Posts by Scott302

Scott302

I believe it was Jeff Speegle who told me that a shortage of systems caused San Jose cars not to get Arvinode's on a regular basis until December. Hence the notation in the catalog.

Scott

Scott302 · Rear Spring Question Scott302 August 19, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Actually the hole should be "D" shaped. The round hole did not appear until 1970.

The three distinct holes (D, square and round) also had a tang size that was unique to each hole.

Scott

Scott302 · 2 X 4 setup Scott302 December 30, 2008 at 10:26 PM

1) Ford dyno tests showed 30hp, IIRC

2) The original 289 linkage was straight line. Depending on your setup unless you had some gears or RPM's some bogging could occur. If you rotate the carbs and use the big block linkage the carbs are now progressive and is much easier to tune.

3-4) Great fun! I have Holley's on my 65 (preparing to convert to BB linkage). Also had a Carter setup on a 65 Hipo. Looks cool when you raise the hood.<img src=images/icon_smile_cool.gif border=0 align=middle>

Scott

Scott302 · Hipo H-pipe concours information Scott302 April 4, 2008 at 7:00 PM

Hipo H-pipe concours information

I am posting this information because I thought some may find this interesting from a concours research standpoint and maybe even thought provoking.

I was allowed to view the Ford blueprint for the Hipo H-pipe a few days ago. I was not allowed to copy it, but I was able to take some notes.

The print showed 2 major and one minor revision to the H-pipe. The pipe C5ZA-5246-C was originally completed on 6/24/64, approved on 6/25/64 and released on 6/30/64. On 4/6/65 the print was ammended and released as C6ZA-5246-E. On 8/18/65 the “FOMOCO” trademark was added to the pipe.

C5ZA-5246-C facts:

-Primary pipe diameter was 2” with the cross over pipe being 1.75”

-Material is listed as “LC steel tubing with .075” wall thickness.

-The item part number was to be stamped on the pipe “with a metal stamp in any suitable location.”

C6ZA-5246-E facts:

-Material was changed to “LC steel tubing, aluminum coated with a .090” wall thickness.

-“For identification purposes daub of yellow paint here 1.00” dia min either pipe for C6ZA-5246-E”. The location indicated was on the outer side of the pipe at the rear of the assembly just before the upward bend where the intermediate pipe connected. It could be placed on either pipe so long as it was visible.

-The “FOMOCO” trademark was added and was to be placed on either the outer side of the left hand pipe on the straight section between the 1st and 2nd bend after the manifold flange OR on the bottom of the right hand pipe just behind the manifold flange. The drawing was not clear on this and the location of the arrow could be interpreted either way.

In thinking about it, it seems that there must have been a reason why they wanted the trademark added to the pipe and in doing so they would want to make it visible to anyone looking at it, so the position at the bottom of the right hand pipe would be easy to see if looked at from below with the car on a hoist. My thoughts are that something prompted the addition. Possibly warranty claims for worn out pipes caused the need to be able to identify whether the H-pipe was the original Ford part versus a replacement pipe. If we go back to the revision from the C5 part to the C6 part it seems plausible that Ford recognized a need to change to a thicker aluminized pipe possibly due to premature rust out of the thinner steel pipe. Adding the trademark gave them a means of quickly identifying the part as being original to the car or replaced using a Ford service part. I do not recall seeing a TSB in regards to premature rusting of the pipe but it could have been a repair that was handled quietly. Adding the trademark would also be a longer lasting identifier than a paint daub that could burn off in time and be duplicated by anyone.

I also find it interesting that the yellow daub was specified for the C6 part. It is unclear whether the C5 part had a paint marking as the revision may have erased the original color code info and in fact the blueprint seemed to indicate that something was erased and rewritten on the original drawing. So we may never know what the color code for the early part was.

It is also possible that the change to the thicker aluminized pipe was not limited to just the Hipo H-pipe and seems likely that the change would have also effected the standard H-pipe and single exhaust Y-pipe. If things were rusting out prematurely I’ll wager they changed all the pipes at around the same time.

I hope you all find this as interesting as I did.

Regards,

Scott

Scott302 · Repo 66 Deluxe Steering wheels Scott302 August 6, 2007 at 6:03 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

National Parts Depot has them listed for $279.95 each and as a kit for $359.95. I don't know the quality of that particular version, but I got a reconditioned one several years back, I need a core charge, and except for two of the rivets that look like crap, everything else was great.

Jim

Actually what you see listed are two different wheels from two suppliers. The wheel only is VERY nice and should not upset too many judges. It's draw back it that some of them have issues with the chrome trim ring on the perimeter of the wheel becoming loose with changes in temperature & humidity. This was more evident is eearly production pieces and is much less a problem now. The other is solid and comes with nearly all the trimmings (less cap) at a great price but the wheel is obviously not an exact duplicate of the original. It's main drawback is that the spokes are more like brushed chrome (very shiny) instead of a brushed satin look. There are actually two more manufacturers out there making the woodgrain wheel but they are really bad pieces.

Scott

Scott302 · Cobra Kit Fender Insignia Scott302 August 6, 2007 at 5:23 PM

Dan,

Without them side by side I would not have known the difference. Being so slight I doubt the image I attempted to link would prove useful. Only the artwork of the logo is clearly visible and that would be subject to the artists interpretation. The actual medallions in my photo are too small to really be certain of the details. I had to dig out current production from the OE supplier to look at them closer compared to your originals. It continues to stike me as strange that a part that was given a 1963 Ford part number would not be used until late 65 or 66. I won't even attempt to discuss AC Cobra usage as I couldn't even pretend to know the peculiarities of their production. I find this kind of research absolutely facinating. I appreciate your input and sharing your collection. <img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

Scott302 · Cobra Kit Fender Insignia Scott302 August 5, 2007 at 10:45 AM

Let's see if I have this right:

[Blocked Image: http://www.photodrop.com/Get.aspx?id%20e8867509-5fbe-46ad-9e77-fc7f7ff7b629 ]

I guess not (yet)

Edited by - Scott302 on 08/05/2007 10:50:15

Scott302 · Cobra Kit Fender Insignia Scott302 August 5, 2007 at 9:39 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

C3RA-14225-A “64/66 ALL 289/427” [“Roadsters”] – a 2” round version FoMoCo commissioned and made by one of their major suppliers. It is currently believed this part became available some time in 1966 as it is not mentioned in Shelby’s May 1965 parts book. (many different counterfeits are available in the restoration market)

Also interesting is that FoMoCo and SAI advertisements printed / published prior to about the beginning of 1966 show pictures or artistic renditions of the S1CS-C 2" part. An educated guess is that the C3RA-14225-A was developed by FoMoCo to fill the volume needed for sale in "Cobra Kits" starting in early 1966. The emblems were included by 1966 in and as part of a variety of over-the-counter "Cobra kits" and a pair of emblems was the "Medallion [kit] C3RA-19D531-A". As far as I have documented the C3RA-19D531-A "kit" was only included as part of larger "Cobra Kits" and not sold individually; a pair came in a package without any identification other that the universal Cobra Kit identification decal. Individual emblems were available as service parts under their C3RA-14225-A number. FoMoCo and SAI sold or supplied the C3RA-A parts in large quantities apparently, not the 100 sets a year like Cobra production, based on availability today. Another educated guess is that C3RA-A emblems started being used in 1966 Cobra 427 production as soon as the supply of S1CS-C 2" parts ran out, some unrestored 427 Cobras still wear faded C3RA-A emblems.

Dan

Dan,

After reading your posts I thought I'd throw some fuel in the fire as I have as my wallpaper an original Ford photograph, taken in 1963, of a "Ford Cobra High Performance Engine Kits" display advertising that these parts will be available soon through service for 221, 260 & 289 Fairlane and Falcon engines. The display's sign uses both the bird and crossed flags logo and the C3RA style Cobra logo. With each "kit" on display is an actual emblem which is the C3RA piece. To me it shows that the C3RA design was already in use by Ford in 1963. Also the 1965 Ford High Performance parts book printed sometime in 1964 uses the image of the C3RA emblem consistantly throughout the book and has a separate section showing the C3RA emblems and noting that they are included with spring nuts in specific Cobra kits.

If I can figure out how to post the display image I will.

Scott

Edited by - Scott302 on 08/05/2007 09:47:27