I've always thought that the loops were there to absorb any movement of the master cylinder or chassis.
Posts by CharlesTurner
-
-
I most likely will attend the show, but doubt I would bring the '65 K convertible.
-
Quote from C6ZZKGT
I had a C5AE-M casting on my 1966 September 65 Metucheon built Hipo convertible and it was defintely original.
-Fred-
Would need to know the date casting to verify.
-
Honestly, I don't believe the fog light wiring holes were ever punched. They were part of an RPO, that would require modification to the basic unit body. Other holes like for wiring wraps, bolts and things that are consistent across all models would have been made in the forming process for each sheet metal section.
-
I'll check them within reason. Would encourage you to seek out copies for yourself.
-
The stem is screwed onto the shaft. I usually pull the knob out, exposing the metal shaft. Use a pair of needle-nose pliers to hold the shaft to unscrew the knob.
-
We've had some discussions about these holes in the past. While it is a common belief that they were stamped, there has been evidence found that they were drilled also. When one thinks about the effort required to stamp a hole (1 piece on front, one on the rear), it would not be as efficient as simply drilling the holes. The same edge on the back of the hole is attainable by drilling. Here's a couple pictures of a May '65 Dearborn GT car after it was stripped:
-
Quote from kowalski
That's confusing....
My 65 F'back has the 2-speed wipers & washers but not the other 2 items.
Doesn't seem like the sort of thing you'd special order?
Is this an original or restored car?
-
Replied to your other post. I had a '65 A code with a C6 intake, 5E1 date code.
-
First GT's we have seen were built around mid to late March '65.
-
I had a 5E1 4V intake on a car I restored a few years back. It had a C6 casting.
-
The shocks for '66 would have carried over the same applications, but the engineering numbers might have changed.
Can't explain the 3 different codes you found on build sheets.
Handling package steering box was 16:1 (4 turns). Obviously, there is an error on that Ford TSB, the tag would have been HCC-AX.
-
The '66 single year MPC does not call out engineering numbers for shocks, but it is specific that there is a version for handling package cars and one for all others.
Not aware of a source of the TSB's other than finding them for sale from time to time. Here's a scan of the TSB I referred to:
-
2-speed wipers with washers is a pretty good indication that a '65 had the Visibility Group... which included the day/nite and remote mirror. I would say that only the remote mirror and day/nite mirror could have been individual dealer-installed items. Conversion to 2-speed wipers would have been too complex.
-
Auto-Flex was not a factory-installed shock. They were mainly service replacements, some carrying a C8PF number on the fronts.
There was a TSB released sometime during '65 production, IIRC, that had all the codes for Special Handling package shocks.
This is a case where the later edition MPC is going to cause confusion.
-
The 65 and 66 single year MPC's show the same information. 38A, 42A and 45A available in '65. 38A and 42A in '66.
For other Fords in 65/66, there was a 53A,55A and 60A available.
-
If K code build sheets are calling out a code in the ALT section, I'd have to guess that that is due to the larger pulley.
What MPC are you using that shows only 38A and 42A were available on Mustangs and what model year are you referring to?
-
Hopefully these training manual pages will help clear things up...
From 11/64 manual:
http://www.early-mustang.com/charles/alt_id…tion/Image3.jpg
From 8/65 manual:
http://www.early-mustang.com/charles/alt_id…tion/Image2.jpg
From 8/66 manual:
http://www.early-mustang.com/charles/alt_id…tion/Image1.jpg
The 11/64 is the most revealing in description.
-
This post probably should be moved as this is the "for sale".
Regardless, it is an interesting topic. I don't know that we can ever do anything about folks that re-stamp blocks/transmissions and try to pass them off as original. I'd like to think that with so few K cars that have survived, there would typically be some ownership/car history that would help in determining fraud. For example, if you are looking to buy a K code, which is advertised as matching numbers with a VIN stamped block, using resources such as this site might yield further information on the car that shows it was sold a while back with a non-matching numbers block. Either the new owner got really lucky and found the original block or new numbers were stamped. I would challenge that of the few engines that a VIN has been stamped, under scrutiny, differences could be seen. It wouldn't take that many samples from the same assembly plant and time period to make an educated guess if a VIN stamp is real or fake.
All in all, we really have no way of knowing if registry cars are legit. Owners/buyers have to leverage resources and do their homework to determine what is real and what isn't.
-
There could be previous damage that exaggerated the bend. Here's the same area on another car, don't believe there was ever front end damage to it:
