Messages

This is a coil spring chassis?

I can't say exactly because it depends on the wheel and the width of the rear housing.

I also do not know if the dimensions vary from the convertible to the fastback?

On my '68 GT350 fastback, a 235-60-15 will fit with no issue in the front on a Shelby 15" ten spoke wheel.

On the rear a 275-60-15 will fit but may need you to roll the fender lip? That would be with a stock Mustang rear and a Shelby 15" 10 spoke.


On the rear, you can gain 2" total clearance (1" each side) if you use a Lincoln /Versalles rear and then you can fit a 295-50-15. The Lincoln is a 9" pumpkin, 2" narrower then the Mustnag pumpkin, flange to flange but the mounting points of the springs are the same.


How the wheel offsets change things and the variations in tire dimensions vary with wheel od size, I simply don't know and likely you won't know either until you screw around with various combinations.

I remember "Hank the Crank" rather then the "Crankshaft Company", but automobile manufacturers being what they are, don't use the term "theft of design", they refer to it as "modelling".

There is likely nothing that was not available to "qualified racers" through Ford's "XE Indy Program". Just not available to you and me whereas even as an 18 year old I could walk into a Chevy dealers parts department and buy a race ready engine immediately.

I do remember 327 four bolt short blocks being $325.


Supposedly "the Deuce" was disappointed that there was no increase in Ford vehicle sales considering the vast sum that he personally had invested in racing. However, maybe if these parts were available to an 18 year old like me, even though I was still wearing sneakers, the investment might have paid off?

From what I personally have seen with XE parts, they were second to none and frankly still are. Which is why some of us still hunt for them.


Unlike those forgings, my Joe Nameth white leather Pumas have not survived the years. Just as well. I likely would just be embarrassing my wife and sons by wearing those? Not to speak of the white Levis?

I do remember having a Joe Namath "foo Manchu" for about a week. I got disgusted in that most never noticed it because it was so light colored.

I'll stick with XE parts. Those still have real value.


Wasn't the crank in the GT40's an XE forging and mated to a four bolt block? The Boss 302 used initially a C8FE block of which the original casting was out of the "Indy Program".

Interesting device. It isn't a mechanical FI and yet to be an electronic FI it would need the ability to vary the fuel by demand.

How can you do that without a CPU or at least an oxygen sensor?

On mechanical system of the time, you "changed the pill". That was essentially a fuel jet. I don't remember electronic injectors in that time frame?

Conelec only built less then half a dozen of these? Was it his hobby?

With ports like those, that can't be just a regular production Ford intake? What is it?

Roy:

That Shelby script intake is a 289 or a B2 intake? Got better pics of it?

Doug, it is a Boss 302 one. Heres a few pictures. Far right Is the shelby intake.Then next to that is a Boss 302 2x4 for regular Holleys? And then the dual dominator and then an Nos Transam intake and then over the counter 2x4 intake for a 289.

     Roy

Thanks for posting. I discussed that B2 with Randy when one came up for sale and he said that it just didn't work on the B2 like it did on the Windsor heads.
Something about the rear carb being mounted too far back?

That's fine since it saved me $3,500.

Roy,
Since I am just finishing up an engine with this set up on it for someone else, I'm tempted to buy it. Yes the linkage for T/A would not have the slotted secondary and would be 1:1 between the carburetors. NOT between the primary and secondary sides of the carburetor. But then again these carbs are vacuum secondary units.

I'm modifying the actual carburetor shaft linkage to give a predictable progressive arrangement copied from my SK carburetors using the shafts from a 660 center squirter type arrangement.

John

Would those secondary throttle levers be applicable to any engine running that set up or are the opening points decided by what gear the car is in and what the primary throttle position is at that point? In other words "only track applicable"?

I find it difficulty to believe that the 660's with mechanical secondaries would or could be very streetable ALTHOUGH I have found that the '65 427 carbs work very well on this manifold on the street.

Currently I'm running a matched pair of 1850's with the primaries converted to annular and the secondaries to downlegs.


Incidentally, I did run what Randy was calling "the turd" that was port matched and is a very streetable and responsive set up. So no one will ever convince me that a 2x4 Holley on a small block isn't worth the efforts, but then again, you guys are racing with this. I'm just a street/open track guy.

Roy:

That Shelby script intake is a 289 or a B2 intake? Got better pics of it?

ShelbyDoug,
Those are not 660 center squirter carburetors, they are 450 CFM mechanical secondary carburetors, that I removed the link style throttle linkage from and installed a set of the 4224 660 linkage with the "cam" on the primary shaft side modified to allow the primary and secondary shafts to be progressive in nature. By changing the shape of the cam you can control the opening points of the secondaries and the opening rate as well. They are not 1:1.


John

Those look like the secondary throttle levers that Randy showed me for the 660's. So I presumed that is what they were?

Running those for me would be entirely too complicated. I'll stay with what I have and for the most part understand but thanks for posting. The entire set up and variations are still fascinating to me.

It is going to take some time for me to loose interest and stop talking about them.

Roy,
Since I am just finishing up an engine with this set up on it for someone else, I'm tempted to buy it. Yes the linkage for T/A would not have the slotted secondary and would be 1:1 between the carburetors. NOT between the primary and secondary sides of the carburetor. But then again these carbs are vacuum secondary units.

I'm modifying the actual carburetor shaft linkage to give a predictable progressive arrangement copied from my SK carburetors using the shafts from a 660 center squirter type arrangement.

John

Would those secondary throttle levers be applicable to any engine running that set up or are the opening points decided by what gear the car is in and what the primary throttle position is at that point? In other words "only track applicable"?

I find it difficulty to believe that the 660's with mechanical secondaries would or could be very streetable ALTHOUGH I have found that the '65 427 carbs work very well on this manifold on the street.

Currently I'm running a matched pair of 1850's with the primaries converted to annular and the secondaries to downlegs.


Incidentally, I did run what Randy was calling "the turd" that was port matched and is a very streetable and responsive set up. So no one will ever convince me that a 2x4 Holley on a small block isn't worth the efforts, but then again, you guys are racing with this. I'm just a street/open track guy.

Roy:

That Shelby script intake is a 289 or a B2 intake? Got better pics of it?

time for shelby doug to show him how to do it right ;

No one listens to me but it is nice to know that someone who knows something noticed mine. 


Admittedly, it is difficult to ignore the headers. The stacks sometimes are and the A3 race heads virtually never noticed with their high exhaust ports.

"They have ears yet not hear. They have eyes yet not see". "Same as it ever was?". 


I actually like the '68 Mustang Trans-Am brakes on the car with the big Lincoln calipers and rotors. Who is this Wilber Wood brake guy and isn't Brembo some kind of Gellato?

The original cross mount rear muffler has been called an RPM limiter. Restriction is thought to be noticeable in the 5,000 to 5,500 rpm range.

The main culpret is thought to be the 90° turns into and out of the muffler not to mention the original od dimension of the pipes is 2".

It does also depend on exactly what you are welding.

A 351w right side exhaust manifold, cracked between #1 and #2 cracks because the casting is too thin. That one is difficult to do because of that.

By the same token, welding a crack through a main web casting in a block is much easier but what caused those cracks also twisted the block and the heat of the weld will just emphasize that, so squaring the block as well as line boring it are going to be necessary and although I have seen 427 Ford blocks repaired in this way and run hard, you need to consider it to be on "borrowed time".

Saving a block worthy of just a boat anchor instead of replacing it with a new $5,000 block is the encouragement but it is going to cost you that is time to "save it" with little or no guaranty.

I have done cast iron with 304 stainless electrodes. It didn't matter if the iron was preheated or not. Cast iron alloys vary. This was for Ford castings.

Most seem to be nodular iron.

https://www.summitracing.com/search/make/ford/model/mustang/year/1967?keyword=flowmaster%20exhaust%20kit%20for&ar=1&kr=flowmaster%20exhaust%20kit%20for%2067%20mustang

These have a nice sporty rumble to them but are made to mate up to headers.

Great articles, all.

As I recall, at some point, Shelby had Gurney driving "the rabbit". It was thought to have been a 325ci.

It was used to over stress the competition by being unrealistically fast and was not expected to finish the race.

Although I have seen those pictures of the offset connecting rod caps, I believe that it was small block Chevy connecting rods that were being used at least at some point in the developement.

The Boss 302 heads were intended to solve the issue of intake restrictions on the 289 heads.

The intake flow numbers as stated are really the hp restrictions with the 289 head flowing stock around 180cfm, race ported about 220.

The GT40 heads something like 240cfm and the stock B302 around 250cfm.


Current aftermarket heads for the inline valves are showing around 300cfm on the intakes and complimentary exhaust numbers.

A couple of years ago, a member here, built a 325 with AFR heads, a .528" solid lifter cam, a single Cobra intake, tri-y headers and a 715 carb and it dynoed right at 425hp.

Several involved in that build thought there was more power to be had there with better cam selection and maybe a better exhaust design that would bring it closer to 500hp?

So the thought of more power by larger displacements on the SB Ford has been kicking around for decades and you can make significantly more with modern tech.

Using old tech will result in old numbers since there is no hidden magic in the old castings.