Messages

A GT350 would be a better candidate even if you intend to do a serious lightening of the 428 engine in a GT500.

You can fairly easily increase the CI displacement of the 351 to near that of the stock 428 and in addition lighten that engine with things like aluminum heads.

It all depends on how deep you want to go to re-engineer the car?

Virtually everything is available. 6 speed manual transmissions. 8 speed automatic transmissions. Aluminum 9" rears. Aluminum engine blocks, multiple carb of EFI induction, etc, and they all can be kept to look reasonably stock in most cases.


The 428 performance wise is kind of a dinosaur stock at a max HP level now whereas the 351's are not.


Chassis wise, as suggested, the Off Highway Boss 302 Chassis book is a very good guide as well.


I would recommend though that you do not throw anything away that you take off of the car. Virtually all of these modifications are essentially "day 2" bolt ons and replacing original stock parts now can be difficult, expensive and in some cases virtually impossible.

GT500 is my bucket list car. MUST be a 500.

Big block Mustangs are notoriously difficult to live with in hot climates. I think well deserved.

In the Mustang chassis, the engine just takes up too much of the engine compartment for it to cool well.

Hot restarts often are not possible.


I understand your passion. I have it too. I currently have a 67 GT500, a '68 GT350 and a '73 Pantera. The only one that is close to "stock" is the '67. That one, you don't screw with. You just pray that it starts and runs and then leave it alone. Personally, I can't immagine it (or any of the 3) in Vegas summer heat, but that's just me.

I take exception to the glue on my sneakers melting from the heat of the pavement.


And as a previous poster mentioned, Holley's don't like the heat either.


Best of luck in your endeavor. It will be quite a challenging experiment.

Thank you. Living in Vegas presents it's own set of challenges.

I have a feeling that there is no way I could ever know for sure what the "challenges" are unless I live it myself?

I'm guessing on this but I think that you are going to NEED a heavily cooled garage to work on the car?

When you are getting opinions on what the issue could be, in a large way, you are just getting feedback on the "likeliness" of the cause by symptoms described. Those are the symtoms that you have observed and they may not be 100% comprehensive?



In some ways, you have overlapping symptoms that are indicative of various possible causes.



I like the thought about questioning the positioning of the throttle plate in regards to the idle slot.

That could explain the lack of response to the idle adjustment screw.


Likewise, the lack of attention to the "emulsion tubes" is right in there as a possible cause. So the only thing that you can do is go down the list, one by one and verify that each of these items is NOT the cause.

Personally I have had issues with Holleys suddenly loosing their ability to idle without stalling.

This has always in my case been caused by an issue with the idle air bleeds or slots either being clogged or blocked OR an issue down in their wells (which for me is rarer).

It doesn't take much for a speck of something to block them individually or both simultaneously.


There are well replacement plugs available that are exactly like the originals.
So don't hesitate to consider removing them to verify that the tubes are thoroughly cleaned out of any kind of debris or even a corrosion build up.

They are not difficult to do but it is carb surgery and it needs to be put on the work bench and will take some time if you have never done one before.


It is probably unfair to blame the "rebuilder or the restorer" for lack of attention in those details since it is so easy to clog the idle air bleeds on a Holley to begin with.


The other thing is that, yes, you can send the carb to a competent carb tech but usually these folks have stacks of work in front of them before they can get to you so plan on a long down time if you go that route.


What electrical issues? Have you verified that the advance in the distributor is function properly? Have you verified that the points cam has zero play, side to side?

A GT350 would be a better candidate even if you intend to do a serious lightening of the 428 engine in a GT500.

You can fairly easily increase the CI displacement of the 351 to near that of the stock 428 and in addition lighten that engine with things like aluminum heads.

It all depends on how deep you want to go to re-engineer the car?

Virtually everything is available. 6 speed manual transmissions. 8 speed automatic transmissions. Aluminum 9" rears. Aluminum engine blocks, multiple carb of EFI induction, etc, and they all can be kept to look reasonably stock in most cases.


The 428 performance wise is kind of a dinosaur stock at a max HP level now whereas the 351's are not.


Chassis wise, as suggested, the Off Highway Boss 302 Chassis book is a very good guide as well.


I would recommend though that you do not throw anything away that you take off of the car. Virtually all of these modifications are essentially "day 2" bolt ons and replacing original stock parts now can be difficult, expensive and in some cases virtually impossible.

GT500 is my bucket list car. MUST be a 500.

Big block Mustangs are notoriously difficult to live with in hot climates. I think well deserved.

In the Mustang chassis, the engine just takes up too much of the engine compartment for it to cool well.

Hot restarts often are not possible.


I understand your passion. I have it too. I currently have a 67 GT500, a '68 GT350 and a '73 Pantera. The only one that is close to "stock" is the '67. That one, you don't screw with. You just pray that it starts and runs and then leave it alone. Personally, I can't immagine it (or any of the 3) in Vegas summer heat, but that's just me.

I take exception to the glue on my sneakers melting from the heat of the pavement.


And as a previous poster mentioned, Holley's don't like the heat either.


Best of luck in your endeavor. It will be quite a challenging experiment.

A GT350 would be a better candidate even if you intend to do a serious lightening of the 428 engine in a GT500.

You can fairly easily increase the CI displacement of the 351 to near that of the stock 428 and in addition lighten that engine with things like aluminum heads.

It all depends on how deep you want to go to re-engineer the car?

Virtually everything is available. 6 speed manual transmissions. 8 speed automatic transmissions. Aluminum 9" rears. Aluminum engine blocks, multiple carb of EFI induction, etc, and they all can be kept to look reasonably stock in most cases.


The 428 performance wise is kind of a dinosaur stock at a max HP level now whereas the 351's are not.


Chassis wise, as suggested, the Off Highway Boss 302 Chassis book is a very good guide as well.


I would recommend though that you do not throw anything away that you take off of the car. Virtually all of these modifications are essentially "day 2" bolt ons and replacing original stock parts now can be difficult, expensive and in some cases virtually impossible.

Brian,  depends on how you intend on using the car and what objectives are. My 70 GT500 was my daily driver for 7 years. 

As a former dealership mechanic, i'll say living with a 69/70 GT500 is a challenge. 

Do you intend to drive long distances,  urban driving,  drag race, parades, cars/coffee, or what.  Hot weather or not

Before anything,  cooling system, brakes, tires, fuel hoses and front suspension need to be verified and optimized.

Next tune quality (carb, timing).

Then mods can be considered and will depend on budget, tastes, intended use, etc.  mild to wild

Yes, this is an understatement.

The entire history of modifications is available and that fills volumes.

As Commander Scott once said, "you remind me of the man who demanded to be taught the knowledge of the world while standing on one foot".

Where to begin? Pick a spot but someone needs to set some limits.

"Limits"?

I would think so, yes. There are literally volumes of modifications available. "A man has got to know his limits"- Dirty Harry.

Brian,  depends on how you intend on using the car and what objectives are. My 70 GT500 was my daily driver for 7 years. 

As a former dealership mechanic, i'll say living with a 69/70 GT500 is a challenge. 

Do you intend to drive long distances,  urban driving,  drag race, parades, cars/coffee, or what.  Hot weather or not

Before anything,  cooling system, brakes, tires, fuel hoses and front suspension need to be verified and optimized.

Next tune quality (carb, timing).

Then mods can be considered and will depend on budget, tastes, intended use, etc.  mild to wild

Yes, this is an understatement.

The entire history of modifications is available and that fills volumes.

As Commander Scott once said, "you remind me of the man who demanded to be taught the knowledge of the world while standing on one foot".

Where to begin? Pick a spot but someone needs to set some limits.

I have a Ford rebuilt PP in my 67 GT500.
They were common at one point.

I would not be shocked if Ford Rebuilders still do them or could.

I'll throw a little something into this mix also. I have a 70 Mustang, but when we pulled the radio out, it was a D1 part number, and my mother and I have had it since new, so I know that it was never changed out. It is not hard at all for me to imagine that a part made for next year's cars were put on the year before cars.Because they ran out and they already had parts for the next year that would work. If a car was made near the end of production.I could see this happening,But I have not paid attention to what month the car is that we were talking about.

       Roy

I would suspect that this is not a rare occurrence at all? No one really noticed original date codes until we all got into this seeking originality thing now.

Now we even want "original bolts" with the original finish and head markings.

It's a good thing that there is no way to determine if an original tire still has original air in it. We can't do that now...right? 

"Concours"

I stand.corrected. i could never spell.

I cant.claim the C8 is original to the car.
I am pointing out only that the part has a date on it where it does fit into the timetable in which Ford built the engine.

I have found the FE's in particular to have more of these parts with dating conflicts that shouldnt exist, but do.

To find a verifiable "untouched" 67 GT500 would be like finding "Nessie", the Lockness "monster" at this point?

Would it have a date code too?🫤

It isn't that way.

There is a clear and ever danger in stating categorically for something like this that it could not have come on the car.

I would feel comfortable to read a statement that the C0 part number is what is EXPECTED on the car and I would AGREE with that.


What is going on really, if you can back out far enough to put yourself into "an Architect of the Universe" position, is that others are coming here, for different reasons other than as being "part of the sport", in order to build their "Investment Quality Portfolio".

They are not looking to advertise their "100 point car", they want a 1000 point correct car. That invites the purveyors to demand things like $699,999, for a B9 car.



While there are many more things going on that are changing our "hobby" that is way beyond our control, the overall movement in the "valuation process" of pricing these cars is legitimized by the "Concourse" segment.

In SAAC's case, that actually accounts for something less then 1% of the membership according to some.
Certainly that is a player and seems to show in the overall turnouts at the SAAC national conventions.


So in regards to recently asked questions asked here, such as, what are the acceptable date codes on bumpers, rocker panels, oil filter adapters and the likes, those folks are looking for instruction manuals on how to build a car. Good luck on that, and maybe if that was possible, that is even beyond a 1,000 point car and heading towards a 10,000 point car..."of investment quality"?


I have always enjoyed reading your posts and learning from them. You are extremely knowledgeable, experienced and generally forthcoming...mostly. That's ok. No one is perfect and no one is expected to be, but this (too lengthy) statement from me is just a caution to us all, not just a criticism of you, not to feed the beast that is so surely to make all of these cars just museum pieces any sooner then they are already headed towards.

I have a C8AE adapter with a spring 67 date code. My 67 GT500 has a May 67 build date.

Interesting however for those reading that does not automatically mean that C8AE part in this case came on a 67 production car.

Yes, but the point is, it doesn't mean that it could not have. Particularly if the scenario was that the C8 parts got put in the assembly bins with the C0's.

The date code on this one is suggestive of something of that order.

And my point is for others reading is to not automatically assume your extra ordinary claim would be correct for their 67 GT500. The anything is possible justification is typically a way to explain away a wrong part. Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary proof.

The date code on the part existed before the car was built. Why do you presume that it was not in the normal parts availability to build the engine?

Because the examples of what you are insisting which are next year 1968 parts on previous 1967 year cars are extraordinarily rare for any part on a 67 regular production Mustang. Consequently it is not unreasonable to presume that it was a anomaly as a production part and not typical. If you found this on your car it may have already been changed on your engine previously. That is if you are saying it was on your car from the factory and not a early dated part you found in your parts bin. Given the many questions about your car and it's engine components I have answered for you over the years I have gotten the impression that your engine is a typical 67 GT500 that has had parts replaced over time for whatever reason and not a untouched one.

I wasn't asking you to answer anything.

I was stating that this one exists and likely isn't the only one.

You viewsa are narrow and inflexible and I would not expect that to change regardless of how you attempt to reverse the tables or the subject.

What you see as typical is only your perspective.

I have a C8AE adapter with a spring 67 date code. My 67 GT500 has a May 67 build date.

Interesting however for those reading that does not automatically mean that C8AE part in this case came on a 67 production car.

Yes, but the point is, it doesn't mean that it could not have. Particularly if the scenario was that the C8 parts got put in the assembly bins with the C0's.

The date code on this one is suggestive of something of that order.

And my point is for others reading is to not automatically assume your extra ordinary claim would be correct for their 67 GT500. The anything is possible justification is typically a way to explain away a wrong part. Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary proof.

The date code on the part existed before the car was built. Why do you presume that it was not in the normal parts availability to build the engine?

I have a C8AE adapter with a spring 67 date code. My 67 GT500 has a May 67 build date.

Interesting however for those reading that does not automatically mean that C8AE part in this case came on a 67 production car.

Yes, but the point is, it doesn't mean that it could not have. Particularly if the scenario was that the C8 parts got put in the assembly bins with the C0's.

The date code on this one is suggestive of something of that order.

 The story is in syndication and it repeats on late night cable channels.

I have seen it many times.

I have a C8AE adapter with a spring 67 date code. My 67 GT500 has a June 67 build date.