FWIW, my $0.02 says that with any type of manufacturing, ANYTHING
is possible. And my definition of "farce" ( in this case ) is if
someone tries to convince me otherwise. In the real world things don't
just go exactly as planned ( and also don't get "recorded" exactly as they
happened ).
When manufacturing a product, profit and adherence to delivery
timeschedules are paramount. And if things
happen that might jeopardize that, then people get creative. They'll do
what they need to do......and WON'T necessarily make any note of the change.
Hey , I think it's VERY possible that some late 1A's came with 289's . I
mean , who knows, maybe some blockhead ( no pun intended ) at the plant
grabbed the wrong pallet of motors or something. And yes, maybe some cars
that were supposed to have 289's came with 260's instead. Mistakes happen.
And I can virtually guarantee that the records of Sunbeam production
don't EXACTLY match what actually went out the door.
( This holds true for virtually any manufacturer / any product ). People
even try and cover up their mistakes sometimes....
Hank, contrary to what I think your message suggested ( when you said "a
351 slipped in occasionally just to make things interesting" ), I don't
think the manufacturers consciously and deliberately plan to do this kind
of stuff, but it's the miscommunications, mistakes, inefficiencies, etc.
that cause them to happen.
BTW, I own # 2590, and it has a 260.
Rick Fedorchak
From: HW200@aol.com
I have a Tiger also produced late in 1966. It has a 260, (2589) intermittent
manufacturing between 260's and 289's is more than a legend, it's a farce.
Not only
would a manufacturer be scrambling with inefficiency but so would the
eventual consumer who was told by the manufacturer they actually DID have a
260 under the hood for that year. That's like a modern day 5.0 mustang having
a 351 slipped in occasionally just to make things interesting for the
consumer. Whether it's Ford or Rootes, I don't think any manufacturer could
be responsible for that. -Hank
|