Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - shelbydoug

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 393
1
If I remember the newspaper ads from back then, I seem to remember that ones with plastic rear windows were something like $39.95 installed and with glass another $20 or so?

Although white tops are better to keep your head from cooking under a very hot black top in the sun, I don't remember them as being popular because of the difficulty in keeping them clean.

At that kind of price, I can envision dealerships like Gotham with Bill Kolb willing to do anything to sell the car, changing the top from white to black to make the sale.

I personally would not automatically dismiss a car because it is reported with a black top by the last owner or vise versa.

2
Just as a point of interest, I mention this.

On my '68 GT350, I bought a set of JBA long tube headers "theoretically" built for that year car.

When I installed them, the car could not turn left. As it turns out, the Pitman arm would hit the #5 tube and restrict it from the necessary distance necessary for it to move to turn the wheels left.

In discussing this with JBA, it seems that they built the headers on that chassis that used a different Pitman arm.

Now I did try to discuss this intelligently with the design tech, but some might argue that is a bridge too far for me, but the comment from JBA was that my car uses a "special" Pitman arm?

So that's what I know and the "Special Bus" just pulled up for me so I have to cut this short and run to catch it.

3
Replicas and Tribute / Re: Dual pulley on an early 428
« on: March 22, 2024, 02:33:22 PM »
I was told by someone I consider an authority on FE's that FE's wound up with a "harmonics situation", i.e., a vibration. All of them.

The only way he knew to reduce it is to use a heavier balancer. What you are doing by adding reciprocating mass is not re balancing the engine but moving the vibration to another rpm range or some would describe it as "dampening" it in the usable rpm range of the engine.

I believe that essentially was said by Scott, not in the exact wording but in describing the effect?


I have seen this effect on other Ford engines as well. You can more then notice the added mass on the 289hp, Boss 302, the Boss351c and the 427's.

One thing that I noticed was on my 351c. When I added the '72 351HO balancer v. the 4v balancer, it seemed to calm the idle down as if I had taken some of the duration out of the camshaft timing.


I think that you can actually use the 427MR balancer in your application also. The 427's are neutral balance through the complete engine. I think the 390's are also but it depends on which crankshaft you used if you built a stroker using Ford parts?

The 428's are neutral balanced in the front half and Detroit balanced in the rear half. I don't know how that works but it means that any FE balancer will work on any FE since they are all neutral balanced on the nose. The flywheel is a different story and needs to match the Ford crankshaft used.

Aftermarket, non-Ford crankshaft manufacturers will advise you what to use with theirs.

I would go with the heaviest balancer that I could get in there, like the "427" on my '67 GT500 428. It can't hurt the engine. Cobra Automotive has those also.

4
1968 Shelby GT350/500/500KR / Re: 68 GT-350 Conv w/Paxton
« on: March 21, 2024, 01:11:18 PM »
How much Horse Power does those Super Chargers give the 1968 GT 350's?

The advertising at the time said 100 but 80 was closer to the truth.

5
The Lounge / Re: 65 GT 350R Rear Seat Delete Panel........
« on: March 18, 2024, 05:51:23 PM »
What is the difference between a '65 GT350 rear seat replacement panel and an "R" panel?

IF you are referring to what we call the '66 GT350 rear seat replacement panel, with the raised reinforcement strips and without the spare tire enclave, then yes it fits the 67-68 fastback.

The 65 street panel actually fits the car also but the spare tire enclave does not match up well with the 67-8 profile and a bit of fabrication is necessary in that case.

Here is a picture of a '66 fiberglass reproduction panel in my 68 GT350. The originals are molded plastic and do not do well with any kind of exposure to warm temps.

6
SAAC Forum Discussion Area / Re: fuel issue
« on: March 13, 2024, 02:37:10 PM »
The high power valve failure rate was an old issue. Maybe 15 years ago?

They were Holley bubble packed and still sealed. As suggested, maybe they were very old stock at the time? I haven't had the issue recently with power valves.


On the inlet valves sticking, I am suspect, like you that it may be a regional refinery issue? I do know that here we do have a "winter blend" put into the pumps. I don't know what is changed on that blend?

7
The Lounge / Boss 429 Battery cable
« on: March 11, 2024, 06:58:39 PM »
What gauge is that cable?

8
SAAC Forum Discussion Area / Re: fuel issue
« on: March 11, 2024, 03:12:25 PM »
In some circles, Holley power valves have developed the reputation for being fragile.

What happens is that in the case of a backfire, the carbs vacuum chamber is instantly positively (+) pressurize and works the diaphram in reverse to what it is supposed to do.

This could be a common abnormality caused by the choke being too lean in cold temps. Cars that don't get used often in winter driving may never have had the choke adjusted right and having a manual choke can be a little bit of a challenge in sub zero temps too.

This can over stress the diaphragm and cause an "air" leak. Once ruptured or cracked, when the engine is running normally, fuel will leak through the diaphram and into the intake manifold.
How much it leaks fuel depends on how bad the leak is.

Normally there will be symptoms of this that illuminate themselves in the engine running very rich at idle suddenly. If you do not have those symptoms, it is very unlikely that the power valve is defective, so leave it alone.


I think that the change in dependability of the power valves is likely the change in the contractors or suppliers that build them for Holley. It isn't something that anyone talked about having issues with in the '60s that I recall and Holley didn't start to install anti-backfire valves in their carbs until somewhere in the late '70s.

One could argue that addition is in essence a default acknowledgement of an issue that needed to be addressed I think rather convincingly.


That Moroso tool is something that is very usefull to someone who disassembles and reassembles Holley carbs more then once in a while since they would want to be 100% certain there were no component issues.

It doesn't exist to create paranoia.


Personally I just ran into a bad cycle of something like a 50% "bad out of the package" situation and for my own peace of mind wanted reassurance that the new valves were ok. So I bought it.

Used in conjunction with a vacuum pump it lets you verify the opening point of the power valve as well.

For me it is a valuable tool.

9
SAAC Forum Discussion Area / Re: fuel issue
« on: March 11, 2024, 12:06:07 PM »
Again, I'm not arguing. We each have had out own experiences. Some possibly are just unique.

I have been running unleaded with 10% ethanol for about 49 years and have never had any of these corrosion issues that some are describing.

As GT350Shelb I think correctly points out, the initial quality of the part exposed to the ethanol is a factor.

Corrosion caused by higher levels of ethanol in the gas has been documented, no question but I just don't see it at the 10% level. I actually do not know if the actual formula for the fuel is varying according to the location and thus the refinery that makes it but that is just a remote thought that is only a remote possibility?

I'm sorry for your troubles and hope that you can find a solution that is workable for you.

10
SAAC Forum Discussion Area / Re: fuel issue
« on: March 10, 2024, 11:00:16 AM »
First off, I am not arguing, just saying what I have experienced personally.

I bought my '68 GT350 on April 4, 1972.

Unleaded ethanol has been around since about 1975 which I have always used.
The only advantage that I found to using SUNOCO Racing gas, if it is an advantage, is that the car will immediately idle down from 800 something to 700 something.

I do not like the white lead deposits it leaves on the plugs and the valves or on the observable portions of the exhaust system.


My experiences with the original gas tanks is that they need to be kept as full as you can get them for storage, not the opposite.



Most of my 68 GT350 has used "Aeroquip hose" since around that time and 304 ss hard tubing where applicable so that might be a factor in the results with those components?

About the only original fuel hose that I can think of that is still on the car right now is from the fuel pick up to the metal fuel line outside of the tank. It is still original. Has been off of the car and examined and still un-cracked or showing signs of interior deterioration.

What you have experienced and that you share with others is appreciated and I note it. I can't deny your experience. 8)



The carb valves show no evidence of foreign materials on them. They just show a mark where the rubber meets the metal ring of the seat.

I have also had issues with failed power valves but that isn't a recent thing. It is an on going phenomena. That goes way back to my start... and yes I do use the check valves installed in the throttle plates even when not original to the carbs.

I invested in a Moroso "power valve" check tool and my initial experiment of 12 brand new, "still in the bubble wrapper packaging" showed 50%, yes half, had vacuum leaks brand new, so really what needs to be factored into that equation is the quality level of the original part or the lack of quality in the original SERVICE  parts?


One probably does need to take into account my location though. There are places on the Earth where the compass does not work. In one case it is called the South Seas Anomaly. Who is to say there isn't another location where the normal laws of physics do not apply and right here in the NYC area could be one of them? After all,  to some, I defy ANY sensible logic?  ::)



On other vehicles here, everyday use cars, many of the "rubber" fuel lines have been replaced. There are no "factory original part numbers" on them and are largely NAPA parts. So far, so good...knock on wood, but simply put, I have not experienced any of the side effects others are describing in over 49 years, so color me cautious but respectful of others more experienced then I am.

With these "bumps of knowledge" on my head and if one is truly wiser by making mistakes and learning from them, I should be, but am not, in the "genius" class by now and still the general consensus is that I am just the "Village Idiot" and we just "humor Doug"?  That's actually ok with me since I long ago learned to accept that and at least get invited to the barque afterwards.. .even though? :)

After all, I am 75 now and don't look my age. I only look 74 so it confuses people because I still use words that are no longer in the vernacular, but I still remember them AND so far only one person has threatened me with a gun and he was just a medical doctor so that is likely understandable anyway by his own piers?

11
SAAC Forum Discussion Area / Re: fuel issue
« on: March 10, 2024, 09:21:53 AM »
We have been running on unleaded 92 octane with 10% ethanol in New York State since about 1975.

There are few issues with it. Not many.

1) The advertised compression ratios shown by Ford mean little. In virtually all instances the actual measure static compression ratio is just about .5 point less.

That puts engines like the 289 at about 9.6:1 or so. Engines with actual static compression ratios in that range with non-domed pistons run fine on 92 unleaded. You just need to stay under 10:1 actual. That is the limit of the compressibility of 92.

During the first "gas shortage" here, "we" found that the 306hp Shelby version would run ok on "regular" which was posted at 89 octane.


Engines that were having issues even on 92 were engines with domed pistons like the Boss 302, Boss 351, 427 MR, and Boss 429.

2) Ethanol reacting negatively with the "rubber" components in the fuel system is largely over rated. Original Ford hoses and components in the system have/had no issues with it AT ALL. Aftermarket hose in the auto stores, that could be another story AT THE TIME but these days aftermarket hose marked "FUEL" is made to use with ethanol.
Fuel Pump diaphrams do not have any issues with 10% ethanol. You won't have issues with ethanol until you get to around a 25% level and there isn't anywhere in North America where companies sell that in the pump.

3) The ONLY issue that I have experienced with unleaded Ethanol fuel in the last 49 years is that the Holley carb VITON inlet valves tend to stick CLOSED after the engine has been sitting dormant for around 30 days.
The carbs like it better if you set the floats a little lower then Holley instructs. This isn't usually an issue on the primary bowls but the secondaries are a little bit of a PITA because by design there is less float travel in the secondaries.
Those admittedly I do struggle with to get just right.


There are those who feel that the engines run better on the equivalent of 106 leaded racing gas or even 103 leaded but that fuel contains so much lead that it introduces other negatives to the fuel system and even the exhaust system.

You can argue that it is what the engines were designed to run on but the reality is that the current blend of 92 with ethanol supports all of them.

Each of us will obviously take our own road but my view is that if you intend to drive the car at all besides just around the block, you need to make the adjustments to what you can buy in any "gas station" out on the open road and it isn't a difficult adjustment and paranoia is not your friend in any respect.

I got over this issue 49 years ago. If I can. Anyone can.

The paranoia is a demon that you are fighting unnecessarily and it is largely imaginary.

12
Up For Auction / Re: 8T02R21031703701 on BAT
« on: March 09, 2024, 09:49:07 AM »
I would not do that to a regular production Mustang let alone one identifiable as a Shelby.

In my view reactions actually cut both ways though. There are those that are openly indignant of how the car currently appears and don't have issues with expressing that and the owners are indignant that the car does not fit into the "Shelby's society's" definition of how the car should be.

Often I notice quite a visible attitude of arrogance on both sides. I personally attempt to avoid both groups and try to appreciate both even though at times it can be quite an abstract endeavor.

I suppose I should point out that I have in fact been told to "go back to my arrogant SAAC buddies" as well as politically be told by both the extreme left and right that, "we don't need you here. Stop telling people that you know "me"." So I kind of get it all, generally, if not specifically speaking.

It is very helpful if you have a thick enough skin to be able to tolerate it all and being a native New Yorker I understand that nobody here agrees on anything anyway, no one likes each other and that everyone complains about everything all the time.

All things considered though it would be nice that once in a while one of our major league sports teams could win something and at least get into the finals? See. Complaints, complaints!  :)

13
Up For Auction / Re: Apparently not...
« on: March 08, 2024, 08:59:26 PM »
I thought it was just some kind of a tatoo on his butt? Now I understand.

14
Yes that's a usual thing I see often and it don't make sense to mount fiberglass like this.

I always did it the right way and thought its wrong and was not done like this by the factory but I thought its better for the fiberglass and years later I found a concours restored one at a saac meet and found out my thinking and doing was right as they mounted it the same way like I did all the years.

By the way I need one of these top panels does someone here has one for sale?
what boggles my mind is the header brackets have a threaded extruded hole for the bolt so why would anyone mount it wrong because you would need a nut or clip on the backside to hold it in place and possibly tightening up on the extruded hole.


It's a no brainer to me. Very juvenile.

15
Mine is original Ford Service part and does not have a part number on it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 393