Skip Navigation Links.
 |  Oil Pan For 428CJ Cougar -- David Shelton, 12/29/2001
I need to change the oil pan on my 1969 428CJ Cougar. Anyone have any recommendations if I should just get another stock pan or an aftermarket oil pan with more capacity? What replacement pans are good? Any ideas anc comments would be appreciated. |
|  | RE: Oil Pan For 428CJ Cougar -- Royce Peterson, 12/29/2001
Your Ford dealer carries a stock replacement, it is chromed and sold in the Ford Racing Performance Parts (FRPP) catalog.
Moroso and Milodon sell deep 7 quart pans. They hang a bit too low for street use in my opinion.
Milodon also sells a stock replacement pan that is gold irridite finished.
The Cobra 6 1/2 quart "T" shaped aluminum pan is available from any Mustang / Cougar parts dealer. It's a bit pricey at $300.00 but works well for street use.
I recommend one of the stock pans personally. The Moroso and Milodon units are available through ant performance parts dealer like Summit, Jegs etc.
Royce Peterson |
|  | RE: Oil Pan For 428CJ Cougar -- Tim B, 12/29/2001
Make sure you get one for a Mustang/Cougar that has the "dimples" in the pan to clear the tie rods. The Galaxie ones won't clear. I got a painted blue pan from Hilltop Classics in Escondido CA. Mansfield Mustang has them also. Check around for any BB Mustang/Cougar specialists.......prices vary :-)
From what I've learned as long as you have the windage tray and aren't doing a lot of racing and use 6 quarts of oil, a stock pan is fine.
Tim B
1969 XR7 428 CJR convertible
http://members.aol.com/timbrands/index.html |
| Net 54 where are you?...Ough Ough.. -- kevin, 12/29/2001
Sorry, could not resist for those old enough to remember Fred Gwynn and whatever his partner's name was on the show years ago. I have been informed that the site is not available so I wondered if anyone else is receiving it. A note to Royce, yes that Cougar has the wheels that you asked about, but the owner does not seem to ever be there. I believe his name is Robert Mulkey but am not positive. There are an awful lot of cars there and are covered with years of dust. I have been informed that he has many more that are not visable and hope to catch him someday. |
| | Cougar GTE -- Royce Peterson, 12/29/2001
Kevin,
Did you get the VIN from the windshield tag?
Thanks,
Royce Peterson |
| | | RE: Cougar GTE -- kevin, 12/29/2001
Its in a showroom, along with other high end cars and it has an XR-7 emblem on it and a "not for sale" sign. I have not seen one for so long that I cant remember if they are XR-7's or not. It says 7.0 and has the right scoop, black interior, and it's medium dark blue. 25 years ago, I had a neighbor that moved to Garland and I lost track of him. His name was Bob Whitehead and I did some work for him on a 454 with EDC heads (sold them to him I think, been too long) along with tri power and long cast headers for his 61 Starliner. It was white with red interior and had Keystones on it. I am curious as if you ever saw it at any shows or Ford events? As a side note I have been sick in bed and watching a lot of tv and just saw a movie with Frank Sinatra as a detective and Jill St John (whew!) and his name along with the show was "Tony Rome" In it he drove a 61 Sunliner, and another gal had a 67 Cougar. Damn good show that i'm surprised I had never seen before. |
|  | RE: Net 54 where are you?...Ough Ough.. -- Tim B, 12/29/2001
I was a little kid when that was on! Pre Munsters I think.
54 has been having a lot of trouble lately. I can only access it occassionally.
Tim B |
| | | RE: Net 54 where are you?...Ough Ough.. -- kevin, 12/29/2001
I cant remember that guys name (I think Joe something) but he was also on another comedy with Imogene Coca called "It's About Time" as an astronaut that landed on earth that went through a time warp and came down in the age of dinosaurs. It was hilarious! |
| | | | RE: Net 54 where are you?...Ough Ough.. -- Tim B, 12/29/2001
I looked it up, it's Joe E. Ross.
http
://www.members.home.net/csmiths/car54/cast.html
Tim B |
| | | | | RE: Net 54 where are you?...Ough Ough.. -- Travis Miller, 12/29/2001
The show names of the officers that rode in "Car 54" were Francis Muldune and Gunther Toody. Anyone remember the theme song?
"There's a holdup in the Bronx, Brooklyn's broken out in fights.
There's a traffic jam in Harlem thats backed up to Jackson Heights.
There's a scout troop short a child, Kruschev's due at Idlewild.
Car 54 where are you?"
|
| Is it an "S", "P" or "Q" Code?? -- Bob, 12/29/2001
Why is it that the only engine I seem to find conflicting info on is the 428PI I have in my 68 Shelby? My door data tag states it is an "S" code, this FOMOCO info pages state that it is a "Q" and I've read many places where it is said to be a "P". Why all this confusion? Most information I find says that an "S" code is 390 except in a Shelby?? I don't see this type of confusion with say the 428cj engine. Maybe they were smoking some of that left-handed high performance stuff?? Maybe I need to try some of that to understand all of this? |
| | It's an "S". -- Dave Shoe, 12/29/2001
In both 1967 and 1968, Ford used the "S" designation in the VIN of Shelby Mustangs, apparently because there was no protocol established for installing a 428 into the car.
The GT-500s were apparently built up as 390 Mustangs, except when it came time to drop in the engine, as an adapted 428PI engine went in instead.
When the 428CJ came out, Ford had a full set of assembly plans for dropping the engine package into the Mustang, and these carried over to the Shelby without a fuss.
The Shelby American Registry details this the best. It's a $120-or-so phonebook sized publication which gets revised every few years, and it details the known history of every Shelby serial number ever made, including options and owners names. You will find the data summaries exceptional, assuming you are the type of person who digs data summaries in the first place.
Shoe. |
| | | No "S" in 67 vin's Dave... -- kevin, 12/30/2001
not if its a Shelby. I have had S code 390 Mustangs though presented for sale as Shelby's, even with all the right stuff on them and it was hard to tell when a knowledgable shyster knew what he was doing. This was long ago and would be hard to do today of course. There was always one sure fire way to tell at a glance if it was a fake. I would look behind the front spring eye for the unique to 67 "hopper stoppers" that were cast w/C7ZX base and were nothing more than a pinion snubber. These were never offered as a replacement when just about everything else was. Naturally this did not make me a very popular person with the seller or person at car shows trying to pass it off as genuine. I am not a member of SAAC as I like my privacy and remember when a person (name withheld) absconded with everybody's money from the original club, (not SAAC) kind of like when Arntz took off to Brazil with Millions of dollars in orders for the first kit car Cobra and left a bad taste in everybody's mouth. The 67 has the hardest research capabilities as records are virtually non-existant. I am looking forward to the day when I can start posting pictures, as one of them will be of a friend's supercharged Medium Riser 67 GT-500 with Paxton blower, ordered right from Holman-Moody brand new. This car was stripped of engine and wheels when overseas and waiting up on blocks from a return of overseas tour of duty right on the docks of the base. |
| | | | RE: No "S" in 67 vin's Dave... -- Chip Huffman, 12/30/2001
Kevin,
Was this the Shelby's Owner Association you are referring to about the money. Can you describe a bit more in detail the 67 hopper stoppers? Is this the front coil spring you are talking about?
Chip |
| | | | | '67 cars had 'anti wind-up' bumpers at rear springs. [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/30/2001
n/m |
| | | | RE: So what is a '67 GT500 vin? -- Mike McQuesten, 12/30/2001
What is the correct engine id VIN letter for a genuine 1967, Shelby GT 500?
I am sure this is extremely common knowledge to the afficiandos of all things Carroll Shelby but not to us common(or ignorant?) folk who never took opportnity to buy a Shelby when they were available and reasonable. |
| | | | | RE: So what is a '67 GT500 vin? -- Chip Huffman, 12/30/2001
Mike,
Z6741OF4A03145 is an example of my 67 GT-500, There is another corresponding VIN under the Shelby ID plate.
The engine tag reads:
428 67 3
7 E 404 AO1
Maybe someone can decipher these codes for us.
This GT-500 was made very near the end of the 67 production. Sold at Koons Ford in Falls Church, VA for $5375. The salesman was Ralph Wooten, who at last I knew had sold more Fords than anyone period. It was somewhere around 12,000+ cars.
|
| | | | | | RE: So what is a '67 GT500 vin? -- Mike McQuesten, 12/31/2001
So what you're saying is that the '67 Shelby 'stangs got their own brand new VIN? Because what you're providing there Z6741 etc. is not at all a "normal" FoMoCo production VIN. And underneath the Shelby plate is a Ford number? I have a hunch the Ford number may have the letter -S- 5th unit in....
This is probably all old stuff to Shelby experts. I'm kind of embarassed that I don't know but like I've said before, I keep a learnin' and an open mind. I was actually there in those days but we didn't give a damn about any serial numbers & VINs. It was a Shelby and there was no need for checking numbers. But I understand why it's important to have the documentation now.
The closest I've ever come to owning a Shelby......I have a genuine '67 GT 500 Shelby aluminum wheel bolted on the wall of my shop. It's purpose? It's my compressor air hose holder of course! Like there could be something else I could be doing with it! Don't get pissed. It was run into a curb many years ago by a friend. He had a lime gold GT 500/automatic. He was drunk and hit a curb. This was in the early '70s. He replaced with another (probably a Cragar SS!) and had this one I have stashed. Gave it to me one day to take to a swap meet. I kept it in the cab of the F100. Couldn't sell it......
Nice conversation hose holder. |
| | | | | | | No "S" under the plate either Mike... -- kevin, 12/31/2001
in fact, the #'s are truly unique. Chip you must have an out board car too. Yours a ten spoke? And dont believe the story about the only one's having lights on the upper scoops stopping at #200, it's not true. There are differences in many features throughout the car's accessories that are amazing. Remember that this was the time that Shelby was fed up with all the crap he had to put up with and made many deals with suppliers to get them out the door |
| | | | | | | | Shelbys Lessons -- Chip Huffman, 12/31/2001
The many years that I have been involved in the hobby has taught me to never say they only came this way. Some people have a problem with this as they are not aware that Shelby used what was available to manufacture the cars. For example, my car has the smooth vinyl seats with the rest of the car having the GT type interior, I have only seen a handful of 67 cars like this. Most have a version of the comfort weave seat material. It does have outboard high beam headlights as indicated by the Z apparently hand stamped into the Shelby ID plate. The wheels are Kelsey Hayes Magstars. The spare tire is a unused Goodyear Speedway 350. I have owned it since September of 77. It does have the proper 428 with a C6 auto. I changed the rear gear 3.25 pumpkin with a N case 3.91 Traction Loc from a totaled Boss 302. This really made a difference, woke the beast.
Chip |
| | RE: Is it an "S", "P" or "Q" Code?? -- Royce Peterson, 12/29/2001
Bob,
The 68 GT500 Shelbys started life as "S" code 390 Mustangs making the conversion to a 428 PI motor easier. Shelby used "S" as the engine code for the 428 PI motor. Some even came down the line and never had a 428 installed according to SAAC, being delivered with a 390GT engine.
Shelbys are confusing enough without added ingredients.
Royce Peterson
|
| | | "S" as in 8T02S149561-01854 -- Chip Huffman, 12/29/2001
You guys got me thinking and I looked up the s/n from my first Shelby. It was red w/ black interior, 4 speed had 98,000 miles on it. My grandfather who was 75 at the time could not believe I paid $3000 for a car with 98,000 miles, I was 17. I only wish I had bought about a dozen or so of those $3000-4000 Shelbys for sale at the time, I'd be in tall cotton now!
Chip |
| | RE: Is it an "S", "P" or "Q" Code?? -- Steven Locher, 01/03/2002
All 1967 GT500's engine code (fifth digit), in the Ford Vin # Located under the Shelby Vin Tag rivited to the Drivers front inner fender should have a "Q" engine code. All 1968 Shelby's Vin #'s incorporated the Ford Vin and then ended in - (Shelby #) For example see Chips old # 8T02S149561-01854. All GT500's should have an "S" in the fifth digit and all GT500KR (428CJ) should have an "R".
Steve |
| | | Ford's database claims the 1967s are "S" code -- Dave Shoe, 01/04/2002
According to Kevin Marti's book, which is a compilation of Ford database numbers which he is licensed to use, there were 1376 Shelby 428 wide-ratio 4-speeds marked with an "S" engine code and "5" tranny code, and 672 428 Shelby C6 cars marked with an "S" engine code and a "U" tranny code.
Dunno whether 1376 actually got the wide-ratio trannys, but that's what the database seems to indicate.
I know one of you folks out there has a '67 GT-500 in their garage.
Shoe. |
| | | | RE: Ford's database claims the 1967s are "S" code -- Steven Locher, 01/04/2002
According to the Shelby Registry, which I tend to believe since they have all the original Shelby/Ford paperwork on all 1967 Shelby's, all GT500's were "Q" codes. I have owned two Shelby's, including the one I currently own & have numerous friends with GT500's and have attended several national conventions and have never seen a 1967 GT500 with an "S" engine code in their ford VIN. The only real way to get a definitive answer would be to contact the 67 Shelby Registrar at: 67registrar@saac.com and have him verify it. He has all 67 Shelby & corresponding Ford Vin #s on file.
Steve |
| | | |  | RE: Ford's database claims the 1967s are "S" code -- Kevin Marti, 01/04/2002
This is a common confusion because of a lack of understanding about standard Ford production methods. For each car line, the engineering department determines and the data processing department codes what engines will be available for the car line at the beginning of the model year. In the case of the Mustang, the 428PI engine was not available for that car, although it was an available engine for other car lines. In order to produce a Mustang (Shelby) with a 428PI engine, a DSO (Domestic Special Order) had to be written.
Quoting from the Ford Automotive Assembly Division Data Processing Manual for 1967, "Special Order Number Note: When these columns (the DSO) are punched, there must be a punch in column 80. When the special equipment specified on a DSO or FSO is one of the basic items, i.e. series, body and/or engine, the item will be punched..."
What this means is since the P or Q engine was not available for the Mustang under ordinary conditions, a DSO had to be generated. This DSO was about 11 pages long and contained notes about what items to delete (in this case the 390 engine amongst a host of other items like the front fenders and hood) and what items to add (amongst them the 428PI engine). Since the column for the engine (column 5 of the IBM punch card) must be punched with something, they made a decision to put the nearest appropriate engine code (an S) in this place. It is a place holder required by the programming system. It means nothing other than that. Whenever there is a DSO, it superseded all other punches for production.
Once the order arrived at the assembly plant (in this case San Jose), the assembly plant manager made a decision to insert the "Q" in the serial number to be stamped into the fender aprons. Since this operation was performed manually, it would not be prohibited by the system. But note that the actual motors installed were not even Q motors, but P motors.
I hope this gives a little insight into why things were the way they were.
Kevin Marti
www.martiauto.com
|
| | | | | No "Z" or "S" or "Q" in my fenders or data plate.. -- kevin, 01/04/2002
It is simply stamped 67400F9A0** on both fenders and the plate and it is a close ratio with 31 spline's w/411 Detroit Locker. It does have the comfort weave seats and I know the Dealer, salesman who sold it, the original buyer and me. I also know all the Shelby's and Cobra's from the dealership and the owners who bought them and who bought them after that. I've lost track these last years and dont care anymore! I was never interested in correct part number cars cause that did not mean squat at the track. I have put 3 "R" code Fairlanes and Galaxies on the circle tracks before and am going to do it again starting later this year, along with a "R" code Mustang. I took my Shelby to the first SAAC show in the 70's and someone pried the emblem off the rear as I was standing in the front talking to Jim Cowles. I dont care if anyone ever sees my car again or not, for the damn thing is for my pleasure. I've done enough of the show biz with other vehicles and it is in one word, BORING. There are enough original examples out there so I just dont care. Maybe I sound jaded, but after all i've been through I reserve that right. Besides how many FE powered circle track racers are left in the country? I know how to make em run, live, and be competitive, and this year i'm going to be trying some revolutionary things that have not been done before with an FE. I may introduce a couple of ideas that are worthy of patents (if its practical) and will not share until proven in battle. |
| | | | | | RE: No "Z" or "S" or "Q" in my fenders or data plate.. -- Steven Locher, 01/04/2002
This Shelby Vin # you have referred to should be stamped in the "Shelby VIN Tag" on the drivers inner fender and on the Passenger shock tower inner fender. The Ford Vin # Should be located under the Shelby Vin Tag on the Drivers inner fender and under the fender lip on the passenger fender. Only the Shelby Vin's are visible when the hood is up. You would have to remove the Tag or unbolt the passenger fender and lift up to reveal the ford Vin. If you look you should find a Ford VIN that starts with "7R02Q**"
Steve |
| | | | | | | RE: No "Z" or "S" or "Q" in my fenders or data plate.. -- kevin, 01/05/2002
With both fenders off, there is only what I described on both sides, period. |
| | | | | | | | RE: No "Z" or "S" or "Q" in my fenders or data plate.. -- Steven Locher, 01/05/2002
The Ford #'s Should and Would of had to be there at the time it left the ford factory in San Jose & was sent to Shelby American. What happened to them since then is anybodys guess??
Steve |
| | | | | | | | | RE: No "Z" or "S" or "Q" in my fenders or data plate.. -- Joe P, 01/05/2002
Kevin,if you checked both sides of the inner fender panels one last resort is to check the FORD vin stamped on your 4spd transmission than contact the SHELBY REGISTRY so they can verify it. I also own a 67 GT-500 4spd car i bought it back in 1983 restored it got tired of car shows yanked the 428 PI , rebuilt a 428cj installed a 430 geared Detroit Locker rear end and have a blast tearing up the backroads! |
| | | | | | | | | | Verify what?..The trans is original.. -- kevin, 01/05/2002
I saw the car new, its not the only one I've had in my garage either. The other one was the same way,(#3,000+ as opposed to #2,000+), identical, other than color. You should have seen people about to break their neck when they drove by and saw two outboard cars side by side. I have many friends with them too. One of them has an early one (inboard, side markers, non comfort weave) and our keys unlock and start each others up! This is over 30 years of fun and worry and none of them are in the Registry for a reason. I guess when you've had enough stolen it gives you a mindset of paranoia, oh well. Hell I put my Winchester in someones face that was trying to break in and made him beg. Thats how I feel and I would have just as soon squeezed the trigger believe you me, and if nobody would have been able to hear it the world would be a better place without someone like that. He ended up in prison like his dad for life anyway. I have a ring of trusted friends and we all look out for each other like this and know who's who in the zoo. Look at that poor guy from DesMoines that had his swiped at the Tulsa meet this year. If it is not secure there, than where is it besides locked up where theifs dont know where it is. That stupid movie only made it worse, now every frickin gangbanger thinks it's a challenge or something to be the driver of "Eleanor", (dumb), I rest my case, and apologize for the rant, but I've been carrying the FE torch for years, like others here. |
| | | | | | RE: Glad I'm not the only one, Kevin! -- Rich Kutzner, 01/05/2002
Glad to hear there are other Shelby owners who want to beat them as ol' Carroll intended. This was one long exchange when what it comes down to is if you own the car that matches the title that matches the SAAC World Registry then you got the car. Now ENJOY it! Drive it, race it, beat it, park it in the parking lot at the car shows and go look at all those nice restored originals, then check out the crowd when you return! God only gave me one life and I'm gonna drive my Candyapple KR til he takes me home...........the next guy can take the parts in the attic and show it if he wants! And Mr. Marti, thanks for the free info, I'm always willing to learn more about Ford history...especially Mustangs! |
| | | | | | | Thanks Rich! you know how I feel... -- kevin, 01/05/2002
hell, everybody said I would be buried with it, or it would bury me. I do have a child that will get it someday, she just got her license and thinks she should have it NOW, LOL. No hurry on my part you can bet. I have always wanted her to race and have made her drive as long as she was able to grab a wheel. It was funny seeing a child driving a F-350 and learning to back that sucker into field access openings in the snow and trying to shift. I've got a nice 68 for her comverted to Trans Am specs that I just need to install the cage first. I'ts a scarry thought to let her go but she has been to racetracks all over the country and has seen what can happen if your not careful or unlucky. Im only trying to give her the mindset to not let some boy talk her into driving it so she is going to have to do the sanding and a lot of detail work to make her appreciate how much work this stuff really is. Like I say, if you want to look at a trailor queen, you might as well invest in art or sculptures or something else, cause they were built as cars, and to be driven. |
| | | | | | | | I got twice the problem ! -- Rich Kutzner, 01/06/2002
You're lucky, I got two girls who love the car. I think that is going to cost me the $ for a second one. Of course, that will be after they take my license from me when I'm 97 or so...................... |
| Numbers on my 427 -- Sonny Murphy, 12/29/2001
Hi Fellas!
I have a beautiful and nearly all original 427 w/2-4 barrel carbs for sale and it has less than 5000 miles since new, (was in an old show car,). However, I have checked the numbers on the carbs and heads and these match. I would like to know where I can get the numbers off the block because I want to be able to tell the person who might be interested in it exactly what it is. I do not want to BS anybody, I am VERY sure about the history of this engine 'cause I knew the guy who built the show car, but I can't find the dang numbers! Can ya help?
Thanks in advance, and Happy New Year!
Sonny |
| | RE: Numbers on my 427 -- Mac, 12/29/2001
how much for it and is it a high riser or what? |
| | | RE: Numbers on my 427 -- Sonny, 12/29/2001
> how much for it and is it a high riser or what?
HI Mac,
It is advertised on this site, but I'm asking $6,500.00. I know it may seem like a lot but this one is super complete. It is almost a drop in for any Ford. Every bracket, pulley, linkage, fuel log, lines, etc.. The starter and original Autolite alternator with the chrome brackets are even on it!
Oh, it's a low riser, just right for a Cobra. In fact it has all the Cobra accessories already!
Thanks for your response Mac, Happy New Year!
Sonny |
| | RE: Numbers on my 427 -- Bob, 12/29/2001
The casting date is under the oil filter adapter pad. On some blocks there is a casting number on the passenger side of the engine blow and to the front of the front freeze plug. There usually are some thing cast into the bellhousing area. |
| | | RE: Numbers on my 427 -- Sonny, 12/29/2001
HI Bob,
Thanks for the response! I'm gonna check her out as soon as I can get to the garage, just about 7 feet of snow between the house and garage! I'm in Buffalo, but if you saw this mess you would think I was in the Alps!
Thanks again Bob, and Happy New Year!!
Sonny
|
| 427 Cammer -- Bill Malone, 12/29/2001
Does anyone know how many units were produced? I know they were not put in production vehicles, but distributed to race teams and drag racers. I am trying to get the total number to determine how rare they are.
Also, how about parts availability. I have a chance to buy one but a little uncertain whether I would be able to find replacement parts.
Thanks,
Bill |
| | RE: 427 Cammer -- Mac, 12/29/2001
i belive very few were put in cars |
| | RE: 427 Cammer -- Bill Conley, 12/29/2001
Hi Bill,
Dave Shoe has a lot of specific info on cammer production, and he is the moderator of this forum. Here is what I have concluded (Dave- straighten me out if needed!):
The first 50 engines built in late '64/early '65 were high compression (12.5:1) race engines meant for NASCAR development. Most or all of them had aluminum heads. After NASCAR put the kabosh on the cammer, Ford decided to build a bunch of iron-head cammers for drag racing and over-the-counter sales. What most people don't know is that these engines had a lower compression ratio- around 10.5:1 - 11.0:1. My untouched original engine cc'd out to 10.7:1 with the original TRW slugs.
There was certainly at least one batch of 250 complete engines produced in late '65. There was very likely a second batch of 250 built in '66. My engine appears to be from this second batch: The heads are stamped "519" and "522" which if you divide by two would indicate the beginning of the second batch. My casting dates are also correct for an early '66 build. Holman-Moody sold several dozen of these last "crate engines" when they cleared their inventory in '69. Price: $2500.00 Occasionally a virgin crate engine will still turn up...
There were also a fair number of cammer conversion kits offered by Holman-Moody. I have seen NOS bare cammer heads in the original Holman-Moody boxes. I would guess a few hundred more engines could have been built this way on standard 427 sideoiler blocks.
Having said that, most cammers were raced very hard. They also broke timing chains- which would destroy the heads. Based on conversations with guys who used to run them, I'd say close to half of the engines perished. That would leave somewhere around 300-600 healthy engines in existence (just a guess- but backed up by the number I've seen at shows across the country.)
Hope that helps. What kind of condition is the engine in? Any history? If you can pick it up for less than 17-18k you're doing very well.
As far as replacement parts, all of the bottom end stuff is easy. Rocker arms and chain drive parts can be very hard though. The best thing is to stay in touch with people who have these engines. I have collected spares for mine over the last several years. Once in a while you'll find a real enthusiast who will let stuff go "to a good home" for a reasonable price. Unfortunately there are also speculators who want the deed to your house in exchange for a cam sprocket.
If you're patient you'll find the right stuff at a fair price.
Regards,
Bill
|
| | | RE: 427 Cammer -- kevin, 12/29/2001
I too had a crate engine at one time and it cost half that. Well.. connections did help, LOL! I still have the "virgin" manual that came with it and never let anybody borrow it as I lent out a lot of manuals and literature to hundreds of people years ago to educate them and some never made it back. I have never owned a repro anything in my collection, whether it be parts or literature and am agast at what these crooks charge for anything. They ruin it for the rest of the hobbiests that otherwise would enjoy it and cant. I do remember the first Cammer's had the spark plugs going in from the bottom of the valve covers and used a different intake manifold and were not side oiler's to boot. Mickey Thompson (RIP) had about 250 or so lined up at his place at one time. Sure would have been nice to get some of those! A friend was on "Fast Eddie's" crew and had some good stories. I was in negotiations with George Montgomery to buy some stuff when he switched to Boss 9 power in the Malco Gasser Mustang but fell through. I can tell you it was quite a thrill to see him on the big end with 2 turbo's on that thing! |
| | | RE: 427 Cammer -- Bill MAlone, 12/30/2001
Hi Bill:
Thanks for the effort you put in your reply. After much searching, I found this on another FE site:
http://people.we.mediaone.net/fenatic/
"In the rush to victory Ford obliged the new seven liter displacement cap of NASCAR with the 427 production motor, introduced in 1963. Had NASCAR raised this limit or made no such restriction, Ford would have produced a larger animal, having raced stroked motors on the salt flats upwards of 483 cid. This behavior was exactly the engineering aggression that catapulted Ford's reputation and competitiveness. As would always be the case through the 60's, competition restrictions dictated 427 production designs. With the 427 cross bolted foundation and a (relatively) consistent displacement requirement, Ford set about improving the horsepower potential through head designs that incorporated increasingly larger valves, ports and intake designs that performed better than the competitions factory equipment ever would. It holds true that Ford's factory equipment for this motor was superior to any GM efforts no matter how covert or blatant, and Chryco had to rely on crossram technology to make the torque they needed, even with the Hemi engine. Tug of war with NASCAR approval over Hemi and SOHC motors in competition led to 1965's boycott by Chryco and GM's reticence incensed France who wanted diversity in the field. The eventual "acceptance" of the 427 SOHC motor by NASCAR came too late and with provisos that made it untenable, particularly since the 427 wedge was so inherently competitive. As a result of Bill France's faint heartedness, the SOHC was built in limited quantities of around a 1000, all for drag racing and non NASCAR competition use by factory backed name racers. It was the most powerful motor ever built in this fashion (by a major manufacturer for competition use). The race hemi has to take a backseat by quite a few horsepower. At the time of greatest effort by the big 3, Chevrolet produced it's greatest big block, the L-88 which produced 565 horsepower as built, and the race hemi in NASCAR trim made 600 horses in full regalia. The SOHC made 615 horsepower with a single carb. 660 or so with dual Holleys. Out of the crate, so to speak. "
1000 units as you say.
The engine runs and is installed in a kit Cobra now. I too am contructing a Cobra kit car. My original engine choice is an aluminum (Shelby) side-oiler. But, now this Cammer becomes available. The price is over 20 K.
Sure would make one heck of a Cobra, but it is probably more sensible to build the new aluminum motor. What do you think, too much money?
In fact, that would be downright frightening in a 2600 lb. car
Bill |
| | | | I remeber a story about a Cobra and Bill Cosby... -- Ed Jenkins, 12/30/2001
..... at some point in time he owned a Cobra with a 427 with dual Paxton superchargers one of 2 built called the dragon snake. The other was Carol Shelby's personal car. I have also herd that the latter still exists in running condition. Bill put out a recording about this car I belive that it was called "Bill Cosby at 200 mph" or some thing like that.
I wouldn't want to imagine a Cobra kit car with a 427 Cammer engine Crammed in. That would deffenetly be a Corvete Ciller. Imagine that engine with EFI!!
|
| | | | RE: 427 Cammer -- Bill Conley, 12/31/2001
Hi Bill-
Just got back from the East coast. There have been several SOHC cobra replicas made. ERA replicas had one on their web site but it seems to be gone. Basically you'd have to put custom foot boxes on the body because of the width of those cammer heads. You'd also have a tough time putting the engine in unless you lifted the body from the chassis. The owners of the ones I've seen have reported lots of fun though! (...and a big tire budget)
For the money I'd probably lean towards an aluminum Shelby block. The weight off the front end will make a big difference in handling. I'm putiing my cammer into a big ole' '64 Galaxie so handling isn't a priority.
Good luck on your project. Sounds like a blast!!
-Bill |
| | | | | RE: 427 Cammer -- Bill Malone, 01/01/2002
Hi Bill:
That's so funny, the one other car I was interested in building was a 64 Galaxie. Prior to starting the Cobra prioject, I was looking for a 64. By far, the best looking year. Thanks for your enthusiasm and good luck on your car.
Bill |
| | | | | | Let me know if you pick up that motor -- Bill Conley, 01/01/2002
Bill-
I've picked up plenty of technical info over the last several years. Despite its reputation as a finicky race-only engine, the cammer will run very well on the street. You just have to set it up properly.
Good luck on your tire shredder!
-Bill |
| | | | | | | RE: Let me know if you pick up that motor -- Bill Malone, 01/01/2002
Hey Bill:
I'll let you know what transpires.
Bill |
| | You guys want to guess Ford's 1966 cost per SOHC? [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/30/2001
n/m |
| | | RE: You guys want to guess Ford's 1966 cost per SOHC? [n/m] -- Mac, 12/30/2001
3k |
| | | | Nice try, Mac - too low. [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/30/2001
n/m |
| | | RE: You guys want to guess Ford's 1966 cost per SOHC? [n/m] -- Dave Shoe, 12/30/2001
I'll guess $12K-15K on unit cost (properly amortized) for the 1964 Cammers only.
I've heard it was $3K to $1.5K on the selling end for street Cammers, depending on year purchased. I've never heard any 1966-batch costs, but it's reasonable to suspect cost would be closer to $5K each in 1966, when TRW was making the pistons instead of Mickey Thompson [correction posted 20Mar02***I mistakenly confused Thompson Enterprises (M/T) with Thompson Industries (later renamed Thompson Ramo Wooldridge, Inc and later TRW, Inc.) - apparently, only TRW made Cammer pistons directly for Ford***end of correction].
The 1000 number is curious, though I suspect that was just somebody's guess. I wonder if ***TRW*** managed to get a later batch going. Date codes and serial numbers will tell, but I sorta doubt it exceeded the 550 or so that are somewhat recognized to have been made
As for the low-plug versions, there were only one or two of those first-ever prototypes made, as they didn't work much better than a 427HR. They also lacked the oil drainback provisions, and needed setscrews drilled into the aluminum heads to force down the deck sufficiently to compress the head gaskets between the cylinders. I believe the budget for this early program was about $750,000 with a three month development schedule, and the 500 street Cammers would have been budgeted over and above this.
The 2nd generation of SOHC prototype in 1964 apparently used the sideoiler block with the SOHC drainbacks, LeMans rods, and the forged steel crank which borrowed from 391FT development engineering to keep costs on track. These engines still used shim adjusters to set the valves - the 500 street Cammers which came in 1965-66 would get adjustable rockers, and the more familiar "427SOHC logo" valve covers which could fit the adjusters. These street Cammers would be used by Ford to keep political pressure on Chrysler's Hemi. It worked, as NASCAR kept the screws tight on both the Cammer and Hemi.
I believe the 1964 era NASCAR Cammers were mainly 12.0:1, and the later street Cammers were mostly 10.5:1 with a few 12.5:1 tossed in for good measure. The facts (as presented to me) are geting foggy, so I should really review the info before spouting off.
I'm trying to determine whether some of the 1966 batch was actually made in 1967, because I've seen some signs that late Cammers may have come with unusual C7AE rodcaps which look sorta like something you'd expect to see on a 429 engine. I'm still checking it out.
JMO,
Shoe. |
| | | | RE: You guys want to guess Ford's 1966 cost per SOHC? [n/m] -- Bill MAlone, 12/30/2001
$2500, over the counter, in a crate at your Ford dealer.
Bill |
| | | | | That was Ford's 'clearance' price, retail - not their cost. [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/30/2001
n/m |
| | | | Yep, Dave - you're in the ballpark. Take a swing. :-) [n/m] -- Mr F, 12/30/2001
n/m |
| | | | | RE: Yep, Dave - you're in the ballpark. Take a swing. :-) [n/m] -- Bill Conley, 12/31/2001
Here's my guess, Mr. F-
When I was at Ford engineering I got to know a guy named John Vermeersch. He told me each cammer cost Ford about $14,500 to build.
For those of you who don't know of John, he's been Ford's "Total Performance" answer man for a number of years. He installed a cammer into his '61 Starliner back in 1967- and has driven it over 130,000 miles since then. Seeing his car inspired me to find my engine and stick it into a full sized body.
Anyway, back to that $14,500 figure. Makes sense because of all the custom parts amortized over such a small number of units.
So am I close??
-Bill |
| | | | | | It's gotta be 5K. -- Dave Shoe, 12/31/2001
I vote for 5K each.
The iron heads were easier to cast than the aluminum, easier to machine, the contract volume for 1966 was apparently 250 engines so set-up fees would be less significant, and the design and tooling already paid for.
Special machining and non-producton handling made the cost of each engine come out to 5K. That's a million and a quarter to build the final batch. This also brings up the question ofwhat the 1965 batch of 250 cost, and how much tooling cost affected the build of those engines.
How did I do, and where did you find your info?
Shoe. |
| | | | | | | I bought one in 1966 -- Ted, 12/31/2001
I paid $1,900 with my garage discount for one from Copoloa Ford in Fairfield, Ct . |
| | | | | | | | Also -- Ted, 01/01/2002
A 64 Galxie XL convertible, 2x4 427with four speed was $4,200 new. You could buy a nice house for $15,000 in 1964/6 but on the other side of the coin I was making $95.00 a week and that was really good money at the time. |
| | | | | | | I think you swung low. I heard $15K-$20K each. -- Walker, 01/01/2002
actual Ford cost. |
| | | | | | | Ok - here's the answer... -- Mr F, 01/01/2002
|
I vote for 5K each. [....]
the contract volume for 1966 was apparently 250 engines so set-up fees
would be less significant, and the design and tooling already paid
for.
The stated cost I found was
$4300. Thus, the oft-reported sales price of $2K - 3K per
unit was probably a loss-leader.
Due diligence: this
figure comes from a Special Vehicle Activities' report. It was
formally presented to Ford Division's Operating Policy Committee on
July 13, 1965 - likely by the head of SVA, himself, Jacques
Passino. The report lays out all their proposed expenditures for
the 1966 model year.
I'm betting most of you aren't familiar with
SVA. Basically, they were responsible for handling Ford's
race-related programs. This means they had their fingers in lots of
pies: from engine development to race-team support to parts
procurement. SVA wrote the checks for building all
those Boss 429s, oversaw the Shelby program...they even bankrolled
the whole GT-40 effort.
So, you can see they were in a perfect position
to know exactly how much a 'cammer' cost. I have no reason to doubt
its accuracy. But its important to note that the $4300 figure (as
Shoe mentioned) probably does not reflect amortized
expenditures for tooling, R&D, etc. If it did, undoubtedly it would
be several times higher.
Hope this helps.
Mr
F |
|
| | | | RE: You guys want to guess Ford's 1966 cost per SOHC? [n/m] -- Eyes, 01/04/2002
>the later street Cammers were mostly 10.5:1 with a few 12.5:1 tossed in for good measure. <
I bought one back in the '80's that was represented as a "crate" motor w/less than 350 miles on it. It was in a '66 Mustang FB.
After spending some time talking to the father of the seller I surmise that it probably was (crate). He was a NASCAR mechanic back in those days and remembers the day they were disqualified from being run.
It didn't have the 2 X 4 setup but a single 4. Anyway it has the adjustable rockers but I would guess 12.5:1 compression. It hits hard as heck when it fires but nothing sounds quite as sweet idling through open headers.
It is on the stand in my garage as I type. Haven't heard it run in ....ooh 15 - 18 years. I tried to sell it last year but no one seemed interested in it @ 12,500.00.
Thank goodness I came to my senses and decided to keep it. Later this year I will begin work on the FB that it came out of with the intentions of putting it back in place. I'm a little worried about putting it on the street, especially with that compression ratio, but since I'm getting to be an old fart I'm as proud of what it looks like as I am at how much rubber I can pile up on the highway so I guess I'll be ok. Parts for that sucker are totally outrageous.
I too had thought of putting it in a '64 Galaxie. Must be something special about that year. LOL
If I can check anything on it for you I'd be glad to do so. I was told that the rod bolts had been changed and a NASCAR type oil pump had been put in but that was all that had been done to it from "stock". I've never checked. As I said I've had a valve cover off and it does have the adjustable rockers. I was originally told that it did not so that was a good deal there.
Again if I can check anything for you let me know.
Eyes
PS. I'm still looking for a Weber manifold for it BTW.
|
| | | | | If I had the bread, that woulda been mine. -- Dave Shoe, 01/08/2002
I've been spending waaay too much on car books these past two years. It keeps my wallet too thin.
I'd definitely have enjoyed that hunk-o-metal, had I been able to snatch it from you.
Yup, Cammers were all crate motors. Ford built 'em, boxed' em, and stacked them in the warehouse, waiting for pudgy-walleted hotrodders to show up and shed some long green at the register.
Thanks for the download on your little screamer. I do have a few questions, such as what the serial number on each of your heads are, and possibly what the "cast-in" date code on the block is (below the oil filter bracket), and also any stamped date and serial codes on the block. I don't expect you to go a running to read them. Just though I'd mention it's a curiosity I have.
Thanks,
Shoe.
|
| | | | | | RE: If I had the bread, that woulda been mine. -- Eyes, 01/08/2002
Be glad to get that info for you Dave. Will take a little time as I have to dig the motor out of the pile but I'll not forget it.
Hey I had a guy email me from Texas and offer me 5k for it. Said he would even come and pick it up at his own expense! LOL :-)
Eyes
|
| Head casting id -- er, 12/28/2001
I recently picked up heads with casting #s C6AE and 6090R. What were the original app, and what is there potential. What sort of intake is required? The exhuast crossover is in a different location to other FE heads.
|
| | RE:C6AE-Rs R good -- Mike McQuesten, 12/29/2001
These heads are good ones. They've been discussed numerous times on this forum but I know there are new readers constantly. Dave Shoe has extolled the virtues of these heads and he knows the details. What I can say from memory of Dave's posts is this: They make great pseudo Cobra Jet 428 heads, the vaunted C8OE-N. Have the CJ valves installed, 2.09-I, 1.66-E, have your machinist do some pocket port work done while he's(she's?) doing the valve work. That's about it. Oh, if you are installing these C6-Rs into a Uni body car, Fairlane, Comet, Cougar, Mustang, Montego, Torino, Cyclone.....make sure the provided bosses have been drilled/tapped to accept the correct exhaust manifolds. If the bosses haven't been drilled/tapped, go ahead and have it done since it will offer more future adaptability to these fine heads.
As for application, they saw duty on various FE powered vehicles from early '66 to ...... ? Not sure. But they're not emisson heads and that's good in my opinion. Not that working to save our environment is a bad thing either. It 's just that what we do with these heads now.... I don't think it matters too much anymore. |
| Tremec/TKO FE update -- Bob Enright, 12/28/2001
This is in a 67 GT Mustang Fastback....I had posted a few questions here on this swap & got some info on it... Well... its done. Just a few things for those who are intrested in doing this. First off, its not really just a bolt in... Well sorta. The trans goes in no problem,as long as you have the correct clutch. I opted for the input shaft shortining. Not the best choice & here is why. If you have a console this will be a real pain in the ass. It moves the trans about an inch or so foward. You have to notch the shifter hole which in itself is no big deal. However, the toploader's shifter comes through to the left closer to the driver. This unit comes up dead center. The shifter just plain old doesent work with this setup. After spending some time cursing & such I took a torch and....HE HE (just kidding). I went & found a piece of steel plate. I then took a grinding stone on a drill & shaved the front of the shifter piece that comes out of the trans. This is what was hitting the front of the console. When that was done I took the steel plate drilled & tapped it so the back half duplicated the shifter nub. Then I drilled the front of it to the same size as the lever. I used some rubber grommets & mounted the plate to the shifter nub. This placed the shifter lever back about an inch or 2. More important though it moved the lever closer to the drivers side. I then installed the stock boot. I couldent bolt it to the floor but the rug kinda hold's it in place. By now I was wondering if it was worth it......That thought dident last long. I took it out for a ride. I am running a 3.25 rear with a 428cj. 1st gear is WILD! roll into it & the tires squeal (burn). 2nd some tire spin I don't really know how much cause right away you reach for 3rd. This is alot a fun so far. I wasent really jamming the gas just rolling it on. Up onto the interstate & this is what I had: 70mph in 5th was around 2100 rpm, 80 was about 2300 or so. 90 was 2600! There was traffic so I did not go any faster.. Before the swap 4th gear at 70 was 3000. Anyone intrested in doing this I would highly reccomend it. Just be prepared to do some tweaking.... Happy New year!! Bob |
| | RE: Tremec/TKO FE update -- Alan Casida, 12/28/2001
Excellent! I have mine setting on the floor in the box, in front of my car waiting for me. Mine is going in a 66 Galaxie with a bench seat so I don't have to worry about the console thing. I opted to use the McLeod spacer plate. It is good to it is working out ok as it is major expense. |
| | RE: Tremec/TKO FE update -- Will, 01/01/2002
I'm in the middle of my swap right now. I'm also switching to a Lakewood bellhousing. The block plate was hitting the headers, so I ordered some FPA headers. I was going to do that next anyway, so I figured why not do it now instead of denting up my Hookers.
I opted for the shortened input shaft too. I guess I'll have to cut some later on. Oh well. At least it's a chance to use more of my tools.
Glad to hear yours turned out okay. |
| Re; now a trans. question. -- David Siedschlag, 12/28/2001
Currentlly on e-bay there is a C-6 from a 69 cougar. It is for a 390. My 67 cougar is a 390 and I am in need of a trans. Is there any problems with using this 69 C-6 in my 67 car other than not having the right date code? My other question is it comes with the torque conv. is that the same? Also my 390 I rebuilt came from a 65 production year car. (works for me) Anyway it had a old cruisomatic on it. Now I have the flywheel from that trans. yet, will it work with the C-6 I want to put in? Thanks David Ps. Thanks for all the carburator info. everyone. |
| | RE: shouldn't be any problem -- Mike McQuesten, 12/29/2001
There should be no problem with this at all. Since the '69 C-6 is from a Cougar it already has the shift lever provision for the floor mounted control of your '67 Coug. As for the torque convertor....again, no problem. Should be just fine. As for the '65 cruiso flexplate.....no problem! It all sounds like a do-able package. Hope it works out as a good tranny.
One minor thing....I think your '67 390 Cougar C-6 is the same as the '66/'67 GTA C-6. This trans does have a little better servo than the lower performance '69 non GT 390 had.......I think? Royce Peterson would know about this. What I'm trying to say is if you have the original '67 390 Cougar C-6, don't just trade it as a low value core. The C6 in true -S- code 390GTs was a better C6 as built from the factory. Any C6 can be easily brought up to the same standard however. |
| Identifing a big block -- Fernando Herrera, Jr., 12/28/2001
Hello, my name is Fernando and I'm from South Texas.
I've recently been given a big block off of a galaxy 500. I don't know the exact year model but its between 62-66. I'm curious as to the size of that engine. I have gotten most of the numbers on the block. The first line reads C 3 A and I could not make out the last symbol. The second line reads 6 0 1 5 - E. I really think that this is a 390 because it has a 2v carb. I did notice that the gaskets however did not look like factory gaskets. I there a possiblity that someone may have installed this intake and carb on a different size big block. If anyone could help me in possibly identifing this engine, I would most appreciate it.
Thanks,
Fernando |
| 428cj vs 390 -- John T., 12/28/2001
My 1966 390 is very tired, already been bored .040 and needs a decent burial. I have an opportunity to get my hands a good 428SCJ short block. Are these interchangeable as far as all the bolt -ons, mounts and tranny? HELP!
Thanks in advance,
John T. |
| | RE: 428cj vs 390 -- Mac, 12/28/2001
yes should not have any problem |
| | RE: 428cj vs 390 -- Mike McQuesten, 12/28/2001
There are a couple of things to be careful of here. First and foremost in my mind is the flexplate/flywheel you'll use? Your tired 390 is internally balanced and if you use its old flexplate/flywheel(you don't mention stick or automatic?) you'll have a balance problem that will mean a engine vibration problem. This will be no problem if you get the 428 flexplate with that short block 428SCJ. But if not, I'd recommend you find a 428 flexplate/flywheel for your application and use it. Again, do NOT just bolt on the old 390 flywheel/flexplate.
Second, what heads are on your 390? You've mentioned that the 428SCJ is a short block and to me a short block has always meant headless, right? So if you bolt on the 390 heads you have.....? I would check the cc volume of the heads you plan to run and compare that figure to the 428 CJ heads, C8OE-N. You probably don't want to have a compression ratio beyond 10.5:1 and that's marginal on our standard "High Octane" 92 unleaded fuel.
Third, does your 428SCJ have the harmonic balancer? This dampner is extremely important like the correct flywheel/flexplate is to correct engine balance. Again, you can't just bolt on your 390 dampner and not have vibration problems.
Those are just a few things that pop into my mind. All of them can be easily cared for. I would recommend that you do get your hands on that good 428 SCJ short block.
BTW, how do you know it's a Super Cobra Jet 428? Is that pan off? Can you see the rods? Please, don't just take the word of someone telling you that it's a 428 Super Cobra Jet.......a 428 Ford is a good start most times, but there are a lot of folks who like to use the terms Cobra, Cobra Jet and Super Cobra Jet rather loosely. |
| | | RE: 428cj vs 390 -- Bob, 12/29/2001
I believe you are mistaken about the harmonic balancer. I think they are all interchangeable. I use any of them from '68 up and never have had any problems.
I would think that a 428 short block would (should) come with the harmonic balancer and spacer since you can't assemble the front timing cover properly without installing the crank spacer first. |
| | | | RE: 428cj vs 390 -- DJ, 12/30/2001
I do believe 428SCJ engine had,C9ZZ-6359A Hatchet spacer to compensate for the heavier Lemans type rods |
| | | 428 Harmonic Balancer (dampner) - same as 390 -- Royce Peterson, 12/29/2001
Mike,
428 PI, 428CJ and 390 all used the same damper / balencer in 1968-1970. All are neutral balance. Even the SCJ balaner from 69 - 70 was neutral balance although a little heavier. The flywheel or flexplate would be the only issue in this case,
Royce Peterson |
| | | | RE:but John indicated a '66 390 -- Mike McQuesten, 12/30/2001
Good information Royce. I was referring to John's '66 tired 390. Not to use that dampner on the 428.
Interesting that you note the dampners being the same or very similar from '68 - '70, my original '68 360 from my F100 has what looks like the same harmonic dampner as a 428CJ. Are they the same? |
| | | RE: 428cj vs 390 -- blake, 01/02/2002
re the 92 octane bit: here in phx,az the oil companies seemed to of lowered the octane to 91 now, it was 92 a couple of months ago-i checked all stations, really. i can't believe it! this sucks! |
| | RE: Good Means? -- R Dreamer, 12/29/2001
I hope that the 428SCJ hasn't been bored allready, if so I'd do some checking to see how sloppy the piston to bore is. Most 428s can only be overbored .030. As mike said DON"T USE the 390 Flywheel/flexplate on the 428 or you will grenade the bottom end the first time you put some rev's in it. |
| | | RE: Good Means? -- Dennis, 01/03/2002
I don't know where that old wives tale comes from. I can't even remember how many 11,12 and 13-1 428's I have run at 6500+ with 40 and 60 over pistons. If you stick with an 'A'( T-Bird) or 'C' (Cobra Jet) block and not some billion revolution water pump( industrial) block like those being passed off as 'Replacement' blocks nowadays, you will have very few problems. Probably none at 40 and maybe 10% at 60, curable by 1 or 2 sleeves. Just my dollars worth... |
| | RE: 428cj vs 390 -- John T., 12/31/2001
Thanks for the responses. If & when I get this project started, I'm sure I'll have many more questions! |
|