ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1967 Mustang => Topic started by: travnemi on June 26, 2015, 11:06:15 PM
-
Hi there,
I have a 1967 GTA S Code Dec. built in San Jose. Here's a picture of it roughly pieced together. Please pick it apart and let me know what I could do to improve it. I have all the cadmium plated high pressure clamps ordered and the wire clamps.
Thanks for looking
-
Here's another pic
-
Hi there,
I have a 1967 GTA S Code Dec. built in San Jose. Here's a picture of it roughly pieced together. Please pick it apart and let me know what I could do to improve it. I have all the cadmium plated high pressure clamps ordered and the wire clamps.
Thanks for looking
Need wire clamp on short pcv hose as well as other hoses but you are aware. Fitting going into the intake was painted with the engine. Other fitting not painted. I can't tell for sure but looks like staples are missing on valve cover gasket tabs.
-
Here's another pic
Electric choke is quite noticeable out of place given all the other attention to original detail.
-
Bob here two pics, please let me know if what I said is correct. Ok, you peeked my interest, What's wrong with the electric choke? I included a pick of the part number of the carb.
-
Bob here two pics, please let me know if what I said is correct. Ok, you peeked my interest, What's wrong with the electric choke? I included a pick of the part number of the carb.
Fittings are painted and unpainted as you marked. The electric choke(starting in late 70's?) is a more modern modification of a original carburetor. Original automatic choke should have insulated choke tube and fresh air tube going to carb. The electrical harness to the electric choke would logically be suspect too.
-
Thank you Bob for all your help.
How's the thermactor hose placement? Having the low pressure hoses over the high pressure hoses is correct?
Off topic, I included 4 pics, the first two are of my carb and the second two are of the same carb i found on the internet. I see where I'm missing the tube above the automatic choke. There's a lot of the same modifications out there. Would you know where I could find the correct automatic choke and is that the only thing wrong with my carb?
Thanks again for all your help,
Travis
-
Travis, is your valve cover grommet for the PCV valve a reproduction ? There is a picture of the one on my car and the PCV valve in a post below this post and the grommet looks different and the number is different.
-
Yes, it's a repo. I don't believe I'll get marked down on it though. I couldn't find a NOS at the time of purchasing.
-
Thank you Bob for all your help.
How's the thermactor hose placement? Having the low pressure hoses over the high pressure hoses is correct?
Off topic, I included 4 pics, the first two are of my carb and the second two are of the same carb i found on the internet. I see where I'm missing the tube above the automatic choke. There's a lot of the same modifications out there. Would you know where I could find the correct automatic choke and is that the only thing wrong with my carb?
Thanks again for all your help,
Travis
I cannot be considered an expert on specific carb details for your application, but I did notice something that nobody else commented yet on.
It looks to me as though there might be Teflon tape or a sealant on the fuel transfer tube. I am not understanding that to be concours correct, maybe somebody more qualified can elaborate on this note.
-
Guys already addressed the vacuum blocks. Lets see about the rest - sorry for the long list. Numbered them just too keep the discussion neat
1- Of course we have the clamps locations to cover
2- The idle compensator block finish (should be dichrome) interesting that you have an automatic carb but no idle compensator. Not sure when the hose was attached and how far up engine color would have been on a thermactor engine but on non Thermactors the paint can be applied up to the PCV block at times
3- Base of the gulp valve would be the goldish green protective coat like found on the PVS/vacuum tee and the steel top dichromate
4- Guess your car was built during the period when the thermactor pump air filter was attached to the shock tower by the hose your using
5- Thermactor Hose tee would be a greenish gold finish rather than the bare metal
6- As 67gtasanjose mentioned no Teflon tape on any connection
7- Interesting carb tag - in green dye? Thought they were brass on Thermactor cars - will check my notes and Ford documents
8- Doesn't look like the small diameter steel hose is long enough to reach the front of the engine. It normally reaches to the area just in front of the carb on the passenger side then attaches with a rubber hose to that vacuum block at the front of the intake. Might be from a small block application
9- Since you mentioned where you got this - I wonder if its off the 67 Dearborn built Cougar he had. Piece look very much the same though the PCV - to gulp to intake hoses have been reconfigured and one replaced. Seen many with a short straight hose between the idle compensator block (if you had AC) and the PCV block ( compensator block flipped over 180 degrees). Rather than using the L shape hose you show.
10- Not associated the Thermactor system. Things like hardware finishes on carb pieces. Arms, screws, retainers .... That might be better to save for another thread unrelated to the smog system
Well that's a start. Think I've got 20 reference books covering the 66-69 Thermactor systems - unfortunately allot of the illustrations are generic in fashion.
-
Jeff's #7 statement about the greenish tag is referring to a carb picture found on the internet, NOT the O.P.'s carburetor tag~ This carb (tag) would conceivably be from a non-thermactor application, therefore mentioning the incorrect tag clarifies that the correct tag would be brass, not greenish.
Otherwise, would that particular image be a good representation of what the OP should be looking to correct on his carburetor?
-
I believe that is a marti made or similar brass tag with a protective plastic film not pealed off yet.
-
Jeff's #7 statement about the greenish tag is referring to a carb picture found on the internet, NOT the O.P.'s carburetor tag~ This carb (tag) would conceivably be from a non-thermactor application, therefore mentioning the incorrect tag clarifies that the correct tag would be brass, not greenish.
Sorry missed that the pictures were of two different carbs and from different sources
Otherwise, would that particular image be a good representation of what the OP should be looking to correct on his carburetor?
Most of the pictures I have of Holley carbs are either original (so the finishes are weak or missing) or NOS (which will have some variations with the originals being service parts.
travnemi's carb looks like its been "cleaned" or stripped removing most or all of the dirchromate finishes and black oxzide ones. Fuel filter is easier to replace with a new one rather than replating, removing any markings and adding (one of the few times where a clear decal is original ) the correct C7 decal to it.
Not sure if he wants to spend the money to send it out for everything to get recolored - especially since little is seen once the air cleaner is in place. His choose.
I think the fuel filter, the teflon tape and the choke cover is a prefect first step where ever he chooses to go after that.
If I recall correctly the choke cover has a GT visible on the cover once installed - going from memory but it is covered in the TSB that introduced the Holley
CHECKED - I remember incorrectly. The GT cover was a detail associated with the 68 428CJ Holley carb :(
-
Thanks everyone, this is such a big help.
Travis
-
Jeff I had questions on this tube, you wrote;
-Doesn't look like the small diameter steel hose is long enough to reach the front of the engine. It normally reaches to the area just in front of the carb on the passenger side then attaches with a rubber hose to that vacuum block at the front of the intake. Might be from a small block application.
I have a longer tube but it has threaded brass fittings on both ends. The tube doesn't connect to the back at the base of the carburetor?
Thanks,
Travis
-
Jeff I had questions on this tube, you wrote;
-Doesn't look like the small diameter steel hose is long enough to reach the front of the engine. It normally reaches to the area just in front of the carb on the passenger side then attaches with a rubber hose to that vacuum block at the front of the intake. Might be from a small block application.
I have a longer tube but it has threaded brass fittings on both ends. The tube doesn't connect to the back at the base of the carburetor?
The small vacuum tube you have is likely from a small block or other application. vacuum source is the vacuum block located at the front of the intake (one the U or Y shaped steel vacuum tube screws into as shown below. Connects at that end with a short piece of rubber hose. Its also formed with the typical (like used in early dist vacuum steel lines) That loop is shown in the earlier picture of the unrestored example
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-010715215747.jpeg)
So
Yellow arrow - Rubber vacuum hose connecting long thin steel line from the back tire valve to vacuum block attached to the intake
Blue arrow - Big steel tube/line connecting front and rear intake vacuum connections and the PCV nipple
Green arrow - Long thin steel line from the back tire valve
Red arrow - A very rare (only seen a couple) sheetmetal clamp that was designed to hold the thin and large vacuum lines together. In the picture the clip has fallen/moved off of the large steel tube
-
Sweet thanks Jeff!!!!
The sheet metal clamp was like a S shape clamp?
ThNks
Travis
-
Thanks Jeff!!
Here's another question, are the bolts correct on the Anti back fire valve back fire valve bracket in the picture below.
-
Sweet thanks Jeff!!!!
The sheet metal clamp was like a S shape clamp?
Believe so - as mentioned - don't think I've ever seen one in person
Here's another question, are the bolts correct on the Anti back fire valve back fire valve bracket in the picture below.
Merged this post with the other related ones
All four bolt finishes should match :)
And what is the "strings" under the intake mounting bolts?
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-090715213752.jpeg)
-
Ok here I go again!!
I just received some part for the thremactor system. Before I go crazy painting, I just want to make sure I'm painting the right hoses and fittings. I placed arrows where I believe paint would go(I don't have any spring clamps on there yet, and they get painted too). The hose I'm really not sure about is the one that goes between the anti back fire valve and the pcv T.
Thanks for the help
-
No paint on the hose from the T to the back fire valve - those hoses were not in place when the engine was painted
IMHO The wire clamps on all those other hoses (PCV vacuum hoses) is a question since not all original engines show evidence of ever having clamps on that side but others do. Same goes for the short hose between the metal "Y" and the rear vacuum block
Paint on the vacuum/PCV hose and fittings can fade out anywhere along the hoses and fittings after the attachment point of the metal "Y"
Why we're looking at that side of the engine - are the valve cover gaskets silver painted cork ones?
-
Yes they are, I'm hoping the staples are ok?
Is the engine tag in the right location?
Also, I included some corrections on the carburetor.
Question on the hose between the oil fill cap and the air cleaner. Is it a straight or the one I have in the picture?
Your thoughts on on the pics
-
Yes they are, I'm hoping the staples are ok?
Is the engine tag in the right location?
Also, I included some corrections on the carburetor.
Question on the hose between the oil fill cap and the air cleaner. Is it a straight or the one I have in the picture?
Your thoughts on on the pics
Accelerator pump arm should be black oxide .Screw and nut are silver . Fuel filter should be zinc dichromate gold with the C7 sticker. Your engine is way too early to have a oil cap with the FOMOCO in block letters in the rectangle. It should have the one with the Ford in script in the oval. If I were guessing which I am I would guess that the hose from the oil cap was not a molded one .
-
To expand on Bob's descriptions and great help
Carb details
As Bob mentioned the accelerator arm was a black oxide (dark) (Red arrow)
The upper vent parts would have been zinc dicromate (Gold arrows)
Accelerator adjusting hardware would have been zinc (Green arrow) Have seen the springs in zinc, dichromate and dyed colors but the colored ones were on later and service replacements
As would the secondary arm and primary shaft - zinc (Green arrow)
Also (no arrow) the screw holding the secondary cam would have been zinc
Just can't do everything in one finish like many carburetor restorers do :(
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-160715000306.jpeg)
Loose (remove and paint over) the 2014 date on the bottom of the coil - it is facing forward for everyone to see ;)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-160715000248.jpeg)
Vent hose would not have that number on it and would be straight as shown in the other group of pictures
-
To expand on Bob's descriptions and great help
Carb details
As Bob mentioned the accelerator arm was a black oxide (dark) (Red arrow)
The upper vent parts would have been zinc dicromate (Gold arrows)
Accelerator adjusting hardware would have been zinc (Green arrow) Have seen the springs in zinc, dichromate and dyed colors but the colored ones were on later and service replacements
As would the secondary arm and primary shaft - zinc (Green arrow)
Also (no arrow) the screw holding the secondary cam would have been zinc
Just can't do everything in one finish like many carburetor restorers do :(
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-160715000306.jpeg)
spring on bowl vent arm would be black oxide too.
-
spring on bowl vent arm would be black oxide too.
A 67 thing? - seeing non- dark ones on 68's and 69 examples
-
A 67 thing? - seeing non- dark ones on 68's and 69 examples
I suppose a better worded description would be spring steel and not gold as the as all of the surroundings in the picture are.
-
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-010715215747.jpeg)
Red arrow - A very rare (only seen a couple) sheetmetal clamp that was designed to hold the thin and large vacuum lines together. In the picture the clip has fallen/moved off of the large steel tube
Do you have any better pictures of the sheet metal clamp?
-
Do you have any better pictures of the sheet metal clamp?
There is a simple drawing in the assembly manual but I've never seen or found one still on a system other than the one shown in the picture. If I did (20 or more years ago) I tossed it not realizing what it was :(
-
There is two ports on the vacuum fitting for the thermactor hose in the above picture, what was a use for the second port ? Reply # 28 pic.
-
The fitting is universal, used on T-Birds, Mercurys and other cars that may have had a vacuum requirement for tilt wheels, head light doors or some other future vacuum operated device. Many that I see have the two smaller ports capped and use the large fitting for power brakes. As a universal fitting it cut down on inventory.
Jim
-
There is two ports on the vacuum fitting for the thermactor hose in the above picture, what was a use for the second port ? Reply # 28 pic.
I have singles and doubles of those fittings just depended (it appears) which one was chosen for each engine build - with the unused capped
Much like the 3 port thermactor pumps being installed originally on 289's with one of the attachment ports capped often see this way on 66 289's
-
About what percent of total production of mustangs with the 390 and thermactor system built for the California market came from Dearborn ? I understand this may need to be a guess, thanks Paul.
-
About what percent of total production of mustangs with the 390 and thermactor system built for the California market came from Dearborn ? I understand this may need to be a guess, thanks Paul.
In 67 very very few F code (Dearborn car assembly plant) cars IMHO were sent to the two California regions in since San Jose was building all models and body types. Believe that a fair number of cars with 71 or 72 DSO's that were built at Dearborn would be those odd ball cars without Thermactor systems since the DSO shows the origin of the order not always where the car was shipped to when completed. But it was very rare IMHO - Maybe a hand full of cars.
Of course you have cars such as Cougars that were only being built at Dearborn so all of those cars going to California were assembled at Dearborn with the Thermactor systems if being shipped to California. So its not like those workers never saw them - sure they we're happy about the extra work and details
Now some of the Thermactor equipment was already attached to the engine when it was shipped to each assembly plant from the engine plant. Have seen differences in systems (complete system installed in the engine compartment) between thermactor systems installed at San Jose compared to Dearborn on 66 and 67 Mustangs
-
I was wondering if the small diameter steel vacuum tube from the anti backfire valve is a correct fit? Here's a few different angles, with and without the air cleaner. Please excuse all the waveyness of the steel tube, I had to straighten it out the best I could. I was shipped to me a mess. Once every this is correct, I'm going to get a replacement made. Also, what would be an exceptable wat to attach the small vacuum tube to the emissions tube for the concourse driven class?
Thanks
-
Looks like the routing at back is incorrect and your missing a few factory bends - maybe these will help
Front hose is too long (ends too far to the drivers side) but maybe adding in the other bends and changing the routing will shorten it up to where it should be
There is an approx 20 degree bend/dog leg that moves the tube from the outside edge of the large vacuum tube to the inside edge about mid way. Shown by the purple arrow in the pictures
Think I might have one or two of the small dia lines but don't know/remember how bent they are from factory
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-190715220524-43341179.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-190715220525-4338732.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-190715221254.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-190715220528-43401234.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-190715220527-43392382.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-190715220531-4342211.jpeg)
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-190715220530-4341718.jpeg)
-
Thanks Jeff!!!
PM me with details if you have one laying around and willing to part with one. Also, I have two smog hoses that go from the pump to the "T" and they are both wrong, I wouldn't suppose you have one of those? Is the small metal vacuum tube supposed to be painted engine blue?
-
Would anyone have a part number for a Anti Backfire Valve for a Dec 1966, San Jose build 390 mustang?
Thanks
-
Would anyone have a part number for a Anti Backfire Valve for a Dec 1966, San Jose build 390 mustang?
The assembly manual shows some C7 part number but it doesn't look like anything I've ever seen or heard of
Looking at a Aug 67 MPC It shows C6AZ-9B289-C for the 67-67 390. Don't have a picture currently with a box, number and part but it may be correct
To make sure you get the right piece you should be able to compare the two port valve you have engineering number to a new one. Guess you've figured out its easier to by a NOS one than replate an original
Don't accept one stamped with HOLLEY on the top cover ;)
I've got some (it appears from this picture) used one I could double check for that engineering number but I believe you have one currently. Part is on the face where the mounting bracket attaches. Just a picture of one of the boxes of parts I happen to have on file
(http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/4/6-220715001623.jpeg)
-
I can't find anyone to plate the one that I have. I tried the Eastwood paint, looks pretty good but it's not the same. I've been looking for a NOS one, but it's just hard to locate one. I'll be making some phone calls today to various parts houses. Thanks for your help Jeff.
-
Would the diverter valve for Travis's car have a date code on it ? Also would it have a part number such as L3331-1 along with the C6 number.
-
Would a master parts catalog be the best place to identify a ford number on a part (engineering number) to check for the part being used in the right application ?
-
Would a master parts catalog be the best place to identify a ford number on a part (engineering number) to check for the part being used in the right application ?
Often the MPC don't include the engineering numbers of all the parts. Sometimes yes sometimes no. If it was listed it might also show a substituted part or engineering number
There was a separate thick book that was published every 6 months or so that was a cross reference between the engineering and the part numbers. And another book (published about the same number of times of year) that showed what part numbers were no longer used and what could be used (if any) to substitute for them.
What part or engineering number do you need?
-
I understand the part number you listed for the OP's diverter valve as being correct for my Dearborn, April 67 application I just wanted to identify the valve that I have on my engine; C6AE-9B289-E L3331-1 as I have a feeling it may match the application that my fan clutch was for.
-
I understand the part number you listed for the OP's diverter valve as being correct for my Dearborn, April 67 application I just wanted to identify the valve that I have on my engine; C6AE-9B289-E L3331-1 as I have a feeling it may match the application that my fan clutch was for.
Well by now I've forgotten what your fan clutch application was so can't comment directly about that.
But since you posted this in a 67 390 thermactor thread I would hope that its the same. If so then my comment related to the number of ports would apply
-
I wanted to identify if this was the correct valve for my Dearborn car, but it seems just having a MPC that always cant be done.
-
I wanted to identify if this was the correct valve for my Dearborn car, but it seems just having a MPC that always cant be done.
That is the same configuration as used on the 67 390. Now is there any markings on the top cover?
-
The top has ford in script. I understand the outlet configuration is correct Where Im getting confused is the correct part number and correct engineering number. With a part such as this is configuration close enough ?
-
The part looks like the correct piece and the engineering number matches the other ones I have and have seen on original cars
Haven't always made note of the supplier mark on the bottom of the assembly