68 J Code vs GT350 Engine

[Greg P]

Thanks again everyone.  Great information and very helpful.  I think I have the numbers under control now.  BTW, what was the recall done for?  Were there defective C8ZE intakes or was it for a performance upgrade?

[Coralsnake]

They had intended to use the aluminum intake all along, but could not get it certified until late in the 1968 model year.

[shelbydoug]

That intake and the Holley S8MS carb change the nature of that engine quite a bit. Considering the release date and the last build dates of the 68 GT350's, there could not have been many installed in original production.

The 350's were almost done by that date and it was KR territory from there in.

[Coralsnake]

Spot on!

[shelbydoug]

I once asked about the cam and headers on that engine. I can't remember who it was. One of the Ford people. He shrugged his shoulders and said that "they EXPECTED" buyers to do a cam and headers on it.

I think really what happened though is the '68 GT350 got caught between a last minute cancellation of the 302 Tunnel port and the switching over to the Boss 302 which was still not completed enough for production? So the 302 J was the next best alternative.

The late decision on the Holley and Cobra intake fits into that entire scenario? Three to four months on a change like that is tomorrow for Ford. I don't think that there are ANY S8MS Holley's that have an earlier then May 1 production date but the things are so rare it's next to impossible to survey that.

Are there any November '68 Shelby's? I haven't looked lately. I thought December just before Christmas was around the first production? Phil's car is pretty early with the early lower nose. Is that early block on your website his? That doens't fit into the two week sweet spot for the engine vs. car build date?

Neither of the S8MS carbs are cheapo's at all.

[Bob Gaines]

I once asked about the cam and headers on that engine. I can't remember who it was. One of the Ford people. He shrugged his shoulders and said that "they EXPECTED" buyers to do a cam and headers on it.

I think really what happened though is the '68 GT350 got caught between a last minute cancellation of the 302 Tunnel port and the switching over to the Boss 302 which was still not completed enough for production? So the 302 J was the next best alternative.

The late decision on the Holley and Cobra intake fits into that entire scenario? Three to four months on a change like that is tomorrow for Ford. I don't think that there are ANY S8MS Holley's that have an earlier then May 1 production date but the things are so rare it's next to impossible to survey that.

Are there any November '68 Shelby's? I haven't looked lately. I thought December just before Christmas was around the first production? Phil's car is pretty early with the early lower nose. Is that early block on your website his? That doens't fit into the two week sweet spot for the engine vs. car build date?

Neither of the S8MS carbs are cheapo's at all.

Here is a S8MS-C with a 831 date (first week of March 1968) that I have on my shelf.

[shelbydoug]

Have you seen an earlier date?

[Bob Gaines]

I can't say that I have but I have not been paying enough attention to that detail ether. I only thought to look when you brought it up.

[shelbydoug]

Mine had the same date code. I wonder if they are batch coded? Don't Holley's tend to be? Still, they wouldn't have been installed until the intakes were ready AND would they have been installed by Ford at the engine assembly plant?

Someone needs to do a survey? Someone highly qualified and motivated? Hey Pete? 

[gt350hr]

  Doug ,
     At that time , Holley could easily build 100 carburetors in a day and the carbs were coded by the week so 500 or more could have the same date. The Ford purchase order quantity would be the determining factor. IMHO anyway.
   Randy

[shelbydoug]

  Doug ,
     At that time , Holley could easily build 100 carburetors in a day and the carbs were coded by the week so 500 or more could have the same date. The Ford purchase order quantity would be the determining factor. IMHO anyway.
   Randy

Correct. The question is, how many were ordered and when. GT350 production was almost over by the time the intake became available for production and even so, look at the total production of '68 GT350's, divided by two for automatics and manuals, then whatever was thought needed for service.

I have seen several with 933 or 934 production dates. Those obviously are service, over the counter carbs.

The other thing is even if Holley had 500 a day production capability, how long is tomorrow? I doubt if you ordered them Monday morning, they were done by Monday afternoon?

Then there is the question of the dealers not installing the Holleys, just the intakes on the recalls, etc, etc.

Looking at both carbs, I'm not sure why there needed to be an automatic version and a manual trans version. The linkage is the same as far as I see it. I don't see a kick down lever on the auto version BUT I only have had the manual version.

These were both 1860's too and not the cheaper 1850's with secondary metering plates. They had all the bells and whistles for the time. Not a cheap carb new.

The rarity of the '68 carbs is on par with the '65 GT350 carbs. Few '68s have them installed so it's difficult to do a study with any significance.

It's entirely possible that the original production carbs are all dated 833 like the one that Bob posted.

[gt350hr]

   Idle calibration differences between stick and auto. Harold Droste was the Holley/ Ford-Autolite carb specialist and "made them right" for each need.
    Randy

[TLea]

831, 833, 841 are dates that are feasible for assembly line (Smith) install. There weren't a lot of factory installs but the ones I've seen, maybe 5 cars, have all had the S7 . Majority of dealer installs are the latest S2 with the coil pedestal

[gt350hr]

   Doug ,
       Small block kick down was on the gas pedal , not the carburetor , so the linkage was the same regardless.  As an FYI there was also "going to be" a 302 Hi po even before the tunnel port fiasco, but Ford couldn't get smog approval on it either. Ford desperately needed a small block performance engine but '68 was also hurt by the strike in late '67 ( '68 model year) as well as the smog compliance issue. Stepping back from 306 to 230 hp was not a great selling point!
     Randy

[Coralsnake]

Randy, have you ever heard of the plan to offer overbored cobra jets?