Messages

I'm getting confused. You start out talking about the front end being off and then you start talking about the rear end so I don't know what you are trying to fix. Please clarify. Maybe I'm just getting to old 😕

       Roy

re read post #7

I might have a bead on an old Ford three-two barrel setup and was wondering if it would add some decent power to the car.  As everyone probably knows by now, my car is a day two car with a 302 roller rocker setup. Edelbrock midrise intake and Holley 650 double pumper currently. (Original Cobra intake in closet with engine).  I believe that the Monte Carlo bar would clear such a setup though it would be a close shave.  I'd rather keep the original bar intact than go for a curve at the center of the bar that defeats the purpose.

I would go with different heads before I tried to reinvent the wheel with the tri power setup. Especially if you wanted more power and still a somewhat original look. The heads will not look so out of place like a tri power set up will . The 650 double pumper and linkage is a no brainer . The tri power not so much. Just my 2 cents you do you. 

After all of this debate on possible culprits, if the symptom continues to happen changing out the pump is the first thing that I would try. Of course that is just me that has had to deal with similar symptoms on many cars over decades. You do what you think best. I think that the rebuilt pump core is around 83.00 from NAPA with your core exchange. New is 220 with no core. Or you can send out your pump with your reservoir(if its the correct one) to Rodes Restoration (Roger Rodes)419-468-5182 who has been doing this for decades and you will get back what you sent. If you think it is original to the car that is important IMO and so confirm that you want yours back with Roger. I think the rebuilding of your original pump (if you think so ) is the best option  IMO.

Engine is a late 80s 302 that came out of a Mustang drag car.  So a five liter Fox body type 302 thermostat is what I will need.

The one I posted a link to is the small thermostat which will work in the housing that you have. Getting to the root cause of a overheating problem and fixing that is always good but sometimes it is a trick in figuring that out. Somethings things like overbored engine or engine block with scale in the water passages can be difficult to fix short of tearing apart the entire engine. If the inexpensive thermostat fixes the symptoms then some people are satisfied with that rather then finding the root cause. The debate goes on as to what degree to use. To each their own. I know what has worked for me after listening to all of the debate. Use your best judgement on what to do. 

There is a Ford large diameter thermostat that was used up to and including 1966 production and a smaller thermostat that started being used starting in 1967 production. You need to be certain which thermostat housing you have.Maybe post a picture or check the casting numbers . The summit part I posted a link to is for the smaller thermostat. 

I seem to have a small coolant leak.  Could be around the thermostat housing.  While at it I am looking to replace the thermostat and I saw a recommendation of 195 to fix any potential overheating problems.  Thoughts?

This is my go to thermostat. It is a 180 degree high flow design .Used successfully on many cars for decades by me and many others .https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mrg-4364

Doesn't have to be hot, but definitely don't overfill

The dipstick reads "check hot" however I agree it doesn't have to be but don't over fill.

For sale an original master cylinder. Bendix number 2227091. Date code 249.

Price: 450$ + shipment.

Isn't that a later service replacement master cylinder since the assemblyline master cylinders typically have the cone shaped stop bolt on the bottom side instead of being blocked off like in the picture ?

Yes, RUG-S is correct. The last six characters (or is it four?) of the Ford VIN should be stamped on the boss of the main case just in front of the extension housing.

I have seen almost entire vin stamped before but not seen less then the last 4 .

Satin or shiny chrome?  I have the shiny chrome on at the moment which I suspect are aftermarket.  I also have a pair of satin which appear to be original. 

Polished stainless is what was used on 1965 Mustang/Shelby .It is shiny but not chrome plated.  For 66 production it was a Federal requirement that all wiper blades and arms be of the satin stainless from that point on.   

I've measured this distance more times than I care to admit. It remains at a difference of three-quarter inches higher on the right. The car pulls a bit to the left when I brake, most of the time. I suspect that this is a problem unrelated to the ride height. Correct? Are the longer shackles readily available? Hard to replace for a pro? Are the ones that are available, original in their appearance? Thanks again, Steve.

I think the 3/4 of a inch difference is going to bug you more then the vast majority.I understand you wanting to strive for perfection. I however don't think that the ride height difference in this case is directly proportional to how much you car pulls to the left. Forget the shackle scenario because there is not anything readily available that looks stock or is practical to get the all the results you expect. I would dare say that a 3/4 of a inch longer shackle on one side even if made to look like a original would be much more noticeable if looking under the car and comparing the left and right.It will take some spring substitution in the back or re arching IMO. I think the re arching will be the more costly ,more time consuming and more need of someone experienced to oversee the total process so as to the end results you want. That is when you consider all of what you will have to do to make the leaf spring look concours correct as is your concern. At least compared to a concours prepare replacement as I previously mentioned. Less time and stress I think but the costs will still be significant non the less. There is no easy button or 1 800 number direct replacement here. Just my opinion meant to be helpful.   

Aluminum block weight drops down to about 160 pounds and the aluminum heads combined to around 55 pounds.

Don't forget the "427 Lightweight" used a magnesium PI single 4v intake, and aluminum water pump and a aluminum HUB balancer.

It still couldn't compete with a lightweight 289 totaling around 450 pounds.

I don't remember anything about an aluminum flywheel or clutch cover back then but even the "lightweight 427" was somewhat of a monster for racing.

The big FE "bell" was cast iron v. aluminum for the 289.


I always wondered what the reason was for in casting the Holley carbs out of zinc rather then aluminum? There must be a technical reason for that since it seems so obvious to save weight there?

I had the same question in the past and after researching it a little found out that it is more economical first and foremost in large production.First off you should know that Zinc die cast has a significant part of aluminum in its alloy.The zinc die cast is not much heavier the aluminum die cast.Zinc diecast has a lower melting point which has advantages in the mold process when compared to aluminum . Zinc diecast has more corrosion resistance when compared to aluminum.Aluminum diecast is about 4 times stronger then zinc diecast. Aluminum is certainly the better choice if you require a strong and durable item.
Zinc is a superior material choice if you need parts produced quickly and economically. Aluminum diecasts are typically 3 to 4 times more costly compared to zinc diecast.

I appreciate the responses and have noticed a few distributors with varying dates, Fomoco dated 7D but also Autolite dated 6J-M.
Odd that the Fomoco was dated 5 months after the Autolites.

My next question would be, how close would the date be on the distributor with my 6K block? A few weeks prior to 6K, or a month or more?

Todd

From a logistics standpoint if you were within a few weeks to a month of the block casting and you would be good IMO. I have seen some later and also some sooner. But that is just from my observations.

Cool well done plates. The seller miamiviceshelby is long time Shelby memorabilia vendor John Barnes I am sure he gets them from Craig. A finite amount at some point so get one while you can. The genuine are significantly more expensive.

Center and right hand side show the correct assembly-line battery hold down clamp for the 24F battery

regards

PHILLIP BERESFORD
MELBOURNE.
AUSTRALIA.

Correct information for the picture however for those reading a little history lesson in that there was no 24F battery and or hold down clamp used on the assemblyline for a 66 GT350. A group 22 is what was used on the 66 GT350 (and front mount battery 65 GT350) which is a smaller battery compared to the group 24 . The group 22 battery used the wider version of the same hold down clamp in the picture. Unfortunately there is not a replacement battery that I am aware that is the same dimensions as the group 22 and has the ridge at the bottom to accommodate the factory hold down clip.