ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1967 Mustang => Topic started by: mikelj5S230 on August 06, 2014, 02:21:16 PM
-
I know the metal PCV tube is painted on my 390 4V, along with the longer hose and clamps to the PCV valve, but what about the short hose and two clamps to the manifold vacuum tree? Is that short hose and the two clamps also painted? Thanks!
-
Believe the short hose and attachment fitting to the intake were in place when engine was painted.
Mike can you remind me where you car was built. Finding a handful of Dearborn built S codes using no clamps
-
Mine is a Jersey car, April 27, 1967.
-
Ok ignore the Dearborn comment - though I would expect that sometime in the future some member will bring up the subject :)
-
Ok ignore the Dearborn comment - though I would expect that sometime in the future some member will bring up the subject :)
Is this "future" enough? ::) There's bits and pieces of discussion in various threads regarding clamps on the PCV hoses. Is there any consensus or general pattern to usage of the wire-style clamps on big block PCV assemblies for '67-'68? I have somehow ended up with several assemblies in my collection, but not enough data to determine a pattern Here's what I've found on mine:
1) '67 390GT (GTA car), plant unknown. Clamps on long hose, no clamps on short hose. (Assembly is connected to intake in photo)
2) '68 390GT, plant unknown. Clamps on long hose, but not on compensator, only on extreme ends, also has clamps on short hose.
3) Year and plant unknown. No clamps on either hose.
4) Year and plant unknown. Clamps on long use, short hose is missing. (Assembly is on the left in photo, laying on valve cover)
Not a lot to go on, especially #3 & #4. All hoses appear to be original, and ones marked "no clamps" show zero evidence of any sort of depression from a clamp.
Personally I need to know what is typical for SJ in Feb. 1968. But it would be nice to compile a comprehensive list for 67-68.
-
Is this "future" enough? ::) There's bits and pieces of discussion in various threads regarding clamps on the PCV hoses. Is there any consensus or general pattern to usage of the wire-style clamps on big block PCV assemblies for '67-'68? I have somehow ended up with several assemblies in my collection, but not enough data to determine a pattern Here's what I've found on mine:
1) '67 390GT (GTA car), plant unknown. Clamps on long hose, no clamps on short hose. (Assembly is connected to intake in photo)
2) '68 390GT, plant unknown. Clamps on long hose, but not on compensator, only on extreme ends, also has clamps on short hose.
3) Year and plant unknown. No clamps on either hose.
4) Year and plant unknown. Clamps on long use, short hose is missing. (Assembly is on the left in photo, laying on valve cover)
Not a lot to go on, especially #3 & #4. All hoses appear to be original, and ones marked "no clamps" show zero evidence of any sort of depression from a clamp.
Personally I need to know what is typical for SJ in Feb. 1968. But it would be nice to compile a comprehensive list for 67-68.
1st Picture shows "Mercury" valve covers. Not sure that they were used after 1966. Certainly not factory on a Cougar, although some guys have used them. I believe that the FE PCV transfer tube was used starting in 1966.
-
Is this "future" enough? ::) There's bits and pieces of discussion in various threads regarding clamps on the PCV hoses. Is there any consensus or general pattern to usage of the wire-style clamps on big block PCV assemblies for '67-'68? ....................................................................................
Personally I need to know what is typical for SJ in Feb. 1968. But it would be nice to compile a comprehensive list for 67-68.
Yes the discussion can begin again - going to be rough going to find many 390's that haven't been played and to keep CJ and other years/models out of the mix
But lets where it goes.
Let's just keep the years separate, label findings with when and where and random, unknown samples are useful IMHO but can only muddy the details
Maybe there is a road test or two from period magazines that might help also- not that those cars were unaltered in every way
-
I know the metal PCV tube is painted on my 390 4V, along with the longer hose and clamps to the PCV valve, but what about the short hose and two clamps to the manifold vacuum tree? Is that short hose and the two clamps also painted? Thanks!
Typically yes the short hose and clamps was painted . Now for all of the anomalies ;) .
-
The engine tag on my 322A is 7D. I do not know any history on this engine, so I don't know that the paint is original. Most of the blue paint is gone from the metal PCV tube, but some still remains just in front of the carb and behind the distributor - see white arrows. Other sections of the tube look like some kind of plating....were these tubes plated before painting? Any comments are welcome.
-
were these tubes plated before painting? Any comments are welcome.
I presume the tee was soldered or brazed in place onto the main tube. The "plating" would be an excessive amount of tinning. I'll take a closer look at the couple I have, they're missing most of the paint. Or better yet I suppose I should blast them and start refurbishing them...
-
After I bead blasted my tube, it looks like the tee was brazed into place. Also there was no plating present on mine.
*****************************************************************************************************
I also has some detailing questions, I had a 1967 390 my car info is down below in the signature field.
In the picture below, the areas where the yellow arrows are pointing at are painted blue plus the required spring clamps? On the second picture, is the tee also painted blue?
Thanks,
-
After I bead blasted my tube, it looks like the tee was brazed into place. Also there was no plating present on mine.
*****************************************************************************************************
I also has some detailing questions, I had a 1967 390 my car info is down below in the signature field.
In the picture below, the areas where the yellow arrows are pointing at are painted blue plus the required spring clamps? On the second picture, is the tee also painted blue?
Thanks,
The photo with the yellow arrows is an assembly I recently purchased at a yard. It was not on the car, so I do not know the year or the plant it came from. The remnants of paint appear to be original, but I am not 100% certain of that.
-
I was just using your photo as an example to see what what was painted on a 1967 GTA 390 SJ Dec Build car. I assembling my 390 motor, and I need to know what needs to be painted and what doesn't.
Travis
-
Not sure if the steel line was plated or not is a big detail to worry about since it gets covered with engine paint
In the picture below, the areas where the yellow arrows are pointing at are painted blue plus the required spring clamps? On the second picture, is the tee also painted blue?
Clamps or no clamps? appears that it depends either on the worker or the time period when the engine was assembled. Have originals both ways but not enough IMHO to establish or support a pattern right now
Since the T would have normally been in place I would suspect that at least the top and sides had paint - though the bottom possibly not - sort of like the PCV hose
-
What about the brass 90 that connects to the pcv valve, is it also painted?
Thanks Jeff!!!
-
What about the brass 90 that connects to the pcv valve, is it also painted?
IMO sometimes - just depended on where the painter got the paint. Have original examples where the paint ended (soft sprayed edge) between the bend and the PCV block while others have spray out to the block and overspray on the PCV
-
The photo below was posted in a recent ebay auction, with the following description:
The two LHS ones are for a 428CJ, the third one is the 68 GT390 - they're very similar but different - the final tube is for a 390/352/360 PCV setup as defined by the angle of the nipple on the tube to acount for the difference in intake manifold height between the engines in question.
Is that an accurate statement? Are there tubes with different nominal angles? Or is there one design with a fair amount of variation at assembly?
-
The photo below was posted in a recent ebay auction, with the following description:
Is that an accurate statement? Are there tubes with different nominal angles? Or is there one design with a fair amount of variation at assembly?
Yes ,different angles on pcv hose nipple. Also different ends for different forward fitting placement.
-
Yes ,different angles on pcv hose nipple. Also different ends for different forward fitting placement.
+1 different angles = different applications
-
While we are on the subject of the PCV tube and the fittings, should the fittings be painted or bare? I have seen photos of both. Also looking to confirm the difference between the 390 and 428 fittings front & rear on the intake and the vacuum tree, assuming there are different applications.
Thanks
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/20/4775-270424221636-203242151.jpeg)
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/20/4775-270424221856-20325681.jpeg)
-
While we are on the subject of the PCV tube and the fittings, should the fittings be painted or bare? I have seen photos of both. Also looking to confirm the difference between the 390 and 428 fittings from & rear on the intake and the vacuum tree, assuming there are different applications.
Thanks
(https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/gallery/20/4775-270424221636-203242151.jpeg)
The one that isn't painted is the accessory vacuum block that the brake booster tube is connected to. The other fittings are painted including the hose and clamps.
-
The one that isn't painted is the accessory vacuum block that the brake booster tube is connected to. The other fittings are painted including the hose and clamps.
Thanks Bob