I found parts and dont know exactly what they are Shelby GT500 1967 + 427 parts

[pbf777]

     Personally, maybe less than ideal, but I always thought the "boxed" 392 rods back in the day was pretty cool, along with the added (welded on) center counter weight on the 427 cranks; and the 391 FT  cranks one had to weld plates to as the counter weights were cut down as compared to the 427's 

     My personal winner, for the most pieces of heavy metal stuffed into a single crankshaft, after I couldn't convince the "engine builder" that his creation was going to take way to much metal to be viable, if even possible, was 23 pieces!     

     Ah, the good old days of hot-rodding,...........well, maybe not always?     

     Scott.

[Side-Oilers]

I think part of the LeMans rods' lasting appeal is their name.   It just sounds cool.

If they merely had a part number, and weren't as good as today's rods, most people would've probably moved on.

[Kent]

Hello, back from holidays, sorry. So the valve covers are original or not to a 67 Shelby GT500? I think they should be correct. For the 427 parts they came out of a 427 engine just some days ago and the engine did 462 hp on the dyno and worked great, I only dissassembled it to do some changes to it for more hp.

So GT500 correct are
Brake parts
Rag Joint
Valve Covers? 1 said yes 1 said no

[Kent]

The intake has no c7zx number but it has a fomoco logo and I know my shelby gt500 has the number on the intake and the same logo, anybody knows why the number is missing on this item but it has a fomoco logo? All repros I know dont have a fomoco logo. Part Identification really makes me crazy sometimes I have 3 or 4 of the same parts but they all vary a bit.To find out what is wrong/right can go crazy then.

[Kent]

Got it the 427 block came from a 67 Fairlane.

[gt350hr]

  The medium riser dual four did not have a part number on it . That is correct along with it having the "block style" Ford logo.

[Kent]

Ok so it is 1967 Shelby GT500 correct?

[gt350hr]

Ok so it is 1967 Shelby GT500 correct?

       The C7ZX  intake is the accepted intake for a '67 GT500 . It was made specifically for the '67 428 combination. The medium riser "could" have sealing issues at the bottom of the port on the "GT 390" head that was used on the GT500 engine.
   Randy

[1967 eight barrel]

Randy, so it not uncommon to have an air leak at the bottom of the ports that pull drain back oil underneath the ports in the valley into the intake runners with the C7ZX intake ? As you know, the heads have the taller 2.34 low riser port.

                                                                                  -Keith

[Kent]

 I would like to know why this intake has the fomoco stamp/logo but not the C7zx number on it the runner is blank. So where all GT500´s without that number but with a fomoco logo on the intake or whats the deal? And the oil filter adapter should be also right for GT500 yes? That one came from one as the most of the other parts.

[Kent]

So correct and original for 1967 GT500 are
Valve Covers
Oil Filter Adapter
Rag Joint
Brake Parts
Intake

anyone can verify?

[gt350hr]

Randy, so it not uncommon to have an air leak at the bottom of the ports that pull drain back oil underneath the ports in the valley into the intake runners with the C7ZX intake ? As you know, the heads have the taller 2.34 low riser port.

                                                                                  -Keith

       Keith the C7ZX manifold was made to match the 14 bolt 390Gt heads is what I was saying. Using a 427 medium riser intake ( with it's shorter port openings) on the 14 bolt 390 Gt heads "could" cause a sealing issue at the bottom of the manifold. The same could be said for the '67 "W" code single four medium riser intake often mistaken for a PI ( which WOULD work with the 390 heads). Bottom line , dedicated medium riser intakes fit medium riser heads. C7ZX and PIs fit the others except HR and TP heads. That's what I'm saying.

[pbf777]

I would like to know why this intake has the fomoco stamp/logo but not the C7zx number on it the runner is blank. So where all GT500´s without that number but with a fomoco logo on the intake or whats the deal? And the oil filter adapter should be also right for GT500 yes? That one came from one as the most of the other parts.

     I believe as stated by Randy previously, the later F.E. 8V aluminum intake (not a 427 L.R. which at least one version did not present a number in the casting but does have the FoMoCo, but perhaps in the oval vs the rectangular version) bare without the C7ZX number is generally attributed to the 427 M.R. as installed in the Fairlanes & Comets (O.E.M. on Cobras ever?). And yes, it would appear that the C7ZX version, is a modified version of the 427 M.R. intake (either the no number or the C7AE version), and was cast with the intent of insuring compatibility for gasket sealing on the taller inlet port versions of the F.E., as the exterior cast perimeter in the vertical dimension, although not an exact sum, averages approximately .100" - .150" greater.   

     Generally in my observations, the as cast port configurations of the intake and cylinder head at the familiar flanges are not so exacting as cast or so different dimensionally between the two engines (M.R. vs. taller port F.E.'s) as to restrict interchangeability from one to another for sealing (with reasonable gasket selection), but does present poor alignment in both the vertical and horizontal planes of the inlet port to point of discouraging  the practice, if one is concerned with proper transition. But, since the castings do present significant variance in accuracy, and one is truly mixing unintended products, and injecting the variable of the sealing gasket selected, then yes, one could experience sealing issues; so one would be advised to look twice at the relationship before declaring a happy marriage.     

    Also, I made a reference as to use of the oil filter adapter previously.     

     Scott. 

[Bob Gaines]

So correct and original for 1967 GT500 are
Valve Covers
Oil Filter Adapter
Rag Joint
Brake Parts
Intake

anyone can verify?

I would like to see the passenger side valve cover shot that shows the PCV opening (without rubber grommet ) before making a judgement. Oil filter adapter is correct,rag joint is typical,Master and distribution block look typical, Intake is not correct for a 67 GT500

[Kent]

Thanks Bob I waited for your thoughts, the other valve cover has the round hole I dont have a picture now but will forward it. So why is the intake not right because of the missing number? Had all 67 GT500´s the number on the intake? I´m not 100% sure but I would say this intake was on the GT500 since day 1 from what I know about the history of it.