Posts by bobmannel

One of the things that was done by Shelby was to remove the three front half-inch freeze plugs for the oil galleries and thread them for screw-in plugs. This was for reliability purposes.

Kevin indicated that the database recorded if a vehicle was equipped with a Thermactor system.

I agree that the number seems small, but consider that only 489 HiPos were made in 1967. Spread that out over all the states and production year and the density is pretty light. Now, think of yourself buying a 289 HiPo with smog. Might you go elsewhere to buy your car, like Nevada, Arizona, or Oregon? I would.

Today you have a rare car indeed. I have a feeling that in 1967 you would have been less happy with its uniqueness -- unless you were a enviro-friendly hippie!

If you email your pictures to me at bobmannel@charter.net, I will post them for you. I would like to see pictures of the thermactor air filter and hose connections, if still present. Much of the 289 HiPo smog was like the non-HiPo 289s, but the air filter was unique because of the open-style air cleaner did not have provisions for the bypass connection, so Ford ran the hose up to the thermactor air filter -- at least according to the assembly manuals.

Neither do I. Any 19, 20, or 21 head I have ever seen was a HiPo. And I have not found a HiPo with a number other than 19, 20, or 21.

I asked Kevin Marti about two years ago how many 289 HiPos came with thermactors. I don't think he would mind me telling this group. The number is 14.

Just because there are C7ZE heads or that the heads are machined for air injection might not be sufficient proof of being one of these cars. The injection ports could be plugged like Ford did with the C8ZE head. Look for evidence that there actually was a thermactor installed. Check for pulleys (should be a 2-groove crank pulley and three grove water pump pulley), or brackets that might have been left behind.

The 1965 289 HiPo had a part number of C5OZ-6010-A, which was superseded by C5OZ-6010-B, then C5OZ-6010-C before becoming obsolete.

The standard 289 2V/4V had a part number of C5AZ-6010-C, which was superseded by C5AZ-6010-E.

The casting number on all 1965 289s (HiPo or non-HiPo) was C5AE-6015E.

The part numbers for the crankshaft were C30Z-6303-B for the HiPo and C3AZ-6303-F for the standard 289 2V/4V. Both cranks were marked 1M.

All 289 HiPo cranks have a polished section on the rear counterweight. According to Ford sources in the plant at the time, 100% of the 289 HiPo cranks were inspected. The inspector had photographs of what the grain size should look like. He compared the 289 HiPo rear counterweight polished area under a microscope with the photos. If the grain patterns met the criteria of the photos, the crank passed the inspection. Otherwise, it was recycled. What exactly was the criteria, I don't know, but, I would guess that there was at least a normal (what to expect) and a minimum (reject) grain size pattern. Maybe I will learn more in time.

Recently a HEH-T sold on ebay with the following details:

Serial number 5F09K705784. Date code for this car would be about 26R, or April 26, 1965. Trans tag number was HEH-T 015678. Casting casting number was C30 (March 30, 1965) and extension housing is C22 (March 22, 1965)

Here are the pixs from ebay:

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/HEH-T-1.jpg]

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/HEH-T-2.jpg]

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/HEH-T-3.jpg]

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/HEH-T-4.jpg]

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/HEH-T-5.jpg]

Good documentation here to investigate the HEH-T to HEH-BX transition.

Edited by - bobmannel on 09/19/2007 07:09:30

Edited by - bobmannel on 09/19/2007 07:11:06

This might help. Note arrows are in different places.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/Mexican-HiPo-Caps.jpg]

Actually, the curved ones have been around since the 289 HiPo was introduced. Our 1963-64 Fairlane HiPos have the curved decal. The straight ones seemed to show up for 1965 production. When the 289 decals were put on the top, the Autolite decal was moved to the side and was straight.

I don't have much information on what was happening to the Mustang air cleaners. Both decals were in the supply system at the time. However, many more straight ones for the standard 289 would have been circulating. Could be whatever was handy was used, but the curved ones are more aesthetically pleasing and probably why they came to be more in favor. But, it appears that both were used.

Yes, the fans were made by Schwitzer Corp and carry the SC marking. The fans were painted black. Aluminum never held the paint very well, so most fans will be missing most of it after 40+ years.

There are two bellhousing for 6-bolt 289s. One had a casting number starting with C5D and the other was C5A. Each takes its own flywheel, indexing plate, and starter motor. Getting the two mixed up can cause the problem you described. The C5D bellhousing takes a flywheel that can mount a 10" or 10.4" clutch (160 or 157 teeth). The starter motor has a longer nose, and the index plate sets the starter closer to the engine's centerline (not much, but significant). The C5A bellhousing takes a larger flywheel (168 or 164 teeth) which can mount and 11" clutch, although most of them were machined for the smaller 10/10.4" clutch. The ring gear was more forward on the flywheel and larger in diameter. So, the indexing plate had to position the starter motor more outboard, and the starter had to be shorter where it goes into the bellhousing.

I emailed them and they said they had them ($. They also have the Autolite Spark Plug decals (curved & straight), and Use Genuine FoMoCo Parts decals. I am asking them now how to order since these decals are not listed on their website.

So, where do we buy these decals?

The picture of the engine is a mockup of the 1965 engine.

The coil was from a 1965 289. What model car I can't remember, but coils were all the same between vehicles.

You are correct. Here is a picture of the proper mounting of the coil in 1965.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/CoilPosition.jpg]

And yes, the bracket covered the stamping, and sometimes preserved it rather nicely as in this case of a 5ECB coil.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/CoilStamp.jpg]

Sounds like a "put-together" engine. Started with a 1964 289, borrowed a 64½ Mustang intake and a 65 Galaxie carburetor, and a 1968 damper.

Production Mustang HiPos all got the manual choke version. There was at least on pre-production Mustang that was loaned to the media by Ford that did have the automatic choke. But, with the June introduction of the Mustang HiPo, they would have all had manual chokes.

The Fairlane HiPo radiator was a 3-row unit. For a 64 Fairlane, the radiator core to buy is Transpro #122492. Modine has one as well #10503. The HiPo top tank was specially marked with a C4OE number. The top tank cover is the most valuable part. The rest can be replaced. In fact, you can build a HiPo radiator using a standard 62-64 20" Fairlane 2-row frame as a core. The radiator shop will have to make the bottom tank as none are available. A Mustang 3-row 20" core bottom tank would work. But, to get the numbers right, you need the HiPo radiator top cover. Otherwise, almost any 20" core top tank cover from a 2-row radiator will work. But, in this case, you might want the Transpro 128614 core which will mate to the standard top cover better. The Modine number is 10498.

I have three original coils. Two have dimples. One has no marking between the terminals. The other is marked 6B. Nothing left of the ink stamping, but I believe these coils were from the 62-63 time period. The third coil still has a good stamping 4ACC. The marking between the terminals is 5D. It has no dimple. This one came from a 64 289.

In my years of junkyard research, I have found 64 coils without dimples and 65 coils with dimples. But all the 62-63 coils had dimples and all the 66 and later coils did not. So, some time in the 64-65 they must have been mixed, but the direction was for no dimples. The dimple was used to index the coil and bracket for mounting on the intake manifold (62-64 cars). From 65 and on, the dimple was useless in production.

I also found coil brackets of four different configurations. A picture will help...

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/Coil-Brackets.jpg]

Only one is compatible with the 62-64 intake manifold mounting with dimpled coil. Another could mount the non-dimpled coil on the 62-64 manifold. All could mount the 65 coil to the head, dimpled or not, because the bracket was below the dimple.

It is possible that the marking between the terminals has more to do with identifying a particular mold for making the top. I would imagine that many coil tops were made at the same time. But, for sure, it is not a date code.

Edited by - bobmannel on 09/07/2007 13:45:00

The date on the carburetor is independent of the scheduled build date, but must be before the engine assembly date since the engine is not complete without a carburetor. Your engine date is 6B17, so a 6BC or earlier carb tag could not be questioned. I would use some other date codes around the engine to make a good choice. You can check the block casting date code, the intake manifold, heads, distributor, fan, exhaust manifolds, etc. -- whatever is not too much trouble to see. Then select a week that is not before the earliest casting and not later than the assembly date. Something in the middle if the dates are close. My guess is that a 6BA or 6BB would be fine.

>>all he has here is a set of early model standard heads<<

Not with a 3A23 date code. C2OE heads had long been replaced in production by the 1963 model year, which began in very late August 1962.

Okay, here is what Gino has. The underside has a configuration similar (but not exactly) to the late 64 and later 289 combustion chamber.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/Chamber-side.jpg]

Note the C and S markings.

Here is a close-up of the C2OE casting number.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/C2OE-marking.jpg]

The G is on the end.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/G-marking.jpg]

Here is the rocker arm side.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/rocker-side.jpg]

It is clearly cast with a 289 marking.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/289-marking.jpg]

The date code is 3A23, which is pretty late for going to Carroll Shelby because the production 289 HiPos were underway.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/date-3A23-marking.jpg]

The heads do not have the 289 HiPo valve spring seats, which were already in production for the 289 HiPo.

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Pictures/standard-valve-seats.jpg]

It is possible that these were castings of the Shelby 260 heads, but it makes no sense that they would actually be going to Shelby with a 3A23 date code. Shelby would have wanted the 289 HiPo heads. But, it would make sense if Ford was using these heads as prototypes for the late 64 289. I have seen other cases where prototype heads having a casting number from a previous head, but incorporating new combustion chamber shapes, so this head does fit that pattern. Possibly, this head must have escaped the factory, somehow. Mondello's machine work has complicated the issue. They were obviously setting this head up for some serious speed.

If anyone has any pictures of Shelby's HiPo 260 heads, I would like to see them.