Skip Navigation Links.
 |  rearend setup w/disc brk -- roger, 07/31/2005
I have a 61 merc with drum brakes,
I feel like I'm driving an 18 wheeler...
got to give 6 car lengths or I crush the
neon...I see disc sets for 60 galaxies,
I was thinking of swap the whole rear,
with contenintal or something...
any Ideas?
thanks roger |
 | 390 Compression Issues -- John, 07/30/2005
Gents, I’m duplicating the Hot Rod Magazine 390 build up they did about a year or so ago. My block is bored 30 over and I’m using the Edelbrock 72cc aluminum heads. I purchased a set of Keith Black Silvolite (Hyp.) 150 pistons that are 30 over. These pistons are not flat-top but have dished recesses in them. Has any one ever used them and how do I know what my compression is going to be with this set-up. Thanks, John, AKA Greenhorn! |
| 64 galaxie throttle linkage -- glennzamp, 07/29/2005
any one have pics or blown up view of throttle linkage for a 64 galaxie with cruise-o trans
working on cusotmer car and looks like a piece is missing for the kick down, with full throttle it does not contact kick down
any help appreciated
glennzamp |
| | anyone -- glennzamp, 07/31/2005
and i thought you guys were the knowers of all |
| |  | Try here -- raycfe, 07/31/2005
www.fordfe.com Lots of galaxie guys |
|  | RE: 64 galaxie throttle linkage -- crusinbuddy, 08/01/2005
Do you have a 390? I assume you have the downshift rod from linkage to trans. There is an adjustment procedure for setting up the throttle linkage It is shown in a Motors Repair Manual for 1964. There is no adjustment on the down shift rod. |
| | | RE: 64 galaxie throttle linkage -- glennzamp, 08/01/2005
there are no screws or adjustments on this throttle linkage, this is why i am looking for a blow up or a pic, there seems to be a missing part
it is a 390 with cruise-o trans, a rod comes from pedal and goed to a unit attached to the manifold that has a cam type set up with rod to carb and on the same unit has the kick down lever,
on this unit there are no adjustments what so ever, the owner had put a piece of rubber ( sway bar end link rubber ) in order for the linkage to contact the kick down on full throttle,
problem is the kick down not raeaching full movment with full throttle..
again some sort of service blow up or pic of a stock unit would benifiet me highly
glenn z |
| | | | RE: 64 galaxie throttle linkage -- Gordo, 08/07/2005
Did you get your diagram? I can email you a scan from the manual if you still need it. Actually, I'll sent it anyway for your info. |
| 1970 Export braces -- randy, 07/28/2005
I have two sets of braces for a 1970 428 Mustang, one has a stiffing plate spot welded to one end and the other set doesn't have the stiffing plate. Which is correct for the 1970 428 |
|  | OEM spec calls for the reinforced shock tower braces. [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/29/2005
n/m |
| | RE: 1970 Export braces -- JW, 07/28/2005
The big block cars had reinforced shock tower braces.The small blocks & 6 cyls did not.
The "stiffys" would be correct..............
JW |
| | RE: 1970 Export braces -- paul, 07/29/2005
Just to clarify... Export braces are the upper chassis-to-shock tower braces bolted on. Reinforced FE shock tower are the welded brace at lower engine compartment shock tower assembly. Some years used stiff-plates for Export braces, some didn't, some were after market stiffened. |
| Gear Vendors Overdrive -- Dano, 07/23/2005
I see that Gear Vendors has a overdrive unit for 67-70 Big block Top Loader Mustangs. Anyone here had any experience with this? |
| Tunnelport Cam -- phil, 07/22/2005
I'm in the process of assembling my 427 Tunnelport for my Cobra. It will primarily be used for street use with occasional track use. Any reccomendations on cams? |
| | RE: Tunnelport Cam -- giacamo, 07/26/2005
comp 270solid or the 280 hydraulic ? |
| 67 shelby gt500 -- Ben, 07/22/2005
Does anyone know where i can get a 428 fe cobra jetengine block?? I just bought a 1967 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 to restore but it has a hole in the block. |
| | RE: 67 shelby gt500 -- paul, 07/22/2005
CJ & service blocks come up often on Ebay.
Just secure the block's conditions & delivery with safe packaging methods very very carefuly. |
| | | RE: 67 shelby gt500 -- Barry B, 07/22/2005
The '67 originally used the 428 police interceptor block which is the same as any other plain jane 428 block. The '68 KR and later Shelbys used the 428CJ block. |
| | Make sure you sonic check the block... -- John Bednorz, 07/27/2005
before you start machining it. FE blocks are notorious for "core shift" during casting which leads to some very thin cylinder walls.
Thin cylinder walls = overheating, block failure. |
| Facts just for fun!! -- paul, 07/22/2005
428 R-Code non-shaker RAM Air..
I found the second owner to my 69 Mach 1 4-spd, April 1 build date, all sheet metal matches shift code no. & dates. It was an DSO Export order under # 97 code.
Was built with a 68.5 style hood scoop and underhood ram air system... now verified.
And I can continue to restore back as a non-shaker ram air! I did not want to mess up the correct restore.... JUST have to keep digging for info. thanks |
| | Care to post that 'proof'? Personally, I don't believe it. :-) [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/23/2005
n/m |
| | Lol -- Royce, 07/23/2005
Post a copy of your build sheet. That will call out the air cleaner assembly P/N.
Personally I don't for a second believe it. Prove me wrong.
Royce |
| | | | RE: You know, Royce, I thought this sounded familiar... -- paul, 07/24/2005
Hi Guys, You're absolutely right! I don't have a build sheet... and I knew this would surface those questions again thus "just for fun"!! Second owner told me when he got the Mach 1 from the original owner, it was untouched - matching sheet metal, fenders & hood. All I could do was check the numbers stamped for shift # codes that assembled it, the paint conditions with factory primer, etc. Those all match. I never thought when I starting taking my car apart that anything was chanded (non-stock), and it wasn't. I expect due to the Exort order... it was Special ordered with a 351 ( etc ) Mach type underhood Ram Air & has the pie cut outs. I have early 69 pictures of prototype cars that have scoop style hoods with the 428 tags on the scoop.
Marti report of couse just states Ram Air, as well as my Ford report. And reading the Ford Arm Chair guides for ordering a 69 428CJ, I see know reason why the car didn't get done that way. It has nothing to do with the April 1, 1969 build date.... it is the way the Mach 1 was ordered. Thanks for the expert observations though. |
| | | | | RE: typos -- paul, 07/24/2005
hi again, A couple typos, but.
There have been numerous early 69s that have the 428 with scoop documented on the 428 CJ reg site.... my build date is not right for that to have occured, and I know that, as well. I can't prove it - but I'm positive the reason for the scoop & 428CJ combination for that date is the Export code order! |
| | | | | | Your car is likely not an export vehicle either. -- Royce, 07/24/2005
Your Marti Report will have the receiving dealer listed. Most of the cars with the Export DSO were ordered through the PX by servicemen and women. The 90 series codes were used because the order was not received through a dealer.
An export car would still have a shaker. I am not going to answer any more of your posts because the idea is simply ludicrous. Face it, if you want your car to have maximum value when you sell it stop trying to justify the missing ram air parts with a ridiculous story.
Royce |
| | | | | | | RE: Your car is likely not an export vehicle either. -- Royce, 07/24/2005
I made a mis statement: The vehicles ordered by armed forces personnel did not receive regular DSO codes because they were not ORDERED by a dealer through the regular DSO system. They were still in 99% of the cases picked up in the United States at a Ford dealer and still had all the standard equipment of any other Mustang.
Royce |
| | | | | | | | RE: Export DSO 97 -- paul, 07/24/2005
Royce,
Thanks again for the comments... your last message about PX & DSOs is the correct statement. Except I know for a fact some sevicemen ordered through a PX, and took delivery at a dealer as my car was (documented). The issue there about the Export DSO was that some Mustangs were sent out of country as ordered by the DSO , and some servicemen who had their orders changed took delivery in the states, and the car was never shipped anywhere, OR they didn't take delivery after the car was delivered to the dealer, and the dealer sold that car as is. No one has to answer any posts they don't care to here! And everyone is welcome to their opinions & ideas - period. But trying to say all things are known about how Mustangs in the sixties were configured absolutely & without exception is crazy, too. Anyone who wouldn't want a Shaker system, (I like the shakers) I think is crazy, too. But I won't add a shaker till it is proven otherwise that it wasn't possible to get that car issued with the scoop. Hey, it's a great hobby, though - right? |
| | | | | | | | | Non Shaker R code -- Mark Viera, 08/01/2005
Paul/Don,
I personally would never say NEVER when it comes to cars build over 35 years ago. Car makers did a lot of strange things in the name of cranking out cars at a profit. Re-stamping left over 1969 Shelby and selling them as 1970 comes to mind. I don’t think that anyone would dispute that Ford was willing to put non correct items on a car to keep the line moving. However, without any supporting documentation to back up the second owners claim you may want to consider the more likely fact that your car came with the shaker type hood scoop. Even if the non shaker scoop was factory installed, I believe that most Mustang people will always look at your car as not factory correct.
With that said, it is YOUR car now and you can restore it anyway that makes you happy. Like you, and as the former owner of a 69 R code Mustang, I just love the insane excess of the shaker hood. |
| | RE: Some R code Mustangs had no shaker -- Jiffy, 07/24/2005
Apparently, anyway. Rumour has it that when ford was making the 428CJ Mustang, the first R codes had only about a 70% chance of getting a shaker as they were having manufacturing difficulties. If one wasn't available, you got an R code car with Q code hood & air cleaner plus a 'shaker voucher' for fitment once they became available. So, it had to be a REALLY early car, and it got Q-code stuff, not '68 flappers... |
| | | Ridiculous: Some R code Mustangs had no shaker -- Royce Peterson, 07/25/2005
That is utter nonsense. Try to find any documentation to back up such a ridiculous claim. |
| | | | Maybe he's confusing vin-code 'R' & the 428SCJ pkg.? [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/25/2005
n/m |
| | | | | RE: Maybe he's confusing vin-code 'R' & the 428SCJ pkg.? [n/m] -- walt, 07/25/2005
i seen and old article about some 428 big block destined for france i think it was,been years ago,coupe or fastback,i don't remember,and some guy found it, restoring it,had dif logo's on it,darn this was at least 10/15 yrs ago |
| | | | | | T-5 logo. -- Royce Peterson, 07/26/2005
Another company held the Mustang trademark for Europe so Ford could not use it there. |
| | | | | | Yeah - a '70 T-5 Mach 1 made the rounds of Ford mags. [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/26/2005
n/m |
| | | | RE: Ridiculous: Some R code Mustangs had no shaker -- TOADYOTY, 07/27/2005
Hey guys........hint.......get a life. |
| | | | | RE:oh please...... -- McQ, 07/28/2005
Go away with your holier-than-thow attitude!
One of the numerous benefits provided by the net to an individual is to have the opportunity to find/learn/discuss personally interesting things.
I find this site to be interesting for its variety of FE related threads. I don't follow them all. But I check in and sometimes find very interesting topics. This one specifically is very interesting to me. Why? Who cares and why would anyone ask? It's my life, thank you, and I'll do what I want!
I'd like to know if there was a '69 Mustang -R- code that wasn't shaker equipped. I'd bet against it but you never know. And, again, for some reason I find it interesting.
|
| | | | | | RE:oh please...... -- crusinbuddy, 07/28/2005
I agree.....very interesting to me too. |
| | | | | | | RE:oh please...... -- walt, 08/04/2005
interesting info,i have seen the 69 cj whith out the shaker,and a boss 29 with out the scoop also,and then that infamous 68 427 mustang,and 68 gt 500,had the cross bolts in it,beautiful wine burgandy color,gold stipes,the guy was killed in veitnam.and the parent's wre selling it,about 1974/75,and was sold before i could get to my bank,the next morning,i never seen another one like it |
| 1967 steering column bearing -- rex budde, 07/20/2005
Looking for the upper steering column bearing for a 1967 mustang with a fixed wheel. Part number is c40z-3517-a. This appears to be a one year part and can't find anywhere. |
| 390 1-wire Alternator swap -- MC, 07/20/2005
I just ordered and received a Jegs 100amp 1 wire ford alternator that they said would fit all ford engines. However it doest fit. Does anyone have any idea on what a good, higher amp alternator would be that fits my 390 with out any modification. the one i got from jegs hits the engine block. i have been looking around and cant seem to find an alternator that is higher amps, 1 wire internally regulated and is big block (FE) specific.
Thanks in advance.
MC
1969 Mustang Mach 1 |
| | Most electric repair shops will rebuild your alternator, to suit. [n/m] -- Mr F, 07/20/2005
n/m |
| | | RE: 390 1-wire Alternator swap -- MC, 07/20/2005
I was looking for an alternator that is internally regulated. It doesnt sound like the alternator from the 95 or so Mustang is. Also Chuck, if i go that route, what is the amp rating from that alternator. I need something to power everything you got plus power windows, do you think that alternator would have enough snuff? |
| | | | RE: 390 1-wire Alternator swap -- Chuck, 07/21/2005
The alt from a 95 mustang is internaly regulated. It is a 3g alternator, and considering the list of options ford hangs on the car you should be ok |
|