Posts by bobmannel

I do send them there, but it is costly -- $36.90 for Air Mail postage (4-10 days), or $22.75 for surface (4-6 weeks). I encourage the former because 4-6 weeks is a long time. You can order through the website, but make a special note in the comments section that it is for Australia. I then email you with the corrected charges. You are not charged on your card until you approve by retuen email. End of commercial....

When I wrote my book "Mustang & Ford Small Block V8", I encountered many surprises that conflicted with stated Ford sources. I considered one exception sufficient to look for a second. If a second was found, I looked for a third as confirmation. If the third case was found, I considered the information confirmed. Now, I am not talking about butchered up engines that looked like they had been worked over by a teenage hotrodder, but engines that had all the evidence of never being molested. There was a case where I was led astray by a single source that was adamant about a HiPo head marked C5AE-E, so I understand the problem. In my case, I trusted the person providing the info and put the information in my book. When I finally had the chance to examine the heads in question, I was appalled to find they were standard 289 heads, and the adamant opinion became a "well I thought they were." So, caution is wise, but where clear contradictions are found, it is best to address them. In the case here, I pointed out that an August 1965 revision to the Ford Master Parts Catalog did not even include the HEH-BX transmission, nor was a 10-1-64 date mentioned. Considering that this revision is a year after the 10-1-64 date and the date is not mentioned, is significant. When combined with the empirical data that to date no 65 Mustang has had the HEH-BX transmission, it merits mentioning.

When I wrote my book, I knew there would be errors, typos, and new information coming to light. I wanted the book to be a living book. So, I established a "List of Changes" which is posted on my website (http://www.fordsmallblock.com). It is updated as needed and available at any time as a free PDF download. You can then make changes in your book in areas of concern to you. True, not every book buyer knows how to access the information. Although I send a sheet of paper with each book sold telling where to find the changes (along with critical changes listed on the sheet), I am sure not everyone gets the word. But, it is the best I can do.

Edited by - bobmannel on 04/07/2007 14:01:15

For the 64½ Mustang, the number would be four digits long. Always possible the stamping was not level, so numbers could be deep on one side and disappear on the other.

To summarize. All 4-speeds listed so far in this forum through August 65 have been HEH-T, all 1965 Mustangs. Earliest HEH-BX listed is 9-18-65, which was a 1966 Mustang. Looking more like the HEH-T was 1965 and HEH-BX was 1966. There could be some sloppy in the transition between 1965 and 1966 production. The 10-1-64 date, if in error and should have been 10-1-65, could represent the HEH-T slipping over into 66 production. What is needed is more data on August and September Mustangs (late 65/early 66). Need just one case of an early (September) 1966 Mustang with the HEH-T. (Or even a late 65 with HEH-BX.)

Yes, Both BR and BT are wide ratios. It was the sequence that was interesting. In and of itself, not important, but as a clue as to the date, possibly. It just fit with the other clues as a possible explanation of HEH-T boxes after 10-1-64. Hopefully, more data will help uncover the mystery.

WOW! This site is blazing. Very enjoyable whipping through the forums. My thanks to the hard workers who made it happen!!

>>What I have found most interesting is how varied and out of sequence the dates on balancers and distibutors have proven to be.<<

Would like to hear more about this...

Is your car an automatic? Ford parts books listed only a 3.50:1 rear with Equa-lock. The 3.50 was generally used with an automatic, although optional with the 4-speed. I don't think Ford trusted the Equa-lock limited-slip behind a high revving high performance engine -- probably anticipated too much warranty work. Torque sensitive locking rears would come out in 1968.

I am not an expert of HiPo trans, but with this discussion about the HEH-T, I thought I would do some checking. Ford listed the HEH-T for 8-20-64 to 10-1-64. (The 8-20-64 date, by the way, is not good. The transition was 8-3-64 [a Monday after the weekend].) The part number for the HEH-T was C5ZZ-7003-C, which has an engineering number of C5ZR-7003-C. The HEH-BX with followed (supposedly after 10-1-64) was C5ZZ-7003-W, with an engineering number of C6ZR-7003-B. I have a Ford Master Parts Catalog dated August 1965. It lists ONLY the HEH-T for the Mustang HiPo. It does list the standard 4-speed toploaders HEH-BR and HEH-BT transition as 2-1-65. Now putting together that the BX would probably be after the BT, the fact that HEH-T 4-speeds are being found after 10-1-64, and the engineering number of the HEH-BX is a 1966 part number, it seems reasonable that there is a good change the 10-1-64 date should have been 10-1-65, which would have been early 1966 production. So, find some early 1966 HiPos and see what the transmission tags have to say. It might help determine if the 10-1-65 date is correct if HEH-T boxes are found in early 66.

I have to agree. The sudden stops in responding are hindering growth. If I can get on and off quickly, it works well. But, the starts and stops make me feel like my feet are stuck in tar. I think we could be entering a death spiral -- less active, less reason to visit, which means less acrive, etc. Forums need to be fast or they would last.

Thanks, Please keep the info coming....

My research into HiPo air cleaners in 1965 seem to indicate that the rounded style were replaced by the flattop style sometime in 1965. I would like to ask those with original cars, which style air cleaner did your car have and what was the assembly date of the engine, scheduled build day of the car, and assembly plant?

Rounded style

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Media/roundtop.jpg]

Flattop

[Blocked Image: http://www.fordsmallblock.com/Media/flattop.jpg]

Edited by - bobmannel on 03/18/2007 22:03:11

Check with Marti Auto Works. He can give you a report with all the details for a nominal price. You are is rare -- in the hundreds.

The TSB called for flaring the cup end .005"-.010" more for better retention. They suggested using a ballbearing slight larger than the inner diameter and tapping it to enlarge the opening. The cup should be sealed with a Permatex No. 2 and driven with a flat-end punch until the edge of the cup is just below the chamfer hole. In thirty years of driving, I never had one I installed come out, so if done properly, freeze plugs work fine. Carroll Shelby left them in in the street Mustang GT-350. But, for the race GT-350, Cobra Coupes, and GT-40 (350 & 380 hp versions) he used threaded plugs. Can't argue with "better" and threaded plugs are definitely better.

The Comet 289 HiPo option was actually announced by Mercury's 1964 TSB #3 dated 10-4-63. This bulletin was superseded by #3A dated 4-17-64. #3 was supposed to be destroyed, but I have a copy. #3 offered only the 3-speed with 2.71:1 rear, which was essentially the Daytona Durablity Run package. #3A added a 4-speed with 3.89:1 rear option as well. As a piece of trivia, Mercury was supposed to code the 289 HiPo was "D" in the VIN, but it never happened. If they had, it would have resulted in the Comet and Mustang using opposite coding for the 289 regular-fueled 4V and the 289 HiPo. I think Mercury coded the regular 289 4V as K to cause the uninformed to think they had a "hot" engine. But, I will say that this was a great engine for around-town driving. Good motor in the Mustang, too. A heck of a lot better than the 260 2V!

The C5OE head was used from 1965 to late 1967 production. The C7ZE head was used only in late 1967. It was replaced by the C8ZE-B head in 1968. The only difference between the C7ZE and C5OE head was that the C7ZE head was cast to allow incorporation of the California smog system (exterior log type). The head was only machined for smog if it was actually used. Smog was installed on California 289 HiPos after May 9, 1967. There were 14 cars so equipped. The C8ZE-B head was always machined for smog and included 4 plugs per head if used on non-smog engines.

I put the answer in my book (Mustang & Ford Small Block V8) on page 3-3. Carroll Shelby installed front screw-in plugs for the oil galleries when he reworked the 289 HiPo for competition versions of the Mustang GT-350 (rated at 350 hp), and for the Cobra Daytona coupes and Ford GT prototype race cars (380 hp). All other used the ½" freeze plugs. Of course, anyone could modify the engine, but from the factory, production 289 HiPos used freeze plugs.

With so little data available to see specific trends, I wouldn't question any part dated within two months of the assembly date, but much better to be within a month, and better still if within two weeks. Two weeks is "numbers matching" in my mind, but I would not question someone saying their car is all original with the dates within two months.

Yes, I still have the 63 Fairlane 4-door.

Not true. The 289 HiPo blocks were the same -- no block modifications (other than mains). Oil still went to each lifter, into the lifter, and up through the push rods. The Ford blueprints for the 289 HiPo list the dye-penetrant inspection and the heavy-duty main bearing caps, but everything else was "SAME AS", then listed the engineering number for the standard 289.

Production 289 HiPo blocks had no oil restrictors in them. Performance modifiers did many things to the HiPo. Shelby did many things to the competition 289 HiPos, but much less to the production HiPos for the GT-350 street versions.