• Welcome to the new SAOCA website. Already a member? Simply click Log In/Sign Up up and to the right and use your same username and password from the old site. If you've forgotten your password, please send an email to membership@sunbeamalpine.org for assistance.

    If you're new here, click Log In/Sign Up and enter your information. We'll approve your account as quickly as possible, typically in about 24 hours. If it takes longer, you were probably caught in our spam/scam filter.

    Enjoy.

289 Tiger Engine Specifications.

64beam

Donation Time
Hi,

I was looking for the engine specs for the 289 ci engine as used in the Tiger's. I don't know if the Rootes workshop manual has it as per WSM 144 general data section. I believe there was another Rootes Tiger manual that also included the 289 engine (WSM 145?). Does someone have this information?

Thank you, Robin.
 

alpine_64

Donation Time
Hi,

I was looking for the engine specs for the 289 ci engine as used in the Tiger's. I don't know if the Rootes workshop manual has it as per WSM 144 general data section. I believe there was another Rootes Tiger manual that also included the 289 engine (WSM 145?). Does someone have this information?

Thank you, Robin.

what do you want to know?
 

alpine_64

Donation Time
Hi Michael,

I would basically like the engine data information as given in the general data section of the Rootes manuals including valve sizes,etc.

Thanks, Robin.


i will see if i can dig it up for you this evening.. or if you are coing to the meeting on Wednesday i can pass it to you then. Alternatively give me a buzz, i cant find your number (changed sim card)
 

bluoval

Donation Time
small block ford eng

Hi Robin I found a soft cover book on ford small blocks at the local advanced auto parts store. It has all the specs for the 260, 289. 302 and 351 the number identification codes for the small block engines also the rebuild info in great detail . was a great help. If you can t find it and want one let me know and i will pick one up for you. Earl bluoval
 

alpine_64

Donation Time
Hi Michael,

I would basically like the engine data information as given in the general data section of the Rootes manuals including valve sizes,etc.

Thanks, Robin.


Rob, you werent at the meeting.. i brought along the MKII owners manual..
 

64beam

Donation Time
Hi Robin I found a soft cover book on ford small blocks at the local advanced auto parts store. It has all the specs for the 260, 289. 302 and 351 the number identification codes for the small block engines also the rebuild info in great detail . was a great help. If you can t find it and want one let me know and i will pick one up for you. Earl bluoval

Hi Earl,

Thanks for the offer. I will let you know if I can't find what I need on the home front.

Kind Regards, Robin.
 

64beam

Donation Time
Rob, you werent at the meeting.. i brought along the MKII owners manual..

Hi Michael,

It is getting hard for me to get to the meetings due to doing the good father thing. Is it the owners manual or workshop manual? Does it have valve sizes, etc?

Thanks, Robin.
 

alpine_64

Donation Time
Hi Michael,

It is getting hard for me to get to the meetings due to doing the good father thing. Is it the owners manual or workshop manual? Does it have valve sizes, etc?

Thanks, Robin.


its the owners manual.. but think it has that stuff.. i know that one of the MKII road tests also listed tht stuff... what are you up to rob? You seeing if you have a 289 in the car, or looking at buying a 289?
 

64beam

Donation Time
its the owners manual.. but think it has that stuff.. i know that one of the MKII road tests also listed tht stuff... what are you up to rob? You seeing if you have a 289 in the car, or looking at buying a 289?

If it has the information I require, I will certainly take a look. Down the track I wouldn't mind getting the 260 breathing a little better, but instead of modifying the 260 heads I would probably invest in aluminium heads (a bit of weight saving as well) and a mild cam. Nothing too over the top, just a healthy reliable motor.
By the way, I heard some rumors that your car is very loud ;) .

Regards, Robin.
 

alpine_64

Donation Time
loud.. hmmmm.. who starts these vicious rumors :eek: ? As for head.. rob dont even bother witht he 289 ones.. go grab a set of the alloy heads.. i doubt they flow that much better than worked iron heads.. but the weight saving is the real benifit.
 

BLISTIC

Donation Time
Careful on the valve size. Remember the bore of a 260 is 2.87 vice the 289 4.0 bore. Valve to cylinder wall issues might come up with putting big valves heads on the 260.


Ford Small Block V-8 Basics


When Ford Motor Company introduced the 90-degree Fairlane V-8 in 1962, not many of us
understood the great potential of this engine. In its original form as a 221ci V-8, it had a 3.50-inch
cylinder bore with a 2.87-inch stroke. That same year, Ford also offered an optional 260ci small
block with a 3.80-inch bore and the same 2.87-inch stroke.
Both of these engines had the same
2.87-inch stroke 1M cast-iron crankshaft and C3AE, 5.153-inch long (center-to-center) connecting
rod forgings. Both engines were fitted with Autolite 2100 two-barrel carburetors and single-point
distributors with vacuum spark advance.

This is the 260-2V
small-block V-8 in
stock form. Introduced
in 1962, the small
Fairlane V-8 became a
legendary performer.


In 1963, Ford pumped up the bore size to 4.00-inches to create the 289ci small block. The 289-2V
V-8 was a hardy engine, long on power potential and reliability. Fitted with the same 1M cast crank
as the 221 and 260, the 289 also had the same C3OE rods. Also in 1963, Ford introduced the 289
High Performance V-8, a more powerful version of this engine that produced 271 horsepower. It
featured a mechanical high-performance camshaft, Autolite dual-point distributor, Autolite 4100
four-barrel carburetion, and special cylinder heads. What made this engine unique was its
aggressive camshaft and dual-point distributor, designed to enable this engine to reach 6,000
rpms. Hi-Po-specific cylinder heads also provided better valvetrain stability at high revs.


For 1963, Ford enlarged the 260’s
bore to create the 289ci, a very
mainstream small-block V-8. This
engine ultimately propelled racer
and car builder, Carroll Shelby, to
three SCCA B/Production
championships, spanking
Chevrolet's Corvettes along the way.

The 221, 260, and 289ci engines lived side-by-side during 1963. For 1964, the 221 was dropped,
leaving the 260-2V, 289-2V, 289-4V, and 289 High Performance engines in production. In 1964,
the 289-4V engine was a low-compression V-8, just like the 289-2V. It ran on regular fuel and was
available only in the Mustang. For 1965, Ford dropped the 160-horse 260-2V, leaving the 289-2V
as the standard small-block V-8. Also for 1965, Ford increased the 289-4V’s compression ratio with
flat-top pistons, boosting the horsepower rating from 210 to 225. The 289 High Performance V-8
remained the same through 1967.

For 1968, Ford stroked the small-block 0.13-inch, raising the displacement to 302ci to compete with
Chevrolet’s 307ci small block. The 302 had the 289’s 4-inch bore with a longer 3.00-inch stroke.
The longer stroke came as a result of a 2M crankshaft with a 3-inch stroke, shorter C8OE
connecting rods at 5.088-inches long. The 302 used the same piston as the 289. The 302 also had
a revised block with longer cylinder skirts (.015-inch longer) to improve piston stability at the bottom
of the bore. This block was actually introduced in mid-1967. Quite a few 1967 289ci engines were
produced using the C8OE 302 block casting. This means the 302 block can easily be used with 289
internals. We suggest avoiding the use of 302 internals in a 289 block, however.
 

64beam

Donation Time
Careful on the valve size. Remember the bore of a 260 is 2.87 vice the 289 4.0 bore. Valve to cylinder wall issues might come up with putting big valves heads on the 260.


Ford Small Block V-8 Basics


When Ford Motor Company introduced the 90-degree Fairlane V-8 in 1962, not many of us
understood the great potential of this engine. In its original form as a 221ci V-8, it had a 3.50-inch
cylinder bore with a 2.87-inch stroke. That same year, Ford also offered an optional 260ci small
block with a 3.80-inch bore and the same 2.87-inch stroke.
Both of these engines had the same
2.87-inch stroke 1M cast-iron crankshaft and C3AE, 5.153-inch long (center-to-center) connecting
rod forgings. Both engines were fitted with Autolite 2100 two-barrel carburetors and single-point
distributors with vacuum spark advance.

This is the 260-2V
small-block V-8 in
stock form. Introduced
in 1962, the small
Fairlane V-8 became a
legendary performer.


In 1963, Ford pumped up the bore size to 4.00-inches to create the 289ci small block. The 289-2V
V-8 was a hardy engine, long on power potential and reliability. Fitted with the same 1M cast crank
as the 221 and 260, the 289 also had the same C3OE rods. Also in 1963, Ford introduced the 289
High Performance V-8, a more powerful version of this engine that produced 271 horsepower. It
featured a mechanical high-performance camshaft, Autolite dual-point distributor, Autolite 4100
four-barrel carburetion, and special cylinder heads. What made this engine unique was its
aggressive camshaft and dual-point distributor, designed to enable this engine to reach 6,000
rpms. Hi-Po-specific cylinder heads also provided better valvetrain stability at high revs.


For 1963, Ford enlarged the 260’s
bore to create the 289ci, a very
mainstream small-block V-8. This
engine ultimately propelled racer
and car builder, Carroll Shelby, to
three SCCA B/Production
championships, spanking
Chevrolet's Corvettes along the way.

The 221, 260, and 289ci engines lived side-by-side during 1963. For 1964, the 221 was dropped,
leaving the 260-2V, 289-2V, 289-4V, and 289 High Performance engines in production. In 1964,
the 289-4V engine was a low-compression V-8, just like the 289-2V. It ran on regular fuel and was
available only in the Mustang. For 1965, Ford dropped the 160-horse 260-2V, leaving the 289-2V
as the standard small-block V-8. Also for 1965, Ford increased the 289-4V’s compression ratio with
flat-top pistons, boosting the horsepower rating from 210 to 225. The 289 High Performance V-8
remained the same through 1967.

For 1968, Ford stroked the small-block 0.13-inch, raising the displacement to 302ci to compete with
Chevrolet’s 307ci small block. The 302 had the 289’s 4-inch bore with a longer 3.00-inch stroke.
The longer stroke came as a result of a 2M crankshaft with a 3-inch stroke, shorter C8OE
connecting rods at 5.088-inches long. The 302 used the same piston as the 289. The 302 also had
a revised block with longer cylinder skirts (.015-inch longer) to improve piston stability at the bottom
of the bore. This block was actually introduced in mid-1967. Quite a few 1967 289ci engines were
produced using the C8OE 302 block casting. This means the 302 block can easily be used with 289
internals. We suggest avoiding the use of 302 internals in a 289 block, however.

Hi,

Thanks for the post, very informative. When I decide to upgrade the Tiger, I will get aluminium heads with nothing over the top. Just make it breath a little better. I would go for a 302 if I was looking for a hipo Tiger.

Regards, Robin :) .
 

MikeH

Diamond Level Sponsor
Just a thought. Have you considered a 65 Mustang shop manual from a Mustang vendor. I has engine sections for both the 260 and 289. I also have an old Motor manual that has specs for both, should you have problems finding the specs you are looking for.
 

BLISTIC

Donation Time
Mike Schmitz how to rebuild a small block Ford will have all the build data. I use this book every time I build a engine.

It has some vital swap info /part #'s and what heads work with what blocks.

My current build which I picked up this weekend...One free 86 5.0 roller block.
A set of 210 CC runner 2.05/1.60 valve aluminum heads. Block will be bored .030 with forged pistons. Piston to except the 2.05 valves. (very important here as the stock small block intake valve reliefs are 1.78) compression right at 10.1.
With my 65 mustang engine I had minor issues with 1.94 windsor heads with stock valve reliefs with a .488 lift cam. Slight piston notch corrected that.
My cam that is going in the Alpine will be in the .500 range.
Estimated HP will be in the 360 to 400 range. Maybe a stoker 331. These little cars need the HP and not the torque most cars need.

That should be enough to light the tires at will but will also make it a nice track/street car.
Idea is to be able to hit the apex and give it full throttle without making the rearend chase the front.
yeah a little bit of suspension modification will need to happen to achieve this goal. I got a wicked idea for a four link. :D
 

BLISTIC

Donation Time
Mike Schmitz how to rebuild a small block Ford will have all the build data. I use this book every time I build a engine.

It has some vital swap info /part #'s and what heads work with what blocks.

My current build which I picked up this weekend...One free 86 5.0 roller block.
A set of 210 CC runner 2.05/1.60 valve aluminum heads. Block will be bored .030 with forged pistons. Piston to except the 2.05 valves. (very important here as the stock small block intake valve reliefs are 1.78) compression right at 10.1.
With my 65 mustang engine I had minor issues with 1.94 windsor heads with stock valve reliefs with a .488 lift cam. Slight piston notch corrected that.
My cam that is going in the Alpine will be in the .500 range.
Estimated HP will be in the 360 to 400 range. Maybe a stoker 331. These little cars need the HP and not the torque most cars need.

That should be enough to light the tires at will but will also make it a nice track/street car.
Idea is to be able to hit the apex and give it full throttle without making the rearend chase the front.
yeah a little bit of suspension modification will need to happen to achieve this goal. I got a wicked idea for a four link. :D

I dont' claim to be a word class engine builder but I have built a dozen or so small blocks.
No of them have self destructed. One cam failure (not my fault).
My last poor man's stroker 306 turned 7k and 140 mph in the straight away at Willow Springs.
That engine had been together since 94! I beat the crap out of it.
Only maintenace on it was a new set of valve guides and a really good port job a new high dollar harmonic balancer and aluminum flywheel. One day I will load a sound byte. Many swore it was a big block.
 

64beam

Donation Time
Just a thought. Have you considered a 65 Mustang shop manual from a Mustang vendor. I has engine sections for both the 260 and 289. I also have an old Motor manual that has specs for both, should you have problems finding the specs you are looking for.

Hi Mike,

I was actually looking at one just the other day on repairing the small blocks. I have not been able to catch up with alpine_64 as he had the specs, but I will keep your offer in mind.

Thanks, Robin.
 

alpine_64

Donation Time
Hi Mike,

I was actually looking at one just the other day on repairing the small blocks. I have not been able to catch up with alpine_64 as he had the specs, but I will keep your offer in mind.

Thanks, Robin.

Rob come to the meeting tonight and ill bring the book. BTW, i told you drop me al ine and iwould send them to you.
 

64beam

Donation Time
Rob come to the meeting tonight and ill bring the book. BTW, i told you drop me al ine and iwould send them to you.

Hi Michael,

I will give you a call after I take the Tiger to the dyno today to check the A/F mixture. Unfortunately, I will not be able to get to tonights meeting.

Regards, Robin.
 

64beam

Donation Time
Hi,

I was very surprised with the results of my dyno run with my Tiger today. Just by removing the air cleaner, it gave the Tiger an extra 6 RWHp :eek: . It goes to show how restrictive the stock air cleaners are even with a K&N filter. I will have to hurry up and sort out my 'Tiger' embossed air cleaner which will be better than the AC assembly. I am also glad that my four barrel conversion was spot on with the A/F mixture very good, but due to my carby size torque dropped slightly. The other advantage of the new setup was that the torque curve was much flatter :) .

Regards, Robin.
 
Top