SAAC Forum

beyond all the chatter about a sequel, there's quite a bit of original footage from 1967 Le Mans!

https://youtu.be/SZdQHJvRkS4

enjoy

jimp

Quote from: Dan Case on August 17, 2021, 12:29:21 PM

Quote from: CSX2259 on August 17, 2021, 12:07:53 PM

"Flip Top"
"Turd"
Actually it should be known as the first 427 Cobra

Or "the" aluminum 390 Cobra

Dan,
Since CSX3001 was the 1st "production validation" 427 car  i.e. coil spring chassis,
would CSX2196 be considered  the 427 "concept development prototype" ??

just word games

jim p

Another factor I don't recall seeing mentioned is the expiration of the lease on Imperial Hwy.

1. Production would have to move somewhere else
2. the problems with the 67 program had solutions (from Ford's view) of more control/management from Dearborn
3. With more control from Dearborn, production moving to Ionia/Metuchen, why have any CA involvement?
4. With more internal Ford performance vehicle development (KK, Trans-Am, Boss programs), SAI becomes a burden
5. CS "agreement with Ford circa 1962 had a 5 yr expiration, so by 1967 the relationship would change no matter what
6. Corporate entities do not work well with outside contractors, i.e. they do not conform to the corporate structure, this is exactly what SAI was, "non-corporate" CA racers
7. eventually the $'s going to SAI would get reigned in by financial side of corporation, even HF-II wouldn't protect CS
8. as mentioned other priorities begin to push performance / halo cars (Shelby/Cobra) aside, safety (Ralph Nader), emissions, insurance pressure, global Ford expansion
9. The slow death began with Ford takeover of 1967 production, it just took until late 1969 to call "the time of death"

just my humble opinion, FWIW

jim p

I found these photos online,
I don't know if the block has any crossover with JWA Gulf engine ??
#1 ID'd as 1968 AAR Gurney Eagle
#2 & 3 1968 Sebring JWA Gulf
#4 302 TP

regards

jim p

Quote from: 6R07mi on August 09, 2021, 01:49:54 PM

Quote from: gt350hr on August 09, 2021, 11:06:39 AM
   Doug ,
     "Technically" there is no such thing as a C7FE block ,period. here is the GT40 block "lineage".
    Early cars ( after the attempt at using the pushrod Indy engine) used conventional Hi Po 289 blocks. Durability issues led to the improved C6FE casting number , two bolt , "steel main cap" block. Continued durability issues led to a four bolt main ( steel caps) block built with SK or XE numbers ( both were built). These blocks all had conventional press in freeze plugs and were also used in '67 T/A engines with C6FE heads. The block was revised for an additional oil passage and given the C8FE casting number. This "general" casting number block saw MANY spur of the moment changes and with different machining programs was used for Tunnel Ports , '68 Indy use with Gurney heads in "dry sump" configuration . The block was carried over to '69 Boss 302 use in both T/A and "street" configuration with the "steel" main caps and "dry deck" or "wet deck" being the major difference. The C8FE block was also a favorite of the Formula 5000 race group. MANY C8FE blocks have additional SK numbers scratched into the bell housing areas. These indicate the various revisions for specific applications.
    There you have it.
       Randy

Randy,
The updated GT-40 FIA form dated 68? listed the 4,942 displacement addendum, including the 5.0L crank set (C8FE ??) and G-W heads shown in the supporting photos.
I thought that was to homologate the JWA-Gulf  G-W engine for 68 / 69 seasons??
Were the JWA-Gulf  G-W all dry-deck using the Cooper ring sealing system?
Did they use both 2 & 4 bolt mains block configuration?

Thanks for the details

jim p

I found the FIA homologation form #224 for GT40, Group 4,
the "68" addition for G-W 4,942 cc variant.

regards,

jim p

Quote from: gt350hr on August 09, 2021, 12:54:04 PM
   Doug ,
      The valve covers are correct "endurance racing" GT40 valve covers for the 289 head. The huge baffles are designed not to let oil seep out , but let crankcase pressure out.
    Randy

higher detail photo of the baffled valve covers

jim p

That video clip of #98 doesn't look like a "Sebring" USRRC car, that appears to have "street" wheel flairs and comp cars didn't have bumper guard / grill guard.

just my novice observation, IMHO

jim p

Quote from: gt350hr on August 09, 2021, 11:06:39 AM
   Doug ,
     "Technically" there is no such thing as a C7FE block ,period. here is the GT40 block "lineage".
    Early cars ( after the attempt at using the pushrod Indy engine) used conventional Hi Po 289 blocks. Durability issues led to the improved C6FE casting number , two bolt , "steel main cap" block. Continued durability issues led to a four bolt main ( steel caps) block built with SK or XE numbers ( both were built). These blocks all had conventional press in freeze plugs and were also used in '67 T/A engines with C6FE heads. The block was revised for an additional oil passage and given the C8FE casting number. This "general" casting number block saw MANY spur of the moment changes and with different machining programs was used for Tunnel Ports , '68 Indy use with Gurney heads in "dry sump" configuration . The block was carried over to '69 Boss 302 use in both T/A and "street" configuration with the "steel" main caps and "dry deck" or "wet deck" being the major difference. The C8FE block was also a favorite of the Formula 5000 race group. MANY C8FE blocks have additional SK numbers scratched into the bell housing areas. These indicate the various revisions for specific applications.
    There you have it.
       Randy

Randy,
The updated GT-40 FIA form dated 68? listed the 4,942 displacement addendum, including the 5.0L crank set (C8FE ??) and G-W heads shown in the supporting photos.
I thought that was to homologate the JWA-Gulf  G-W engine for 68 / 69 seasons??
Were the JWA-Gulf  G-W all dry-deck using the Cooper ring sealing system?
Did they use both 2 & 4 bolt mains block configuration?

Thanks for the details

jim p

Quote from: vintageracer on June 25, 2021, 12:22:47 PM
What numbers constitute a carry over ? 
My car has over ride traction bars, axle limiting cables, functional side scoops.

Is it a carry over ?

maybe yes, maybe no

as mentioned SFM number needed, but override bars continued into 66 production for some time, I believe axle limit cables are part of over-ride modification and all 66 had functional side scoops.

purchase the 66 registry and get to know more about your car

jim p

Quote from: Richstang on June 22, 2021, 01:19:22 PM

Quote from: 6R07mi on June 22, 2021, 12:41:10 PM
you gotta love the audio !
it does provide some sense of what it sounds like with that engine just inches behind you!!

https://youtu.be/1gV_z8e98S0
Revs Institute owns P1049.
enjoy
jim p

Thanks for posting the video!
I'd have to sit in it for a ride to see how the rear engine sounds inches behind. 

It looks like there were no mirrors on the car when first built. (uncertain of the date on the photo)

Rich, that photo is from the VIR event Dick Thompson drove in.

jim p

you gotta love the audio !
it does provide some sense of what it sounds like with that engine just inches behind you!!

https://youtu.be/1gV_z8e98S0

Revs Institute owns P1049.

enjoy

jim p

Quote from: Richstang on June 16, 2021, 06:58:59 PM
A 1964 Le Mans puzzle.
Two cars with the same '1E MFG 013' license plate!
My first thought was one photo was taken prior to race day (#5) and the other was on race day (#6)

BUT...

One photo (#6) shows the 1964 California registration sticker and the other photo (#5) has no registration sticker.
?

Edit; Updated list in first post with new information and more cars added

is the registration sticker only on the rear plate? perhaps they used the front plate on #5 ??

jim p

These are listed, but catching 2 in the same photo, had to post

jim p

 I didn't see this listed, sorry if it's been caught !

65 Reims door #14, CSX2287, 1E MFG 013

jim p

Quote from: KR500 on June 14, 2021, 11:40:03 AM
That NY license plate (  SHELBY67 ) is registered with that 1968 VIN 8T02S149549

"Forget a'bout it"