Messages

Makes me want to get back in the '66 saddle again. I had 6S2295. It was also sold by McCafferty Ford. I like the chrome wheels on the late cars.

Steve

Now, seeing that good info has long legs and life span, and a properly executed search has returned the desired info, are we still having to accept that the info on SAAC Forum 1 is truly lost? Reading the discussion with contributions from our Heavy Hitters Dan, Drew, Doug, and Randy certainly adds credence to a topic where respected opinions matter.

I think you may have several options. If the clutch and pressure plate are original to the car, it may be larger than what is currently available. I believe originals are 11-1/2" dia as opposed to 11" dia.

Another alternative is to replace the 3-finger pressure plate and compatible clutch disc with a diaphragm pressure plate and compatible clutch disc.

The guy that installed my GT500 drive train used the diaphragm and clutch disc. So far, it seems okay, but I've read that it may malfunction by not re-engaging the clutch disc at high RPM shifts. To be on the safe side, I retained my 3-finger pressure plate and worn clutch disc, should I decide to get them rebuilt.

Steve

Is 01767 supposed to be an AC car or a non-AC car? To me, adding AC or omitting AC would be a major Oh $hit mistake if I were cloning a Shelby.

Steve

In the event you can't find a nice one, here's some pretty good info on a related forum:

https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=27967.0

Steve

Thanks Royce. I did not know that the 427MR shaft stands were shorter as well as wider. I thought I could use them instead of the aluminum stands that were used on the 428PI and 428CJ engines. I was mistaken.

I'm working on rebuilding a date code correct block to replace the original block that was cracked. When building this new engine I'll very likely keep it in stock configuration and use the stock aluminum supports, unless I can find a set of reasonably priced, good 427LR cast iron supports.

The engine currently in the car is a 428CJ I yanked out of a '69 Cobra Torino. Its CJ heads have Precision Oil Pump's components; rocker shafts, shaft supports (including shaft end supports), roller tip adjustable rockers, push rods, and solid rocker arm spacers and shims. It's a little stronger than stock, and I like the increased durability in the valve train.

Thanks again for sharing your knowledge.

Steve

I'm of the understanding that the 428 & 428CJ rocker arm shaft aluminum stands are dimensionally compatible, with respect to width and shaft bore centerline to stand base dimensions, with each other and the 427LR shaft cast iron stands. Is that a safe understanding?

Is there a benefit to replacing the standard 428 & 428CJ aluminum shaft stands with the 427LR steel shaft stands?

I'm also of the understanding that the 427MR rocker arm shaft cast iron stands are slightly wider, approx. 0.015", than the 427LR shaft stands. That would be 0.0075" rocker arm pad to valve stem offset per side. If 427MR shaft stands are used as replacements for 428 or 428CJ shaft stands, what damage is likely to happen?

The 428 and 428CJ heads have large bevels where oil feeds through the head to the rocker arm shafts, such that neither the 427LR nor the 427MR shaft stands would restrict oil to the rocker arms on 428 heads.

I hope all this makes sense. Please correct me where I'm mistaken.

Steve

I wonder how the current owner of 5S146 feels about a reproduction VIN tag, stamped as being 5S146, being used on a tribute, as decoration and what recourse (s)he has?

Carjackings may be up in Philadelphia, but my copy of The Shelby American 2022 Annual was delivered without incident.

My world is complete.

Two Shelby owners and the current owner of this car need to be concerned with this car.

This is where I got mine. I may have bought it from Tony at Fords at Carlisle a bunch of years ago.
https://store.cobranda.com/bigblcooilpa.html

I agree with Bob. When I did my conversion it was during the early oil embargoes and I was using my car fairly regularly. During the early oil embargoes it wasn't so much about fuel cost as it was fuel availability. We had long lines, odd/even gas days, and stations running out of gas. I kept my conversion rather than remove it, but he has a valid point.

I did it on my '68 GT500 convertible for the same reason, back in the original days of the gas crises in the '70s. It's a simple swap. If your rubber connector between the tank and fill tube is hard, you may need a new one.

I found it to be beneficial in increasing travel distance with little loss in trunk capacity. 4 additional gallons in a car that gets 8-10 mpg beats having to carry a 5 gallon gas can

Good luck with the conversion.

Steve

When I look at this picture, I wonder how easy is it for a suited driver to quickly enter this car?



One's left foot would be 12", or so, away from the car and one's right foot would have to clear the side cage.

Did the driver enter the car with the door in the closed position?

Steve

The year is likely expressed as the metric equivalent.