> According to Bob Mannel's book; Ford last cast the 260 block July
> 1965 and assembled the last 260 engines in the fall of 1965 which is the
> 1966 Ford model year. These 260 blocks are the ones painted blue and
> there
> is a good chance that the majority of these engines went to Rootes.
>
> The exact reason why Rootes stayed with the 260, we may never know;
> someday all the Rootes and Ford documentation about the 260 maybe found.
> The big problem is finding all the information.
>
> Ron Fraser
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tigers-bounces@autox.team.net [mailto:tigers-bounces@autox.team.net]
> On Behalf Of Thomas Witt
> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:48 PM
> To: tigers@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [Tigers] More cubes for Tiger
>
>
> It seems very interesting that the 289 was available (at least to Ford) in
> the 1963 model year, yet Rootes did not use the 289 until their 1967 model
> year. To my knowledge the 260 stopped being used after the 1964 model
> year
>
> (a few 1964-1/2 Mustangs were built with 260's supposedly to exhaust the
> existing supply). I have Ray Miller's definitive book "Falcon" and he
> indicates that in the 1965 model year only the 289 was available.
>
> The 1965 Falcon and the 1965 Tiger were introduced at about the same time
> and in their line up (Ford's) the 289 was the only small block V-8 Ford
> offered. So, that leaves one to ponder why the 260 was used by Rootes two
> years beyond Ford's production car use. And for that matter why they
> didn't
> opt to, or were allowed to use the 289 in their race cars.
>
> While there has been much reasonable speculation two things remain clear.
> The 289 had already been in production through two (some may say one and a
> half) model years before the first Tigers were sold. And while Ford had
> ceased using the 260, Rootes used the 260 for two additional model years
> after Ford had stopped.
>
> I think the 1966 model Tigers with 260's are the "head scratcher." But
> anyway, it all makes for good Tiger chat and I always glean something from
> the discussions.
>
> Tom Witt ("Monday morning quarterbacking" the 260/289 issue)
>
>
> Subject: Re: [Tigers] More cubes for Tiger
>
>
>> It's too easy to speculate about all of this. We don't know the
>> correct answers and apparently no one asked the people who do know for
>> a first hand account.
>>
>> According to Bob Mannel's book:
>> The 289 was first cast in Dec 1962; this is part of the 1963 Ford
>> model
>> year
>> The Fairlane 289 HiPo was introduced in Dec 1962
>>
>> I believe both of these engines were still in the development stage;
>> some of the internal parts were not up to racing standards. I believe
>> it took most of the next year to sort things out but it is not totally
>> clear when these improvements actually happened.
>>
>> I also believe that FoMoCo was calling the shots about who got which
>> engine and when. Ford was supporting multiple racing teams including
>> Shelby American and Ford carried a very big stick. Ford wanted to
>> dominate
>> at the race track.
>>
>> Ron Fraser
_______________________________________________
Tigers@autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
|