Posts by RalphJr

The same block was used for 2 barrel and 4 barrel engines - only difference is the intake.

HiPos were only built with 4 barrel intakes.

Edited by - RalphJr on 02/19/2011 11:59:41

General theory is that all 5 BOLT HiPo blocks were stamped with a sequential number on the square block boss - drivers side rear of block near where the clutch pivot is. You can find details & photos of this by searching this site.

Most (but maybe not all) Mustang HiPo blocks were VIN stamped but only if they actually went into a car.

Not sure if a Fairlane 5 bolt HiPo would have a VIN stamp - but would defintely have a sequential number according to posts here.

A Service block would probably not have been stamped at all.

Verifying a TRUE Hipo block is difficult - especially if a sequential number or K code VIN stamp doesn't exist. Regular 289 and HiPo 289 blocks are the same casting - HiPo's were just picked special somehow (no one is 100% sure) and machined with the larger main caps.

The heavy main caps can be added to any regular 289 block with proper machining. Doesn't make it a ture HiPo block or worth the same money.

The direction of the gear teeth depends upon which side of the transmission the gear/cable goes in.

3 speed and autos have the cable on one side - toploaders on the other - don't remember which.

BUT don't get them confused!!! The gear on the tail shaft of the tranny is soft plastic too - if you use the wrong gear and chew up both it is a PAIN to fix.

Bill,

I've always like Tigers myself too. I'd love to have a shot at one to restore and hot rod.

The local Tiger group in Tulsa OK would attend the Mid-America Shelby meet for many years. I spoke to a few of these Tiger owners back in the 80's when they attended regularly.

The only 2 things I can tell you is they all LOVED their cars BUT to a man they all complained about the difficulty in finding parts, serious overheating issues, and really bad wiring.

You can probably elminate these with modern stuff today unless originality is the goal.

I hope this helps.

Bill - you are correct - I forgot about the issue with the linkage. The Borgeson box is much bigger at the top than the original box.

Didn't impact my daughters car because it is an AOD now.

Sorry I didn't remember that.

Bill,

Yes my daughters car was just an A code - found it in a barn - it is a highly optioned A code and did have an original 8 grand Rally Pac installed. My heart skipped a beat when I first looked at it because I saw the Rally Pac first and thought it MIGHT be a K code! Not quite THAT lucky! But I did get a correct Rally-Pac for my K code out of the deal and made some great father/daughter memories putting the car together for her!

The balancer issue will have to be resolved regardless of any PS system you use - because you need to add a different lower pulley to add a belt groove to drive the PS pump.

This is the same issue people face when they try to add AC to the K code motor. They have to change the lower crank drive pulley and very few fit the original HiPo balancer.

The original K code balancer has a smaller inner diameter for the pulley "lip" than other balancers and has to be opened up a little.

Fred offers a good solution - use the Ford replacement hipo balancer rather than the original - it will work and sounds like Ford corrected the diameter issue. With this change you can use almost any FoMoCo small block multi-groove crank pulley as long as the grooves line up, are the correct belt width, and the diameter is OK. I think the best fit will be a regular '65 /'66 multi-groove lower pulley - and should be easy to find - but I'm definitely not an expert on pulley stuff. Fred is a great resource for questions like this.

I can check and see if I have the '66 crank pulley if you want. Not sure since the motor was gone from the car when I pulled it from the barn. I did get a big box of stuff - I know the PS bracket is in there, not sure about the crank pulley.

Edited by - RalphJr on 01/20/2011 13:32:32

BJ...BS - no way to know.

Love this '66 rally wheels - must have had a time warp back then to put them on a '65.

Oh wait...

Looks like a nice car. I would look it over though.

Harmonic balancer is a replacement step type - water pump is an aftermarket replacement - pump I understand - balancer would make me ask for oil pan removal to check motor internals if VIN stamp isn't present.

I'd like to see some underside shots too.

I put the Borgeson retro-fit PS box in my daughter's '66 - works GREAT. A big improvement over the sloppy original worn out box and NO LEAKS down below!

You have to cut down the original steering column - I did this to save money on a kids car.

You also have to use the manual steering linkage - an extra cost for me since I pulled out the original PS stuff.

If money isn't a major issue I'd also go with an Ididit tilt column instead of cutting down the original - saves on some of the Borgeson part cost, will make the install go much faster, and will give you tilt.

You will still be way cheaper than a rack & pinion set up.

Borgeson kit using '93 Ford pump from EFI motor in the car ran me about $800 - new everything. Borgeson stuff was about $750 and I added a new part store pump so everything was new. I only had to modify one end of the pressure hose to fit the Ford pump - parts store did this for $20. I grafted a Ford hose pump end onto the Borgeson hose. I'm not including the $250 I spent to replace the steering linkage.

Go to http://www.borgeson.com for details. I think I may have some photos too if you are interested in this swap.

The Ididit column would be an extra $400-$600 depending upon where you buy it and which version you get. But defintely worth it. This is what I would do next time.

If you are interested in the original set up I have most everything you need all pulled off my daughters '66 - sitting in a box. I'll make you a hell of a deal on it. The only thing I don't have is the original pump - I have the pump bracket, but installed a '93 GT EFI motor in the car and adapted the later style pump to the original Ford system. System worked and didn't leak - once I rebuilt the control valve. Big issue was the original worm type steering box - it was SHOT!

Send me an email if you are interested - I can send you photos of everything.

Edited by - RalphJr on 01/19/2011 18:15:01

The motor mounts weren't painted.

What you see in the pics is how all early HiPo mounts should be.

Yes - true - mostly for sound deadening.

I'd like to know too - looks really thick and hard to duplicate.

Maybe the resto magic of Caspian65 can help?

eBay item number 260719808153

Complete engine - wow - must have been pulled out of a car early and put into a race boat.

VIN stamped # 5F07K718013

Looks very complete and original - even has the button top fuel pump.

Welcome Mark - you'll find tons of info here and a realy nice group.

Definitely will help your research on K codes and proper restoration tips abound!

Sounds like you have a nice project and found more than you expected!

The gang here is great and will be very helpful.

I live in the Atlanta area...have been in the Frasier Dante shop.

I'm not impressed with most of what is offered - over priced and incorrectly or quickly restored.

I question the "no expense spared" restoration here...just look for the bad welding on the axle tube of the rear end and the incorrect brake lines.

I'd bet you'll find dozens of other issues if you look.

Typical "dealer" hype IMHO.

I think NPD is likely wrong - but check your locak Autoparts store.

The gaskets I just replaced on my daughters '66 with a '93 302 were different. The same gasket in both places might not work - won't on a later model - so check before you buy.

If you really want big brakes and 17" wheels - check out http://www.mustangsteve.com.

He makes nice brackets to put 13" Cobra brakes on your stock Mustang spindles. Then you want to talk to him about cutting down two '94-'04 Mustang 5 spoke rims for the front. Or you need to talk to Mustang's Unlimited about one of their aftermarket 5 spoke 17" wheel packages (2 17x7" for front - 2 17x8" for rear). They have a set sitting on the showroom floor in Georgia right now - wheels and tires for $900.

With the 13" Cobra front discs you keep the standard track width, turning radius, and don't even have to re-align the car to do the swap. The issue is with the wide later model rim - 17x8 won't FIT on the front without looking weird - really really weird - because you have to use a 1" spacer to clear. 17x7 will clear the suspension and look correct in the wheel well without the spacer. So you either have to use a 17x7" rim or have the later Mustang 17x8" rim cut down in the back and re-welded together - there are a number of wheel shops that do this but it is a little expensive - necessary however to get the wheels to look right - otherwise the rims stick out WAY too far and you look like an old dirt track car!

Mustang Monthly had Steve's '66 Fastback featured last year with his brake and wheel mods - I LIKE IT! You be the judge.

http://www.mustangmonthly.com/featuredvehicl…g_gt/index.html

I hope this helps.

Edited by - RalphJr on 01/06/2011 17:39:38

It has the stars - just really hard to see with the thick paint. You will see a slight one up front and just a dimple in the back - photo is not the best.

Nice looking car, but the devil is in the details. Lots of little things wrong - like rear seat belts and 8 track with door speakers - neither one availabe or correct for a '65. Both the rear seat belt holes, cut dash, and the door speaker holes will be difficult or impossible to repair back to original.

And what about that ill fitted rear fender cap? WOW for a dealer I would have expected a little better. This looks REALLY bad in the photos - might just be on crooked - might tell you that the rear quarter was replaced poorly - something to check out before buying.

I DO like the hubcap treatment too!!!<img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> You don't see many this way anymore. Nice color combo.

Virgina Classic Mustang - available in black only right now but Brent is working on more colors - or so the thread said..

Welcome!

While the information regarding GT status is well know, I wouldn't beleive everything you read on the internet.

Yes Ford did not introduce the GT package right away - it was a mid-year '65 option to celebrate the success of the Mustang. The official release date was in April '65 - with cars built a month or two prior to fill the pipeline.

The dates and serial numbers are approximate guesses at BEST. The only TRUE way to tell a real factory GT from one someone put together themselves is documented here on the site very well - it is a few key metal pieces unique to a K code and GT car in '65. Someone who is very knowledgeable and skilled could make all of the necessary changes - but it would not be simple or maybe even cost effective to do it IMHO.

All of the Ford production records from that era were destroyed - so no one can say for sure when or how the first one was built - so please be careful with the information people put out there for public consumption.

And remember Al Gore created the internet!

<img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>