Recent Posts

1

1970 Mustang / Re: 70 428CJ Question about emissions sticker

« Last post by Tucson Bruce on Today at 09:02:53 PM »

Hi John,
Yep, it's me.  I finally signed up to post on here after many years of just stopping by.  I always read your postings, you are a real expert on the 70 Mustangs, thanks for sharing your wisdom.

2

1967 Mustang / Re: 1967 Fastback 289 2V Engine Mounts

« Last post by RickP330 on Today at 08:12:24 PM »

Okay, so I think I got a handle on this, but getting confirmation is difficult.  The parts suppliers simply do not know the minutia of these details.

So a set of aftermarket frame side mounts is listed as fitting 1965 to 70 and the motor mounts are listed as 1965 to 72.

It appears only the 1967 factory frame side hardware is unique. 

If I just purchase the aftermarket frame side brackets and motor mounts it will fit my car and the motor will sit correctly in the chassis.  At least that is what I am thinking.  If it weren't for the fact I am doing major reconstructive work in this frame rail and shock tower area I would just put it in and take some measurements, but I'll be placing the shock towers based on a mock up of the engine and transmission with these as connecting parts.  I'd like to know before I start fixing parts permanently.

Does the above logic sound reasonable enough?  Is anyone out there with first hand experience that can offer any advice?

PS I am not being that particular about being correct.
RP

3

General Discussion / Re: History of my Mustang

« Last post by Tiny on Today at 05:06:57 PM »

Its been quite a while since I owned that Mustang, I now have a 67 390 GT Coupe.  The 66 was my first Mustang and I restored it as much as original as possible, so all of the suspension, exhaust interior engine bay etc was Factory.  I prefer the original look that the souped up versions of the Mustang.

4

Parts for Sale / Re: 1964 / 65 / 66 DEP C4ZE-8005 A14AE radiator for M/trans (price reduced)

« Last post by CW4macret on Today at 03:39:47 PM »

Bump

5

1969 Mustang / Re: 1969 351 2V carburettor

« Last post by Coralsnake on Today at 03:20:42 PM »

Not sure if this will help, but it might

Its going to matter if its for a manual or automatic trans, but it will look similar to this one:

https://www.northeastclassicfordparts.com/product/professionally-rebuilt-autolite-2100-2bbl-carburetor-auto-trans-manual-choke-1-23-venturi-1968-1969-f-series-390ci/

Not concours, but the C9ZF-A is for manuals

 https://secure.cougarpartscatalog.com/c9zf-9510-a.html

The C9ZF-B is for automatics

6

Parts for Sale / Re: 12-65 dated San Jose radiator automatic transmission

« Last post by mgreene on Today at 11:42:29 AM »

Thanks!  That worked!

7

1964 1/2 - 1965 / Re: Holes in dash

« Last post by jwc66k on Today at 11:41:22 AM »

As I read the post the GT light switch was one (the first) of two requests \

OP  wrote - "I would also like to weld all other holes under the dash. Some are pretty obvious that they were added at a later point. Others I can't tell for sure."   

It's my one track mind in action. 
Jim

8

Parts for Sale / Re: 12-65 dated San Jose radiator automatic transmission

« Last post by jwc66k on Today at 11:36:14 AM »

Phil, do you have a way to save these images to a more accessible format like jpeg or png? None of my older image apps recognize the Apple .heic format.

Try https://cloudconvert.com/heic-converter
There are others.
Jim

9

Parts for Sale / Re: 12-65 dated San Jose radiator automatic transmission

« Last post by mgreene on Today at 10:17:10 AM »

Phil, do you have a way to save these images to a more accessible format like jpeg or png? None of my older image apps recognize the Apple .heic format.

10

General Discussion / Re: History of my Mustang

« Last post by Coralsnake on Today at 10:16:59 AM »

Did the 1966 use that squirrely font?