1967 GT500 Thermactor Configurations

[2112]

From Jeff's pictures above, if the radiator is completely supported by the saddles, what are the two visible body nuts on the radiator support for? (Forgive my bad photoshop skills)

[Bob Gaines]

From Jeff's pictures above, if the radiator is completely supported by the saddles, what are the two visible body nuts on the radiator support for? (Forgive my bad photoshop skills)

Those are just the clips . They are left un used in a GT500. They are on all 67 Shelby's . Something that was used on a GT350 for the radiator.

[2112]

Those are just the clips . They are left un used in a GT500. They are on all 67 Shelby's . Something that was used on a GT350 for the radiator.

Thank you Bob, and Jeff for getting those pictures up today.

[J_Speegle]

From reference page of Mustangtek

Number of details (both related to Thermactor and other things) appear to be "off" in those pictures when compared to regular production systems and typical practices. 

Do recognize the source of the pictures as I'm sure others do.

[J_Speegle]

From Jeff's pictures above, if the radiator is completely supported by the saddles, what are the two visible body nuts on the radiator support for?

There would be four of those. Something you will see in allot of applications and years. Those J clips were pretty much installed automatically on all Mustangs and in turn Shelby's and the like  even if they went unused.

And of course that isn't the picture I posted

[alexgt350h]

Trying to get a handle on the 67 Thermactor Stuff. 
In pictures from #962, (Ford build date: 2/2/67) in post #18. 962 doesn't appear to have the filter assembly attached to the shock tower. My car, #1352, (Ford build date: 2/2/67) has the filter mounted to the shock tower.
#962 doesn't have the cookie cutter cap on driver's side valve cover, but #1325 (Ford build date: 2/2/67) does have the cookie cutter cap, as well as my car #1352.
I guess these different caps could be explained by different build time of the engines?

Also, #962 clearly has natural finish on the check valves. I know there has been some discussion on this, some say these valves should be painted blue, others say natural. ---Interesting---

Are there any other pictures showing #962's engine from the day? Specifically, the area of the curved oil fill tube to air breather. Maybe showing an inline valve or not . From the pictures of #1325 that I have, that car had an inline check/backfire valve.

VERY INTERESTING !
Brent A

[J_Speegle]

In pictures from #962, (Ford build date: 2/2/67) in post #18. 962 doesn't appear to have the filter assembly attached to the shock tower. My car, #1352, (Ford build date: 2/2/67) has the filter mounted to the shock tower.

Note: Just as a mention the Registry shows you car (1352) being completed on 2/1/67. But not a big deal for this discussion

The important thing in this part of the discussion is that your car would most likely be just like all the others in your order group (DSO 2555)  As mentioned, it may just be this set of pictures or that the clamp has come undone and the canister slipped away from the shock tower were it was originally mounted - one reason for adding the tape from the hose to the battery cable, but other cars in your cars group (of the ones I have pictures and record of) had holes for the shock tower mounting of the canister as you found on #1352

In the pictures I have of your car before any work (if there has been any-don't have current pictures) took place, the filter was not attached to the shock tower though the screw holes appear to have been there. The bracket was missing and the canister was rotated with the hose at the pump so it had a very side ways look to it. They spin very easy but not by themselves.

Does this suggest that even though San Jose drilled the holes (as they would for a S code Mustang) was the filter not reattached to the bracket or the bracket removed from just this group of car? I don't think we can say for sure at this point.

#962 doesn't have the cookie cutter cap on driver's side valve cover, but #1325 (Ford build date: 2/2/67) does have the cookie cutter cap, as well as my car #1352.
I guess these different caps could be explained by different build time of the engines?

In this detail, since the valve cover swap didn't happen at Ford,  we look to the period at Shelby and in that case I think it might be explained by the span between the date both cars were converted at Shelby.

Also, #962 clearly has natural finish on the check valves. I know there has been some discussion on this, some say these valves should be painted blue, others say natural.

This appears to be a change from the engine plant and in turn as the cars were delivered from San Jose. Early pictures show and appear to show (different pictures taken of different cars at different times)  unpainted drivers side check valves  while later cars were finished like all the other ones installed and painted for Mustangs

Are there any other pictures showing #962's engine from the day? Specifically, the area of the curved oil fill tube to air breather. Maybe showing an inline valve or not . From the pictures of #1325 that I have, that car had an inline check/backfire valve.

Don't know of any others showing clear pictures of the engine compartment and not enough to show the breather tube or those details.

[Bob Gaines]

Trying to get a handle on the 67 Thermactor Stuff. 
In pictures from #962, (Ford build date: 2/2/67) in post #18. 962 doesn't appear to have the filter assembly attached to the shock tower. My car, #1352, (Ford build date: 2/2/67) has the filter mounted to the shock tower.
#962 doesn't have the cookie cutter cap on driver's side valve cover, but #1325 (Ford build date: 2/2/67) does have the cookie cutter cap, as well as my car #1352.
I guess these different caps could be explained by different build time of the engines?

Also, #962 clearly has natural finish on the check valves. I know there has been some discussion on this, some say these valves should be painted blue, others say natural. ---Interesting---

Are there any other pictures showing #962's engine from the day? Specifically, the area of the curved oil fill tube to air breather. Maybe showing an inline valve or not . From the pictures of #1325 that I have, that car had an inline check/backfire valve.

VERY INTERESTING !
Brent A

Some of the issues you brought up have been covered in previous posts of this thread.

[nightmist67]

It might be helpful to know which type/engineering number/part number smog pump and gulp valve were typically used on these cars.  I have seen smog pumps and gulp valves with variations on the number and location of ports on these components, which I would conclude can affect the connecting hoses used and the resultant orientation of the thermactor system on the passenger side of the engine bay.  Photos, drawings or sketches of these components or their details would clarify how the installed system should typically appear.

[J_Speegle]

It might be helpful to know which type/engineering number/part number smog pump and gulp valve were typically used on these cars.  I have seen smog pumps and gulp valves with variations on the number and location of ports on these components, which I would conclude can affect the connecting hoses used and the resultant orientation of the thermactor system on the passenger side of the engine bay.  Photos, drawings or sketches of these components or their details would clarify how the installed system should typically appear.

Some of the routing IMHO is a change in mounting of parts (changes made in parts to accomplish this) rather than a change as a result of changing parts by Ford at San Jose on Mustangs that had a ripple affect on Shelby's in turn

Some of that data is listed in the add/delete sheets (valves and pumps) so one would need to focus IMHO on what DSO group the car was in.  The challenge is that we don't have clear copies (that I'm aware of) of all groups forms.  Don't think the identified pump changed nor the anti-back fire valve though there were some production periods where pumps were substituted in place of the identified pumps. Guess it depends on how exacting you want your car built to.

Not sure if part numbers will do much good for some parts since new original parts are not very available 50 years later.

For the two parts you mentioned add/delete sheets show
- Pump identified as C7OE-9A486-A which replaced  C6OE-9A486-D (on paper)
- Anti-back fire valve of C6OE-9B289-C which replaced C6AE-9B289-E (on paper)

So basically you have them swapping out Mustang FE parts for 289 Mustang parts