Author Topic: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?  (Read 1342 times)

Offline drummingrocks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1245
Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« on: February 05, 2017, 09:00:27 PM »
I recently brought home a '65 fastback that's been sitting since the 1970s.  I plan on replacing all of the fuel lines, but I saw in NPD's catalog that there are early and late versions for some of the lines.  I'm not sure which is correct for my car.  The car was built on February 12th, 1965.

Both the 'fuel tank to fuel pump' and the 'fuel pump to carburetor' lines come in an early and late style.  Looking at the NPD catalog, the fuel pump to carburetor line either goes in front of the distributor or behind it.  I believe mine originally went behind the distributor, though it's been modified to hook up to a Holley carburetor (see picture below).



Does anyone know what the difference is between the early and late fuel tank to fuel pump line, and which would be correct for my car?

 
--1965 fastback, 289/4-spd, built Feb. '65 at Dearborn
--1965 convertible, 289/4-spd, built Mar. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 GT fastback, 289/4-spd, built Dec. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 coupe, 200/3-spd, built Dec. '65 at NJ (in the family since 1968)
--1967 coupe, 289/C4, built Dec. '66 at NJ
--2017 GT

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14505
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2017, 05:57:29 PM »
Don't recall any differences I can think of other than the single verses dual exhaust differences
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3633
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2017, 06:03:29 PM »
Don't recall any differences I can think of other than the single verses dual exhaust differences
Front of distributor - early, vs back of distributor - late. Is the "early" a 64 routing?
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline drummingrocks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1245
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2017, 09:49:08 AM »
I know it's tough to go off of a picture on a website, but the early and late lines from NPD look identical, at least to my eye.
--1965 fastback, 289/4-spd, built Feb. '65 at Dearborn
--1965 convertible, 289/4-spd, built Mar. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 GT fastback, 289/4-spd, built Dec. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 coupe, 200/3-spd, built Dec. '65 at NJ (in the family since 1968)
--1967 coupe, 289/C4, built Dec. '66 at NJ
--2017 GT

Offline DKutz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 281
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2017, 05:30:26 PM »
Front of distributor - early, vs back of distributor - late. Is the "early" a 64 routing?
Jim

what would be the date cut off for this??
1965 Mustang Fastback 'A' Code, silver Blue Met, Med blue int. Auto, San Jose, 10/8/64 #1449**

Gone but not forgotten - 1996 Mustang GT

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14505
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2017, 07:23:30 PM »
what would be the date cut off for this??

Doubt if we can collect enough engine assembly dates at this point since its an engine plant rather than car plant thing

Guess we can maybe find a range or period like in other details.
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline midlife

  • Wiring Guru---let me check your shorts!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
    • Midlife Harness Restorations
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #6 on: February 07, 2017, 07:48:44 PM »
Does Mannel's book talk about this at all?  I'm surprised if it wasn't.

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1540
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #7 on: February 07, 2017, 10:46:18 PM »
It sure does.  On page 5-25 it talks about a "standard" line for 65, but mentions that in some cases the "old style" was used.  There are pictures of both.
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
MCA 74660

Offline rodster

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 827
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #8 on: February 08, 2017, 12:14:40 AM »
It sure does.  On page 5-25 it talks about a "standard" line for 65, but mentions that in some cases the "old style" was used.  There are pictures of both.

A 'Must Have' if you want details on a small block Ford.  ;)

http://www.fordsmallblock.com/order.html
1965 Dearborn Mustang Coupe
Raven Black - Palomino Pony
1967 Dearborn Mustang Conv.
Wimbeldon White - Red
1984 SVO - 2A

Offline drummingrocks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1245
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2017, 12:59:40 PM »
I have Mannel's book at home, but haven't had time to revisit this issue.  So we know what the difference is for the line near the distributor, but does anyone know what was different on fuel pump to fuel tank line?  Or is that in Mannel's book also?

Thanks again for all of the help.
--1965 fastback, 289/4-spd, built Feb. '65 at Dearborn
--1965 convertible, 289/4-spd, built Mar. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 GT fastback, 289/4-spd, built Dec. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 coupe, 200/3-spd, built Dec. '65 at NJ (in the family since 1968)
--1967 coupe, 289/C4, built Dec. '66 at NJ
--2017 GT

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1540
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2017, 01:51:30 PM »
The book is engine centric so it does not cover the tank to pump line.
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
MCA 74660

Offline drummingrocks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1245
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2017, 08:45:36 AM »
Thanks, guys.  After looking at Mannel's book, the difference is obvious--my car definitely had the carburetor line that routed behind the distributor. 

I can't really see much difference on the early/late pump to tank line, so I'm going to order the later style and see if it matches up.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2017, 08:49:46 AM by drummingrocks »
--1965 fastback, 289/4-spd, built Feb. '65 at Dearborn
--1965 convertible, 289/4-spd, built Mar. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 GT fastback, 289/4-spd, built Dec. '65 at Dearborn
--1966 coupe, 200/3-spd, built Dec. '65 at NJ (in the family since 1968)
--1967 coupe, 289/C4, built Dec. '66 at NJ
--2017 GT

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3633
Re: Fuel Lines for '65 289: Early versus Late?
« Reply #12 on: February 12, 2017, 03:29:10 PM »
After further review (when does the NFL season start?), the NPD catalog has two entries for tank to pump fuel lines for both I-6 and V-8 applications. Addressing the V-8 for now, one line is listed as "65 early" and the other as "65-66". I interpret that as Ford talk (Ford never built a 64 or 64 1/2 Mustang, just early and late 65 models - we identify the differences differently) and for our purposes should read it as 64, and 65-66. The same for the I-6.
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.