Hi kids,
I have driven a Ford w/ the close ratio box and 2.88 gears - this was meant
for Kansas or the plains somewhere as it was unusable in San Francisco (or
here in Colorado).
I've had my Tiger about 2 weeks - as near as I can tell its about a 3.50
rear with a 5 speed - very workable combination.
hasta later,
David
> Al,
>
> I found the cure for the burning clutch issue and that tall low gear,
> and it isn't the 2.88's, it's the close ratio gear set
> choice. The wide
> ratio set of the Mk II (and other Ford products) slip right
> in our cases
> and cure most Tiger ills, including a too-tall first. Now, if I were
> racing on a road circuit, and was only in first gear to start
> (poorly),
> I'd probably like the close ratio. But I am not, and that first 60 mph
> gear is ridiculous. The clutch start load is significantly less, and a
> LOT faster. Have to watch burning rubber in the lower gears with a
> mostly stock engine.
>
> As far as a "Tiger" clutch is concerned, I was not aware that Ford (or
> Rootes) provided anything other than standard selected Ford parts. In
> the case of the Tiger, and US products using the early
> engines, the LONG
> clutch is the original design of choice.
>
> I agree the original LONG clutch it is better than other alternatives
> (other than the special units mentioned), and may be harder to locate,
> but I do not think it was Tiger peculiar. McCleod, and the Ford
> Motorsport weighted diaphragm clutches are also good.
>
> Steve
> --
> Steve Laifman < Find out what is most >
> B9472289 < important in your life >
> < and don't let it get away!>
> <SLaifman@SoCal.RR.com>
> <http://www.TigersUnited.com/gallery/SteveLaifman.asp>
>
> _/_/_/_/_/_/_/
> _/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/
> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/
> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
> _/_/_/_/_/__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
> _/
> _/_/_/
|