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 - sg66

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8
16
The Lounge / Re: Loss of Dr Simeone last night
« on: June 12, 2022, 09:27:34 PM »
Wow, that's unfortunate but how ironic that he passed during the LeMans race.

I was down there last August when he rolled out his cars that raced at LeMans and had them driven around the back parking lot. It was pretty cool to see his Stutz, Bugatti, Daytona Coupe, GT and others taking a spin.

I spoke with him for a while and asked what his favorite car was, thinking he would say the Daytona Coupe but nope, it was his 1938 Alfa Romeo

R.I.P. Dr.

17
    Steve ,
      I tried all kinds of bolt torques and bolt manufacturers in the '60s. I will say it was "MY" lack of experience that caused my gasket failures. Too much compression , timing , and lack of fuel quality ( even though we had 100 octane leaded gas). As I look back on my approach , I was lifting the head off of the block by detonation that I caused. My "seat of the pants dyno" was out of calibration and I was out of control. The good thing is the early failures showed me the limits and strengths of most of the engine parts. I went as far as 100 ft lbs tq on the heads with no improvement on sealing. I also O ringed the heads which helped some and finally tried solid copper head gaskets as a last resort.
     "Now" I use 10 additional ft lbs on the upper row of head bolts as "I" believe the intake manifold torque does play a role against upper head bolt torque. With "modern" head gaskets and 50 years of tuning experience , I no longer lose head gaskets.
    Randy
Now that you mention it, I think the recommendation was for an additional 10 ft/lbs for the upper row. Whatever the root cause was/is, I'm with you that the additional 10 ft/lbs solves the problem.

18
The "banana" shaped water ports "were" a weak point in the head and with ''antique" McCord ( stock) head gaskets the head would flex in that area and cause a gasket leak.
Randy,

Back in the mid to late 80's, Ford Motorsport or more likely Fel-Pro (I forget which one) was recommending to increase the head bolt torque by 10 ft/lbs to prevent head gasket failure. I seem to recall they were pointing to the solid lifter motors causing the head to flex at higher RPMs. I did follow that recommendation with Fel-Pro blue head gaskets, and have never had another head gasket issue.

Does that line up with your findings or was the gasket failure more of a combination of poor gaskets, compression and maybe lifters?

Steve -

19
1965 GT350/R-Model / Re: 65 Hipo Engine Balance
« on: February 25, 2022, 01:59:27 PM »
   With all due respect to all involved , ( including Mr Mannel) the material spec for the HIPO crank did not include nickle . The spec included chromium and manganese to create "nodular" iron. This increased the ductility ( ability to flex without cracking). For MANY years people have used "high nickle" yet Ford never used it. The same material was used for 428 cranks . "N" diff cases and "some" 427 FE blocks and other things too. GM used nickle but Ford didn't.
    Randy
Thanks Randy. After all these years, it would nice if someone had HiPo and non-HiPo cranks tested to see what the metal content of each is. There are non destructive tests like this which would indicate any difference in nodularity but having cranks and access to a testing facility or University lab are easier said than done. https://youtu.be/FIORrrCbLbo?t=149

20
1965 GT350/R-Model / Re: 65 Hipo Engine Balance
« on: February 24, 2022, 09:20:24 PM »
Is it true the hipo crank was a slightly better quality steel than a non-hip engine would receive? Assume the Brunell hardness test was only done on the HiPo crank and flywheel version of the 289 due to the anticipated stress the engine would receive. Assume same casting just better iron/steel?
There is a post on the HiPo site from Bob Mannel June 6 2007 about the cranks https://hipo-mustang.com/user-post-list/1706-bobmannel/?pageNo=13

In short, he spoke with someone who used to work in the foundry who claims they tossed in some extra nickel and manganese but has no documents to verify it.

The testing was not a Brinnel test which is pressing a ball bearing into the metal and measuring the indent.  V8 front spindles have this test mark on the rear side, not sure about others.

The rear journal of the crank is polished and according to Bob's source, the inspectors used this to count or estimate the grains in the iron. I used to have a link to site showing the tool and grid used for this type of testing but don't know where it is now. You can get an idea of what it looks like here on page 16 https://www.thaithavorn.com/pdf/microstructure.pdf

21
Wanted to Buy / Re: 1966 Shelby underride bracket wanted
« on: January 13, 2022, 10:36:14 PM »
Pretty sure I have a single 1068 LH bracket I got from Jim Cowles but no extra bolts. Also have a set of 10-70 brackets but not looking to break up the set either, go with Bob's if you go down that path. PM me if interested in a 1068 which as far as I could tell was identical to the 10-70 bracket

Steve-

22
1966 Shelby GT350/GT350H / Re: Help identifying holes on apron
« on: January 03, 2022, 07:19:53 PM »
Looks like an aftermarket tachometer sending unit, maybe Sun.

That's it, a Sun EB9 transmitter.

Also, did a sanity check and MSD was the first to the automotive market in 1976 derived from research being done at White Sands missile range in 1970


23
1966 Shelby GT350/GT350H / Re: Help identifying holes on apron
« on: January 03, 2022, 01:56:36 PM »
Bob: Agreed they should not be there. I am curious, though as I have seen other cars with similar  holes. I am wondering what aftermarket device may have been installed? This car has been off the road since the late 1970's so that is too early for things like MSD ignition. Maybe this will just be an unknown.
Image from late 70's, maybe too early for MSD but there were other brands. I forget what this was

24
1969-1970 Shelby GT350/500 / Re: Consensus on BFG TA's
« on: November 10, 2021, 10:11:20 AM »
I have 235 60 15 on my 69 GT 350.  I like the look of the BFG TA’s. The only problem I have with them is white letters keep turning brown.
From BFG FAQ, last question under Tire Care and Maintenance https://www.bfgoodrichtires.com/assistance/faq

Direct link to product bulletin basically saying to wet sand them with 400 grit if SOS pad scrubbing doesn't work: https://dcadprod.azureedge.net/b2c-experience-bfg-production/attachments/ckoss264w02hs01o89pidv5yy-b2c-product-bulletin-wsw-browning-vff-3-bfg-only.pdf

I've seen people on other sites claim BFG/Michelin replaced the raised brown letter tires under warranty  but have no first hand experience to back that up

25
1966 Shelby GT350/GT350H / Re: Correct Windshield Washer Reservoir
« on: October 22, 2021, 10:57:44 PM »

I would be interested to see an original smaller white lettered bag with the hinge style cap. I don't believe that I have seen one except for the reproductions.

Brant,

Here you go. Looking at them side by side, the hinge top bag is a little smaller and I also noticed the bracket is just a little narrower and has a 3rd hole in the center. The
 bracket for the wider bag only has 2 holes

Thanks. Do you know if these were found on any San Jose built cars and the approx. build date.

If not, that's fine...just curious.
The bag with the screw cap I'm pretty sure came off a 65 GT-350 that had a service replacement swapped in. The hinged version came with an early style washer motor I picked up. I don't know where it came from.

26
1966 Shelby GT350/GT350H / Re: Correct Windshield Washer Reservoir
« on: October 22, 2021, 01:20:39 PM »

I would be interested to see an original smaller white lettered bag with the hinge style cap. I don't believe that I have seen one except for the reproductions.

Brant,

Here you go. Looking at them side by side, the hinge top bag is a little smaller and I also noticed the bracket is just a little narrower and has a 3rd hole in the center. The bracket for the wider bag only has 2 holes

27
1968 Shelby GT350/500/500KR / Re: Oil Leak Help
« on: September 21, 2021, 08:57:39 AM »
I forget if the 289 and 302 blocks have the rear oil pan bolt holes machined the same but at least on a 289 the rear holes are a through hole and not a blind hole. If there is no sealant on those bolts and they back out, I've seen them leak and cause a similar mess and also make people think their rear main seal is shot.

28
Comments to a post on the Hipo Mustang site a few years ago from Fred Ballard:

an HEH-BT is NOT a close ratio and is NOT for a Hipo. The identifier information that is out there on the internet toploader sites is in error. They also have an error on dates used for the HEH-T transmission and this comes directly from the Ford MPC which is in error on that transmission. We had HEH-T transmission with stamped VIN's on the original Hipo site with Kar production dates as late as May 1965. The toploader sites show that transmission from 8-20-1964 to 10-1-1964 which matches the Ford MPC but that information is in error. If you are in doubt, ask the seller how many teeth are on the second gear. 28 is a close ratio and 31 is a wide ratio

https://hipo-mustang.com/thread/5596-heh-bt/


29
1966 Shelby GT350/GT350H / Re: Upper control arm greasing
« on: August 14, 2021, 06:20:31 PM »
I wasn't taking the gorilla approach, I was just pumping easy until I felt pressure and stopped.

I pulled the arm and figured I would leave this here for others. The shafts on the new arms were not really centered and the one that leaked was the one with the least amount of shaft in the nut. To make a long story short, once I adjusted the shaft, no more leak.

I was on the Opentracker web site and under their blueprinted control arm section they claim the arms they get from their vendor (looks like Moog from pictures)  always have the shaft biased to one side...the same side. This means one arm will shift the center of the ball joint to the rear (good for positive caster) and the other side will do the opposite. For reference, the arm I had most out of whack had about a 1/8" difference between sides. I adjusted both shafts to as close to center as possible with any minor bias to influence positive caster.

30
1966 Shelby GT350/GT350H / Upper control arm greasing
« on: August 12, 2021, 02:48:07 PM »
When greasing the 4 bushings on a new set of Moog control arms, I can tell 3 of them are full because of back pressure on the grease gun. The 4th just keeps pumping with the grease seeping out the back of the shaft. I called Moog and they said it's normal for the grease to come out but couldn't explain why it only happens for 1 of the 4.

It doesn't sound normal to me and I believe there is a rubber seal in the nut to prevent this so before I go through the hassle of removing the control arm, any thoughts/opinions?

Thanks




Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8