> I wonder why just a 3 speed? Would have thought a 4 speed for sure.
4 speeds were a lot less common back in the 60s; also bigger and heavier.
It might have been chosen for the smaller size; but I'd guess it's just what
came out of the donor car.
Ironically, though, I'm not sure it would be all that much quicker than a
souped-up TRactor motor. Back in the 70s I had a TR3A that would embarrass
a stock 289 Mustang, especially if he didn't take me seriously. They were
fractionally quicker in a fair fight, but if I got a car length lead first
...
And if memory serves, the 283 Chevy was a heavier motor than the 289 Ford.
-- Randall
** triumphs@autox.team.net **
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
|