Can the Drivers side Head be removed while engine is in the Tiger?

[Jeff@1965Tiger]

It appears I have a bad cylinder, #7. I have check compression and it is 45 psi
The engine had a fresh rebuild when restored but something went wrong. I suspect the compression ring was too tight and broke the piston????
Some suggest detonation???

I have scoped it and see issues with the top of the piston.
The engine was rebuilt by the prior owner and has about 3,000 miles on it and other than a dead hole, starts and runs strong.

I am considering pulling the head, dropping the pan, and removing the bad piston and replacing it.
It looks like it is possible??? I really don't want to pull the engine.

Has anyone pulled a head on the driver's side with success?

I appreciate your comments whether it is possible to do what I proposed. Yes or No (please don't say the easy thing .. "just pull it", because that's not my question)

If someone has pulled the heads I would appreciate and tricks. thank you

 

[DanR]

If you proceed as planned, do you have any idea how you can match the bad piston weight with a new one?

 

[Jeff@1965Tiger]

Yes, I have the builders details.

My question is can I remove the head with enough clearance and retorque it?

 

[65sunbeam]

I did it a long time ago in a USAF barracks parking lot. Removed the radiator and shroud for clearance, removed the shifter, unbolted the rear transmission mount and lowered the back of the transmission with a floor jack. That gave enough room to remove both heads. Not easy to do but possible! I pulled all the pistons out, put new rings and bearings in and drove the wheels off of my $600 Tiger for a few years. Good times.....

 

[Barry]

I did it a long time ago in a USAF barracks parking lot. Removed the radiator and shroud for clearance, removed the shifter, unbolted the rear transmission mount and lowered the back of the transmission with a floor jack. That gave enough room to remove both heads. Not easy to do but possible! I pulled all the pistons out, put new rings and bearings in and drove the wheels off of my $600 Tiger for a few years. Good times.....

Similar story, but it was a friends '64 Mk-I in a driveway in Lubbock, Texas in 1965. As Eric noted, the radiator and fan shroud has to go to have any chance. Being young, skinny and naive helped. The process added considerably to my NSFW vocabulary and convinced me to never do it that way again.

 

[Jeff@1965Tiger]

I did it a long time ago in a USAF barracks parking lot. Removed the radiator and shroud for clearance, removed the shifter, unbolted the rear transmission mount and lowered the back of the transmission with a floor jack. That gave enough room to remove both heads. Not easy to do but possible! I pulled all the pistons out, put new rings and bearings in and drove the wheels off of my $600 Tiger for a few years. Good times.....

thanks

 

[Jeff@1965Tiger]

If I just replace the piston in question ... #7 will I have enough clearance, or will I need to do what you did?

I understand #8 would be a bear and would need more clearance to get out. Or is it the bolts on the head that is the issue. My plan was to remove the intake, and just the driver's side head?

I really appreciate your input. I am in the process of building a 289 but not ready yet to pull the engine and swap. For now, I want to keep the 260 running as good as I can with minimum effort. Unfortunately, they already bored the 260 .030".

 

[sunalp]

You may just have enough clearance to remove the head, but what about any damage to the cylinder?
If you suspect a ring broke and damaged the piston, you can bet there's also damage to the cylinder.
If it were me, I'd drop the engine so that everything can be looked at. To drop the engine & trans out the
bottom isn't all that bad. Lots more room that way too! Might be a better bet to put your efforts into the 289.

 

[alpine_64]

You may just have enough clearance to remove the head, but what about any damage to the cylinder?
If you suspect a ring broke and damaged the piston, you can bet there's also damage to the cylinder.
If it were me, I'd drop the engine so that everything can be looked at. To drop the engine & trans out the
bottom isn't all that bad. Lots more room that way too! Might be a better bet to put your efforts into the 289.

Agreed.. for all the effort of replacing a piston .. you may as well drop it all.

 

[husky drvr]

If I just replace the piston in question

Have you considered it might not be a piston issue?

If you have a low mileage, rebuilt engine using a flat tappet lifter cam with a single cylinder failure, I would be much more concerned about a possibly wiped cam lobe than an unknown piston failure.

Have you checked for contamination in the oil? How about valve movement under the rocker cover?

I think to pull the engine completely would be your best option.

Just a thought,

 

[Jeff@1965Tiger]

Have you considered it might not be a piston issue?

If you have a low mileage, rebuilt engine using a flat tappet lifter cam with a single cylinder failure, I would be much more concerned about a possibly wiped cam lobe than an unknown piston failure.

Have you checked for contamination in the oil? How about valve movement under the rocker cover?

I think to pull the engine completely would be your best option.

Just a thought,

Thanks for the comments. However, I ruled that out early. I removed the valve cover and rotated the motor by hand and saw the valves move equally as the others, so no cam issue. Then I re-adjusted the valves, and it still ran rough. Doing a compression test showed 45 psi. Next, I used my engine camera scope and saw the damage to the piston. The motor runs strong on 7 but has an obvious skip.

As I mentioned I am building a 289. I am not ready to install it yet, but I wanted to see if I could do a backyard fix until I change the motor. I am disappointed with how the 260 engine was rebuilt with doing .030" over on the bore when it only had 50k on the engine. Plus, a greenhorn mistake of not putting the keeper on the oil shaft which was an unforeseen issue. I noticed the distributor was clocked oddly. So, when I removed the distributor to align it to factory specs it pulled out the shaft from the pump. fortunately, it did not all into the pan but caught on the edge of the pump. I had to make special longnose pliers and use my camera scope to relocate it back in the pump.

 

[DanR]

I am disappointed with how the 260 engine was rebuilt with doing .030" over on the bore when it only had 50k o

That in itself makes the question of reliability of the rest of the rebuild by PO.

Suggest a speed up but steedy process of the 289 engine and forgo the 260.

 

[Barry]

Thanks for the comments. However, I ruled that out early. I removed the valve cover and rotated the motor by hand and saw the valves move equally as the others, so no cam issue. Then I re-adjusted the valves, and it still ran rough. Doing a compression test showed 45 psi. Next, I used my engine camera scope and saw the damage to the piston. The motor runs strong on 7 but has an obvious skip.

As I mentioned I am building a 289. I am not ready to install it yet, but I wanted to see if I could do a backyard fix until I change the motor. I am disappointed with how the 260 engine was rebuilt with doing .030" over on the bore when it only had 50k on the engine. Plus, a greenhorn mistake of not putting the keeper on the oil shaft which was an unforeseen issue. I noticed the distributor was clocked oddly. So, when I removed the distributor to align it to factory specs it pulled out the shaft from the pump. fortunately, it did not all into the pan but caught on the edge of the pump. I had to make special longnose pliers and use my camera scope to relocate it back in the pump.

It's not the mileage that matters, but rather the amount of wear and the diameter required to "clean up" the cylinder bore. There is also the issue of parts availability. Good luck finding 0.010" or 0.020" over pistons and rings for an engine that has been out of production for almost 60 years.

 

[Pete S.]

It's not the mileage that matters, but rather the amount of wear and the diameter required to "clean up" the cylinder bore. There is also the issue of parts availability. Good luck finding 0.010" or 0.020" over pistons and rings for an engine that has been out of production for almost 60 years.

There used to a "rule of thumb" sort of opinion at the local drag racing scene in the late 70's, that .030" over what was the absolute limit for over-boring a 260/289. I think it came from Chittendon's book? Some claimed any engine bored over .030" would chronically overheat.

 

[Shannon Boal]

I can tell you a little about piston failure. Your damaged piston maybe due to overheat or detonation, probably not tight ring end gaps. Ring gaps are made a touch loose,(.004" extra end gap), if you want minimum gaps you buy special plus five thou OD rings and hand fit them. Piston may scuff the cylinder wall if it is overheated, and wipe out the ring lands; it is likely to hurt several cylinders, mostly at the rear of the motor, which runs hotter. Detonation can burn away rings and lands in one cylinder; it starts near the exhaust valve....So, it is up to you. Pull one head and one piston. Maybe you fix one hole and live happily ever after. Maybe you pull one, and then pull down the rest of the motor. All you risk is time and effort.

 

[Shannon Boal]

One other thing, engine width. If I recall, 302 Ford is a little wider that 289, so I suppose the 289 is wider than 260. You might look at that while mulling over the possibilities.

 

[Barry]

One other thing, engine width. If I recall, 302 Ford is a little wider that 289, so I suppose the 289 is wider than 260. You might look at that while mulling over the possibilities.

All of the short-deck SBF V-8 engines (221, 260, 289 & 302) have the same included cylinder bank angle of 90 degrees, the same bore spacing of 4.380", the same deck height of 8.206" and the same basic exterior dimensions.

 

[Shannon Boal]

All of the short-deck SBF V-8 engines (221, 260, 289 & 302) have the same included cylinder bank angle of 90 degrees, the same bore spacing of 4.380", the same deck height of 8.206" and the same basic exterior dimensions.

I stand corrected. I remember two windsor motors sitting on the shop floor, measuring across the exhaust manifolds.....but it was forty years ago

 

[spmdr]

Just as a point of fact, the Boss 302 has wider heads....with the standard SBF block dimensions.

BUT this is getting off the point of this post...

I have changed heads/gaskets with engines in the car, not a big deal.

DW