67 GT350 Original clutch Fork -need picture

[acman63]

does anyone have an original clutch fork they can shoot me a picture?

[bhoulis]

Wow, just logged on to ask the same thing. Also what if any part/engineering numbers should it have? Thanks. Brian

[martyjac]

The Ford catalog lists C7ZZ-7515-D for 289 hipo and 390 engines. 12" long. Never found out if this is an error though. I have an NOS one I'll try and dig out. 

[Bossbill]

[acman63]

Believe this is a service part  sold in the 70s and 80s   also used on 6 bangers.  was a C50Z  prefix number

[Bossbill]

Yes, wrong fork. I think that's a C5OZ-7515-B replacement.

[Bossbill]

I think this is the right pic of the 12" long fork:

[bhoulis]

I thought the 67 part didn't have the large hole. Brian

[Bossbill]

In the old forum I posted a pic of two Shelbys with the C5OZ horned forks and got no feedback and made an assumption on applicability.

It appears finding a picture of these things is difficult as many people post on ebay that they have a HiPo fork, when instead all they have is a fork 12" long. I believe the second pic I posted (with the hole in the cone) is of another erroneous ebay posting.

I'm really only posting pics to get feedback (like the OP) on what one really looks like. I need one too. With all of the issues people seem to have with posting pictures I'll keep at this until somebody says, "Yeah, that's the one."

A bit off topic is one of length measurements. The only two lengths that matter are from the fulcrum to the TO fork and from the fulcrum to the cone.
The C5OZ is 4.0" and 5.125" respectively for a ratio of 1.28:1.
A 12" fork I have here that closely resembles a HiPo fork is 4.0" and 6.75" respectively for a ratio of 1.68:1.
The added leverage of the longer fork gives you added leverage on the bigger clutch (compared to the std 289) decreasing pedal effort. And giving longer life to your Z bar.

Anyway, here is the latest pic I found of a purported 289 HiPo clutch fork:


[edit for grammar]

[acman63]

This fork is correct for all 65/66 GT350.   The 67 is supposedly longer  and fits the 390 and 289 Hipo  so its a small throwout  bearing,  will have a wire fulcrum pivot,  return spring tag on the side rather than end  .  I believe it also does not have the hole on the end where the adjuster goes as the bell shaped part that slides on the and hits the fork  has a 1968  part number on it

[Bossbill]

AllClassicMustang (http://www.allclassicmustang.com/) just sold me the correct fork and here it is:

[1175]

Picture?

Jon

[Bossbill]

The pic in the above post is a link to a Google pic.
For reasons yet unknown it won't display on a mobile device.
I've noticed some others can't either, but don't have enough data on device, OS, etc.

So I placed it in my Gallery and linked to it there:

[69mach351w]

So, is the fork at reply #8 a 65/66 hipo fork and the one at reply #12 for a 67 hipo?

[Bossbill]

If I take all of the posts, in order, above I get the following:

Post #3 is a C5OZ-7515-B Ford replacement (for 65/67). I've heard from a few owners of late 66s that this fork was also used on these later HiPos. That deserves its own thread in the 66  GT350 section.
Post #6 appears to be a 68 390 fork with hole, but I can't confirm and should be another thread.
Post #8 is a 65/66 HiPo fork.
Post #10 is a 67 HiPo and 3904v (only the 4V) fork.

I've been lead astray by numerous online vendors, numerous ebay sellers and overall rarity of this part. I've had the C5OZ fork in my car for over 35 years, as have others, further leading to the confusion.
[edit to add post script to C5OE fork]