Register now to get rid of these ads!

How can I tell a 260 from a 289 in a 1963 Galaxie?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by carmak, Feb 29, 2012.

  1. carmak
    Joined: Aug 8, 2005
    Posts: 451


    I am looking at a 63 Galaxie parts car. It has a good running 2V small block. The engine looks original.

    It is my understanding that Ford switched over from the 260 to the 289 at some point in the 1963 model year.

    Is there an easy way to tell a 260 from a 289 without a tear down or crawling under the car (to see a block sode)?

    Was there a specific date when Ford changed over to the 289? Did they change engine codes (I can only find codes for the 260 in 63)?

  2. 60galaxieJJ
    Joined: Dec 24, 2009
    Posts: 1,525


    You could always just pull off a valve cover and see if the head is stamped with "289"
  3. Del Swanson
    Joined: Mar 27, 2008
    Posts: 708

    Del Swanson
    from Racine, WI

    I may be wrong, but I think the 260 is awful small and under-powered to have been put in the Galaxy. I've heard of 289's in Galaxys, but never a 260.
  4. 61falcon
    Joined: Jan 1, 2009
    Posts: 772


    i may be wrong but i thought the 260 was a 5 bolt bellhousing and 289 has 6 bolts.

  5. Kentuckian
    Joined: Nov 26, 2008
    Posts: 814


    The fifth digit in the serial number is the engine code. If it is "F" the engine is a 260 and if it is "C" the engine is a 289.
  6. BCR
    Joined: Dec 11, 2005
    Posts: 1,262


    Early 289 had 5 bolt.

    Does it have the tag on the intake?
  7. Kentuckian
    Joined: Nov 26, 2008
    Posts: 814


    Most 260's in the '63 Galaxie had a 2-speed Fordomatic while the 289 was usually backed by a 3-speed Cruiseomatic.
  8. BCR
    Joined: Dec 11, 2005
    Posts: 1,262


  9. carmak
    Joined: Aug 8, 2005
    Posts: 451


    Kentuckian had the answer I was looking for. The code books I could find online all show the "F" code 260 but none show the "C" code for the 289.

    I did a quick search and did find a couple "C" code 63 Fords said to be equiped with 289's.

  10. scrap metal 48
    Joined: Sep 6, 2009
    Posts: 6,077

    scrap metal 48

    I think 260's were blue and 289's gold..
    Joined: Jan 18, 2011
    Posts: 1,277

    from alabama

    If it feels like your dragging an anchor, it's a 289.....if it feels like your tied to the ship, it's more than likely a 260...hehehe
  12. Raven53
    Joined: Jan 12, 2009
    Posts: 442

    from Irwin Pa

    What he said
  13. BACAGrizz
    Joined: Aug 27, 2009
    Posts: 201


    According to this, that year did not have the 260.

    Mid 1964 they switched from the 5 bolt block to the 6 bolt block. I am running a 5 bolt 289 in my F100. I had a 260 in a 1963 Mercury Meteor. The Falcon and Comet would have had the 260.
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2012
  14. Cerberus
    Joined: May 24, 2010
    Posts: 1,392


    The 260 was never offered to the general public in a Ford Galaxie. The 289 was the base engine for the Galaxie from 1962-64.
    Joined: Nov 22, 2005
    Posts: 7,591

    from SIDNEY, NY

    '62s still used 292s as the base V8.
  16. Topless Ford
    Joined: Feb 10, 2007
    Posts: 560

    Topless Ford

    I don't care what the books say. My father has a 63 Galaxie boxtop with a 260 v-8 and three on the tree with overdrive. It was confirmed to be a 260 about 15 years ago when the head gaskets were changed.
  17. Cerberus
    Joined: May 24, 2010
    Posts: 1,392


    True. I meant 1963-34 Galaxie. Oops. Typing to fast. Should have put my mind in gear before running my fingers on the keyboard.
  18. Correct. First year for the 289s was '63, my brother bought a new Custom 300 2dr sedan in April that year with a 289, 3spd trans - he replaced the driveline with a 390/4spd shortly afterward.
  19. 51504bat
    Joined: May 22, 2010
    Posts: 3,388


    My Dad bought a brand new 63 Galaxie from Molin Ford in Wayne PA and it had a 260 with a 3 speed auto. I was really stoked since he traded in a '60 Ford four door with a 6 and a 2 speed auto. To a car nut in junior high the upgrade to a V8 was a big deal.
  20. No_Respect
    Joined: Jul 27, 2005
    Posts: 1,172

    from So-Cal

    I own a 63 with a 289 they were yellow/creme I've seen base models with 260's and yes they are blue my engine code shows the 5 digit as a "C". 65 was the changing year for 6 bolt bellhousings there was some 5 bolts that carried over though.
  21. Bruce Lancaster
    Joined: Oct 9, 2001
    Posts: 21,682

    Bruce Lancaster
    Member Emeritus

    The 260 was standard early in the year, was dumped because it was a stone.
    My Father bought a '63 new car in late 1962...we were used to our '48 Ford and '58 Ford 332. When we tested the new Ford, the salesman insisted on driving first...he revved it much more in first and second than one would for normal driving just to keep it moving. It was obvious that he wanted to do the driving because the car was damn near hopeless on hills. We then went off to see the much lighter '63 Plymouth, and I am pretty sure the 225 was faster than the v8 certainly felt stronger. We bought a 318, which was like a rocketship compared to the others.
    I suspect a 6 cylinder Ford would have felt better than the 8 because of probably better low speed torque.
    Traditional Ford mistake...same general experience as the V860 and the 239 Y-block.
    Ford did have engines capable of moving the car, but my Father was not interested in paying for upgrades beyond base V8.
    The test ride was memorable, sitting in that barge feeling like the parking brake must surely have been left on as the salesman screamed up a hill in first...I think if he had shifted normally we would have rolled backwards.
  22. carmak
    Joined: Aug 8, 2005
    Posts: 451


    The one I am looking at has creme valve covers and air cleaner.

    Riverside, Iowa
  23. finkd
    Joined: Mar 3, 2001
    Posts: 1,500

    Alliance Vendor

    You are wrong, there is a 5 bolt 289 block as well, only came in early year galaxies, mine has that one and it is a 289.
  24. sunbeam
    Joined: Oct 22, 2010
    Posts: 5,599


    If nothing has been changed the carb spacer at the rear of the carb has the engine size cast in it. You will have to rase up a tab on the gasket to see it.
  25. ausbuick
    Joined: Jan 31, 2011
    Posts: 676


    all i know is that the 260 windsors had the oil filler in the top of the timing cover not in the rocker cover..
    and 289 and 302 windsors that i have had the engine number is on top of the vally at the back.
  26. This is what I know for sure: 260 and 289 look identical. I've had both side by side.
    Ford Falcon cars used the 260 through 1964.
    Mustang used 260 for the 1964 1/2 cars.
    Mercury Comets got 289s for 1964.
    All 221, 260 and pre-65 MY 289s were 5 bolt bellhousing.
    '64 Mercury Comets had C4 3 speeders, with 5 bolt bell and narrow front band. This was the first year for C4 and Ford gave Merc the bonus for the little cars.
    '64 Falcon had Ford-O-Matic.
    Not 100% positive, but I believe Mustang never got Ford-O-Matics.
    221 engines were usually painted red.

  27. junkyardjeff
    Joined: Jul 23, 2005
    Posts: 8,231


    There should be a tag on the coil ,bolt that will tell what motor it is if a mechanic in the past had not left it off.
  28. Atwater Mike
    Joined: May 31, 2002
    Posts: 10,797

    Atwater Mike

    My beautiful, original white '63-1/2 Fastback has the letter 'C' code, a 289 with Cruis-o-matic. The rocker covers are creme, and it has a 2 barrel. It's coming outa there...

    My 406 is not going in there, my 390 Mercury Marauder is. (with a C-6)

    The 289 will go into 'stock', with some flatheads and blocks.

    I had customers with Galaxies with 260s: One of them (a tudor Boxtop) had Swing-away steering! (like the T-Birds, only the slider was below the dash, not thru it)
    Love to find a Swingaway for my Galaxie...
  29. rotorwrench
    Joined: Apr 21, 2006
    Posts: 633


    My dad bought a new 1962 Mercury Meteor after years of driving an old 1951 Merc with a 255 flathead. He figured the new car would be a little more powerful car than the old 51 since it had a larger displacement 260 with a somewhat smaller body form the the old bomb. He was sorely disappointed the first time he took some of his local buddies (four guys total) to a meeting in another town and he had a head wind in route. He found that the car was a slug going uphill against the wind. The old 51 Merc would run circles around that car. In 65 he traded it in on a new Gallaxy 500 with a 352. This was the first car he'd had that had more balls than the old Merc (not a whole lot more either). We kept the 51 and all the others were traded off.
  30. wombat barf
    Joined: May 1, 2011
    Posts: 366

    wombat barf
    from oklahoma

    the 260s were indeed available in Galaxies and with three speed automatics.



    Galaxie 500XLs were available with three transmission choices. A fully synchronized Borg Warner T-10 four-speed manual with positive reverse gear lockout was required with the 406 and 427 V-8s. It was optional on 352- and engines, and the ratios were 2.36:1, 1.78:1, 1.41:1 and 1:1; reverse was 2.42:1. An 11-inch semi-centrifugal clutch was used with the optional engines.

    The two-speed Ford-O-matic Drive automatic was standard on V-8-equipped 500XLs, but the three-speed Cruise-O-Matic automatic was more commonly seen. That transmission used 2.40:1, 1.47:1, 1:1 and 2.00:1 reverse gearing, and no automatics were allowed with the top performance 406 or V-8s. "Warner four-speeds are sturdy, and are the same basic transmission used in Buicks, Chevrolets, Pontiacs and Studebakers," says Mark Reynolds, director of the Ford Galaxie Club of America. "Automatics are fine as long as they aren't overloaded with power -later heavy-duty C6 transmissions are an easy swap on a 1963."

    I have seen two ads for '64 Galaxies that claim to have factory 260s in 'em.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!


Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.