Messages

4 leaf, see page 32 of 77 https://springresearch.org/pdf/volume_17.pdf

Virginia Mustang used to sell springs that looked like the originals with the rounded ends. I forget the name of the place they were sourced from but maybe Brant will see this and remember, it wasn't Eaton. I spoke with the manufacturer and they were built to 42-437 spec which was the most generic. I have a friend who owns a spring shop and de-arched them for me.

Plus a Shelby on a trailer

The few I have of 69/70 cars

I looked at an early unmolested 65 K about 25years ago and I recall the attachment point on the frame being more forward than what is normally seen on 65 and 66 cars. If you don't see it in the normal place, it may be further up the frame toward the axle.

At the time I didn't know about the Arvinode system so I didn't pay much attention to rest of the exhaust.

These guys make a concours reproduction system and the rear seat hangers look to be different and maybe mounted more inboard. https://waldronexhaust.com/product/1965-69-ford-mustang-concours-model-arvinode-dual-exhaust/

There is also this MotorTrend article with a picture Charles Turner provided from a system he removed. Try reaching out to see if he can shed any more light on what to look for https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/mump-0907-arvinode-dual-exhaust-1965-hi-po-289-engine

Good luck

but the first most glaring issue is that in the O.P.'s original posting the .522" dimension as this isn't so typical

         

100% this ^


FWIW, the Crane teflon seals I installed in 1986 are still functioning flawlessly today. That includes every type of driving from SAAC open track days to just driving around around town.

Boss has definitely been machined. I used Crane 99820 but that was almost 40 years ago. Not available at Summit but has the specs you're looking for https://www.summitracing.com/parts/crn-99820-16

Some on EBay https://www.ebay.com/itm/306185233774

Never heard of this claim before outside of R models. Have I been living in an alternate universe?

https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1966-ford-mustang-827/?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_2648441


"Going from memory here on the GT 350...full bench breakdown, standard bores honed, stock pistons retained but with different ring gap, more precise head efforts on the valves, springs, and seats. Crank polished and balanced and different cam grind. Probably more but I would have to study data."

Hmmm  https://hipo-mustang.com/thread/7131-6r09k130238-engine-block-found/?postID=56038#post56038

I replaced one about 5 years ago. If I remember correctly, it was the Chrysler pierce nut https://www.amkproducts.com/bulk-fasteners-listing/?codeforlookup=7135

Just wait until some day when you're cruising around 50 mph and the locker locks. You'll think you snapped an axle but you didn't.

Another casting difference is the distance between the red lines. HiPo carbs have less material to prevent interference with choke hardware.  Some fakes cut it back and some don't. Either would still have witness marks from being filled.

Dave,

I have a set I got from Brant a few years ago that I didn't use. Sent you a pm

Steve-

Previous thread with approximate date they started showing up on 66 cars and who made some spares https://www.saacforum.com/index.php?topic=14478.msg119138#msg119138

Those are not HiPo rods and someone went through the trouble of doing a poor polish job on the rear crank journal and adding a fake Brinnell hardness mark among other things. Original cranks were hardness tested by inspecting the grain structure of the iron with a special optical tool. This explains the idea of what they were looking at in the polished area https://old.foundrygate.com/upload/artigos/Nodule%20Count%20-%20Why%20and%20How!.pdf

327 Corvettes were using that design in the mid 60's. The belief is that it helped balance airflow https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/can-a-chevy-guru-explain-this-intake.993035/