Posts by s2ms

  • C5OE balancer

    Quote from zray

    Shelby ( & others) sold Hi-Po balancers that had been stamped with degree marks all the way around.

    That's exactly what I was thinking. I believe the fully degreed balancers were commonly used on the 65 GT350 R-models.

  • '66 brake proportioning valve adjustment

    I tried it several years ago but only to get my rears to unlock so not really sure how sensitive the adjustment is, IIRC the described procedure is correct. I tried rebuilding my prop valve which was a total disaster even though I follwed the method on the Stanger site exactly. It looked fine but had scores in the bore that were almost invisible to the naked eye so when I put it back together the piston(s) hung up and the rears would lock. Ended up having it professionally resleeved/rebuilt and it's been great since then.

  • New Repro Yellow Top Coil

    Quote

    The coil I bought may be a dud.....I have been given a replacement to the one that quit, so I may have just been unlucky. I'm not sure if I'm game enough to give it another go.

    Thanks for the update René, since your's failed so quickly I suspect too it was a dud. I got one of the new repop yellow tops recently and am going to install it soon so will report how it performs as well. The original I have in the car now is dying.

  • Axle paper tag ID for 65 - 66

    Murf, I have an old Mustang Monthly article on axle detailing somewhere around here that has a pic of this tag. IIRC the tag has specific codes for assembly plant and gear ratio. Let me know if it will help and I'll dig up the article and email you a scanned pic. Dave.

  • New Repro Yellow Top Coil

    We need to make a distinction between "old" and "new" repop coils. The new repops have only been on the market for about a year (maybe less) and are advertized to be identical in both appearance and performance to the original Ford yellow tops. The top on these is really yellow, not just painted. The only difference is the new repops don't have the numeric code between the terminals like originals. The older repops were terrible in both looks and performance, I had one actually slowly explode (uncoil!) on me.


    Chuck, it sounds like your situation involves an older repop if it happened 7 years ago. Is that right?


    René, can you confirm the coil that failed on you was a new repop and not just a NORS older one? If so, that is disappointing since they were supposed to be a "huge improvement" over the older repops.


    I was hoping they had figured these things out, good thing I have a few originals lying around!

  • Part ID

    Thanks for that info Tom. Just had a look at the original on my car and it's definitely thicker than 1/4" and the OD is in line with Tom's info and wider than the one on ebay above.

  • Part ID

    Quote from 2K -Joe

    FYI: Hi Po washer #C3OZ-6378A is 0.32" thick, standard washer is 0.21"

    My copy of the Ford MPC must be wrong on the dimensions. It lists the standard 289 B8A-6378-A washer as 0.212" thick but then says the C3OZ-6378-A HiPo washer is only 1/8" (0.125") thick.


    Interesting that in the one on ebay right now listed above, the seller says the thickness "looks to be a hair under 1/4 of an inch" which matches 0.21" I wonder if the MPC got the thickness dimensions reversed or is the HiPo really 0.32" thick? Does anyone have a known original HiPo one handy to measure?

  • Part ID

    Quote from CB01

    Another thought, maybe Hi-Po crank damper bolts are supposed to be torqued down tighter than standard 289s due to the high rpms Hi-Po's were built for, thus the thicker washer???

    The 1966 shop manual has the same torque specs for all 289 and 390 damper bolts, 70-90 ft/lbs. Ford surely had a reason for thicker washers on HiPo's, anyone know the answer to this?

  • Part ID

    Quote from garymcgowan

    Thanks Joe. How do I get a copy of Bob Mannel's book?

    Gary, you can get the book directly from the publisher's website but you may find it cheaper on ebay or Amazon. This book is a MUST have IMHO.

    Quote from garymcgowan

    So, what are the consequences of using a regular washer on K code engine?

    Well, your HiPo engine could explode with a force equal to a comet hitting the earth. Decades of darkness would follow and cause the extinction of 90% of the life on earth. A few simple vertebrates would survive the disaster and they would evolve into a former very successful life form and dinosaurs would rule the earth once again, hopefully enjoying the K-codes left behind. :S


    Honestly, I have no idea.

  • oil cap, closed emission

    Quote from fullburn

    I had that style cap, but was told it was wrong and I lost points at mca. The new cap I was told belonged on car is of smaller diameter with tube coming off it an pointing upward part #C5ZZ6766DR car is a early 66

    Sorry, I thought you were talking about a 66 HiPo cap. If not a HiPo then the smaller diameter, upturned spout cap may be correct for your car. Bob Mannel's SBF book has all the info on this. If you are referring to a HiPo cap then the wide cap with a straight spout, like the pic above, is correct for closed emissions.

  • THIRD MEMBER

    Quote

    ...Ford did not change the axle housing to accomodate the 8 3/4 or 9 inch sizes as the are interchangeable...

    Good info Fred. I just noticed that the Ford MPC says just that, has a "note" to use the 9 inch as the service replacement for the 8-3/4. Unfortunately, probably because my copy is a 1975 issue, it doesn't list any applications for the 8-3/4 inch, just 9 inch.