I am looking for any help with identifying the appropriate vacuum fittings for the C7ZX-9425-A intake manifold, and in particular the rear power brake fitting. I have been looking for information and pictures however have found very little. Any information and pictures would be greatly appreciated.
Hope this helps, 90 degree brass fitting. A steel tube with a fitting and a 90 bend attaches to this, the vacuum hose is crimped to the other end of the metal tube and the other end of the hose to the check valve on the booster.
Third image is tube on brass fitting although hard to see in these,
I think (?) all three parts are available from NPD or Dead Nuts On, maybe Virginia too (?).
JD,
Thank you for the information. It is greatly appreciated.
Those in the picture are from a small block. Bill at Mansfield Mustang has them all. My '67 did not have the pair of individual vacuum hose ports like I have seen used on some. Bil also offers the correct Power Booster hard line that comes off the back of the manifold. The chrome plater bent my original, so I had to replace it. The only draw back is that the PCV nipple is different from my Shelby unit in that is has no ridge at the end of the nipple. It's a straight tube. You can see this on Bill's website.
http://mansfieldmustang.com/EngineFuelCarbp1.html
-Keith
This vacuum fitting looks like the fitting for the C4 automatic transmission line for 1966 GT350 as well.
Cory
hope these help... 8)
None of the pictures so far are of the typical 67 GT500 variety. I am away from my picture file. Think 390 intake fitting . It could vary depending on if auto and or A/C . A fairly common fitting.
Which fitting, Bob? The Booster line and nipple is exactly what I have. They are not repros.
Quote from: Wedgeman on February 01, 2019, 01:48:37 AM
hope these help... 8)
The original setup on the pcv doesn't go to the intake manifold. It goes to the bottom on the air cleaner.
If you want the thing to work, then yes, this would be one way to do it BUT you WILL siphon engine oil out of the valve cover into the intake manifold.
The power brake vacuum hookup is "correct-ish". The kink in the tube may vary a little from the originals to the repro's. That is a picture of one of the repro's. It's close and I wouldn't complain about it but the pcv hook up is not as built by SA.
The one booster fitting on my car looks like the one wedgeman has pictured at the bottom if that also helps.
The PCV does on some vehicles go to the intake. Mine does. I don't have the two small vaccum ports off the the power booster fitting.
From pics I have seen, the earlier cars had the PCV to the intake, the later ones to the air cleaner base. I am curious as to if anyone knows when & why this change occurred.
Quote from: Wedgeman on February 01, 2019, 11:25:53 AM
From pics I have seen, the earlier cars had the PCV to the intake, the later ones to the air cleaner base. I am curious as to if anyone knows when & why this change occurred.
OK. Who wants to do the survey and the spreadsheet? I think then that you have to ask which air cleaner base that you have since some don't have the nipple on it.
Worms, worms ,worms. Who opened the can of worms and let them out?
Also...to open the can further....please state whether your car has inboard or outboard brights to go along with the PCV / air cleaner nipple.. ::)
Inboard and early.
I think you can see the PCV from this angle.
-Keith
Quote from: Wedgeman on February 01, 2019, 01:24:24 PM
Also...to open the can further....please state whether your car has inboard or outboard brights to go along with the PCV / air cleaner nipple.. ::)
Son of a...female dog! You just had to bring that up right... ;D
My GT500 thermactor equipped car has the PCV to the intake. The air cleaner fitting goes through a flame arrestor to the oil fill tube.
Quote from: 1967 eight barrel on February 01, 2019, 06:47:06 AM
Which fitting, Bob? The Booster line and nipple is exactly what I have. They are not repros.
The last picture in reply #5 was added after I made my post. That fitting in the last picture is typical. It will have one or two vacuum ports that would be blocked off with rubber caps if on a 4 speed without A/C. The pcv hose typically goes to the the air cleaner base on a assemblyline car unless it is thermactor equipped. If not showing concours and on a pleasure driven car the pcv to the intake may be a preferred arrangement.
I was waiting for Bob to respond. This has been discussed here before. It is my understanding that for Concourse, the pcv hose goes to the air cleaner nipple.
It is Concourse because that's how the car was delivered new.
Functionally, it is questionable that it works at all with that design. To make the thing work as intended, it should go to the intake manifold.
In my view, the "original set up" (going to the air cleaner base) was a way of juggling the 2x4 system to keep the "expected owner complaints" of the carbs flooding, fouling the plugs, the difficulty in changing spark plugs and yet satisfy the emissions law of having a functional PCV system on the car.
Someone in the California DMV had to have determined that the connection to the air cleaner WAS acceptable to them and that it conformed to the requirements. There is no other possibility that I can see.
That's something that "Cantwell and team" would have contrived in order to provide a reduce cost solution to something that they already knew from pre-production testing.
In my view, these engines are going to last a lot longer with fewer issues by using a manifold connection BUT, that sucker is going to syphon in oil from the covers on long cruises.
I had a 302 small block, NEVER touched by me, COMPLETELY box stock, drain the oil pan on a cruise of about 200 miles. Ironically, it still showed oil pressure, but NOTHING on the dip stick.
This is VERY typical in my view of the FORD PCV connection design. Personally, I now plumb in an oil separator tank into all of my systems. The 67 GT500 definitely needs one if you are going to the intake manifold.
As we all know there is not enough vacuum in the air cleaner to ever make the PCV function. As Bob stated, it's certainly an asset to have a functional PCV for moisture reasons.
-Keith
Quote from: 1967 eight barrel on February 02, 2019, 09:55:55 AM
As we all know there is not enough vacuum in the air cleaner to ever make the PCV function. As Bob stated, it's certainly an asset to have a functional PCV for moisture reasons.
-Keith
I agree. The original set up never worked.
It isn't just for moisture only though. A functioning PCV system is worth in the vicinity of 25hp since it helps seal the lower piston ring. Vacuum over 12 inches becomes destructive since many of the engine seals can't take that much negative pressure. A crank seal will literally get sucked into the engine. 8 to 10 inches is about ideal. BUT that's gonna' suck in excessive oil into the intake. You need a separator to reduce that. Call it an oil scrapper if you want to. Same thing.
Even cars with open breathers are using them to run high speed events on open track days to satisfy track safety rules. You'd be surprised how much oil they catch!
Just look at the location of the vacuum fitting. It is below the level of the pcv valve. You're going to get a fluid flow there.
You could also look at it as an open vent system is giving away 25hp and causing excessive piston ring wear.
I will also add that my power brake hook up looks like the last pic in #5.
Is it typical to attach the red and white PCV tag around it on the right valve cover.? GT350
Quote from: rcgt350 on February 02, 2019, 01:39:12 PM
Is it typical to attach the red and white PCV tag around it on the right valve cover.? GT350
Yes , but only on service pcv's not on assemblyline.
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 02, 2019, 08:54:51 AM
I was waiting for Bob to respond. This has been discussed here before. It is my understanding that for Concourse, the pcv hose goes to the air cleaner nipple.
It is Concourse because that's how the car was delivered new.
Functionally, it is questionable that it works at all with that design. To make the thing work as intended, it should go to the intake manifold.
In my view, the "original set up" (going to the air cleaner base) was a way of juggling the 2x4 system to keep the "expected owner complaints" of the carbs flooding, fouling the plugs, the difficulty in changing spark plugs and yet satisfy the emissions law of having a functional PCV system on the car.
Someone in the California DMV had to have determined that the connection to the air cleaner WAS acceptable to them and that it conformed to the requirements. There is no other possibility that I can see.
That's something that "Cantwell and team" would have contrived in order to provide a reduce cost solution to something that they already knew from pre-production testing.
In my view, these engines are going to last a lot longer with fewer issues by using a manifold connection BUT, that sucker is going to syphon in oil from the covers on long cruises.
I had a 302 small block, NEVER touched by me, COMPLETELY box stock, drain the oil pan on a cruise of about 200 miles. Ironically, it still showed oil pressure, but NOTHING on the dip stick.
This is VERY typical in my biew of the FORD PCV connection design. Personally, I now plumb in an oil separator tank into all of my systems. The 67 GT500 definitely needs one if you are going to the intake manifold.
Thank you to everyone for all of the information and discussion. How many use an oil separator tank, and are there any recommendations of a particular tank for a 428 pi?
Quote from: jswoody on February 03, 2019, 10:58:15 AM
Quote from: shelbydoug on February 02, 2019, 08:54:51 AM
I was waiting for Bob to respond. This has been discussed here before. It is my understanding that for Concourse, the pcv hose goes to the air cleaner nipple.
It is Concourse because that's how the car was delivered new.
Functionally, it is questionable that it works at all with that design. To make the thing work as intended, it should go to the intake manifold.
In my view, the "original set up" (going to the air cleaner base) was a way of juggling the 2x4 system to keep the "expected owner complaints" of the carbs flooding, fouling the plugs, the difficulty in changing spark plugs and yet satisfy the emissions law of having a functional PCV system on the car.
Someone in the California DMV had to have determined that the connection to the air cleaner WAS acceptable to them and that it conformed to the requirements. There is no other possibility that I can see.
That's something that "Cantwell and team" would have contrived in order to provide a reduce cost solution to something that they already knew from pre-production testing.
In my view, these engines are going to last a lot longer with fewer issues by using a manifold connection BUT, that sucker is going to syphon in oil from the covers on long cruises.
I had a 302 small block, NEVER touched by me, COMPLETELY box stock, drain the oil pan on a cruise of about 200 miles. Ironically, it still showed oil pressure, but NOTHING on the dip stick.
This is VERY typical in my biew of the FORD PCV connection design. Personally, I now plumb in an oil separator tank into all of my systems. The 67 GT500 definitely needs one if you are going to the intake manifold.
Thank you to everyone for all of the information and discussion. How many use an oil separator tank, and are there any recommendations of a particular tank for a 428 pi?
There is no pre-existing separator "kit". You have to design it. Decide where to put it. How to plumb it, etc. Most people are running without them. Most people don't drive the car much or very far, just basically around the block a few times.
Would love to see your design ...Doug !!....
Quote from: Wedgeman on February 03, 2019, 01:12:37 PM
Would love to see your design ...Doug !!....
Everything is apart. Might have it together again this week? Temps are up to a human level again. I didn't take pics when it was together. Ya' gotta' wait a little bit.
At the moment it's like Scarecrow, with a little over here...a little over there.
I can show you the Pantera if you wanna' see that one but no 427 Wedgie in that one? That one is together.
Excellent !! 8)
Quote from: Wedgeman on February 03, 2019, 04:48:36 PM
Excellent !! 8)
OK. You asked for it, you got it.
This is how I accomplished this in my Pantera. The same tank is being used in my Shelby's. It is billet aluminum. It has a sight tube on the side that will show what is in the tank and a petcock underneath at the bottom to drain it.
It is plumbed between the pcv valve and the vacuum source. In the case of the Pantera it is a vacuum reservoir made out of a Mr. Gasket fuel log. It was used because it fits so conveniently just behind the stainless header heat shield. It isn't showing up well because of the lighting but it's there, plumbed in series to the individual stainless tubing coming from each of the intake runners.
It's a Weber manifold so it's an individual runner manifold and just to get engine vacuum you need to plumb them together.
I think the pictures pretty much explain what is going on with it. The oil that gets sucked in just drops to the bottom of the tank and a minimal amount gets sucked into the intake manifold. It's not 100% efficient, but is highly efficient, or maybe...good enough for my purposes.
The Shelbys are using the same tank. In my '68 GT350, the battery is in the trunk. That provides enough room against the front of the right shock tower to mount the tank. In that application, the tank is plumbed with -6 Russell braided stainless hose from the pcv to the back of the intake manifold.
The intake there is a C60A, 2x4 Holley Trans-Am intake. It's got only one vacuum port and that's at the back up against the fire wall. So what you will see is a gaggle of braided stainless hose for the pcv, the fuel line and the heater hoses all occupying the same space between the back of the valve cover and the intake manifold.
I tell you this so that you can choose to avert your eyes from a completely non-stock assembly and consider praying for me at the alter of Concourse only worship, asking for my forgiveness? I'd appreciate that.
I always hesitate to post pics like that not only to avoid the accusations of blasphemy but in addition to criticisms of why I used blue hose ends vs. pink or purple and why I feel the necessity to be so overly machismo. I tend to ignore those comments these days and just rack that up to those who have choosen to check "other" on their California drivers licenses rather than male or female, or should that be mail or femail? Hum? Another alternative I suppose.
Well anyway, here's the Pantera. You'll get the idea. The parts are all here for the '67 500 but I have no idea exactly the details of where the plumbing will be located or even the tank. Evey place I try, I come back the next day and nix it. There is FAR less room in that engine compartment then the '68 350's.
I keep trying to go Akashic but so far the Akashic Records have not offered me any kind of solution. That's disturbing. One would have thought that in the total time of the Universe that stems from before time existed, some creature somewhere would have come up with a solution and shared it? Maybe that was the part about "get a horse", I don't know? :o
What's with the picture feature here? Three of the four got rotated 90 to the left? Do we have Russian hackers here? I thought that they only twisted things to the right? :o
EarlJ is also using an oil separator in his "R". His is an open breather system, so it's not vacuum powered and is actually a "catch can".
He could pick up around 25hp by going to a pcv system.
Here is the way I did it on my 68 GT350. Hose runs to the pcv and tubing runs to the an extended vacuum t from the back of the manifold. Tubing takes less space then the hose and firmly plants itself in place. Lots of plumbing going on in that immediate area and space is at a premium.
Thanks Doug !.... 8)
+1 Thx Doug!
I think I've got a handle on the PCV side of the system, but still a little fuzzy on the breather side. I want to keep my '65 restomod engine bay clean (as much as feasible). If I understand correctly, under acceleration, the blow-by gasses pressurize the crankcase. Some of those gasses go through the PCV, but the breather side is now pressurized as well and some of the air/oil fumes come out there. Would it make sense to make this a closed system, add a small air/oil separator to this line and run it to the air cleaner?
Quote from: Jim Herrud on February 05, 2019, 10:59:22 PM
+1 Thx Doug!
I think I've got a handle on the PCV side of the system, but still a little fuzzy on the breather side. I want to keep my '65 restomod engine bay clean (as much as feasible). If I understand correctly, under acceleration, the blow-by gasses pressurize the crankcase. Some of those gasses go through the PCV, but the breather side is now pressurized as well and some of the air/oil fumes come out there. Would it make sense to make this a closed system, add a small air/oil separator to this line and run it to the air cleaner?
I posted a pic of EarlJ's "catch can". I'm sure that when he checks in, he will offer to post better pictures of how he plumbed that. That's an open system running 48ida's.
It can work either open or closed. I prefer the closed version. It isn't always simple to come to a solution that has longevity to it. I've revised mine many times and certainly/ probably that will always continue. What seemed like a good idea last week then shows it's issues in use and needs to get revised, etc.
It's just something to consider and certainly I'm as guilty as anyone as getting stuck in the solution of the '60s that never worked right in the beginning either. The factory configuration of the 67 GT500 is a good example of that. It's really easy to make a car into a restomod. They are very delicate in that sense.
There are lots of Weber set ups being run these days and they aren't that simple to plumb into a pcv closed system and not affect the jetting.
I'm convinced that a pcv is the best solution. You need to find your best solution. There are going to be other issues in building the system. For one, you need to find a PCV valve that actually closes at idle. None do. Some just are closer to closed then others.
The M/E Wagner is the best I can find. It has quite a range of adjustment but even it doesn't close completely. As near as I can determine, it only looses about 2 inches at idle were the best of the standard valves were more like four and more inches at idle. For a Weber system, that's a kiss of death. Idling at 8 inches is ridiculous.
As a matter of fact, that may be the critical factor considering what cam, what induction and power or manual brakes set up that you have. You can easily loose 4 inches at idle because of the valve. The best I could find only looses me about 2. Right there, I think that is why some just go to an open system. It's just MUCH simpler then a closed one. The pcv just complicates everything a bunch that some think isn't worth the effort?
In the case of my Pantera the simplest solution was just to go to a vacuum pump for the brakes and a pcv for the engine ventilation.
What version of PVC routing would be correct for #1594? I'm more partial to the intake fitting than the air cleaner set up because, well I don't have the "original" air cleaner. I'd like to get the right set up, witch ever one that might be? Thanks!! Matt
For GT500's it depends. Are you pleasure driving your car a lot or not driving much but want a original look? PCV with a hose connected to the elbow on the front of the air cleaner base was the way it was typically run from the factory. Running the pcv hose to one of the forward vacuum plugs on the intake using the small block pcv brass nipple is the suggested way for when doing a lot of pleasure driving . That modified pcv routing is not factory but works better. With this information you can decide which makes the most sense to do for your situation.
Thanks Bob!! Great info as always. Well, I'm doing things a little different but striving to find the "right parts" as always. I've found most of the really hard parts for my original engine except the correct air cleaner. I know where a few are but none are obtainable.
Seems also to be the subject of raw aluminum vs. black crinkle finishes? I've seen both but in 67 you just never know with production issues and such.
Regards,
Matt
Quote from: 67GT500#1594 on July 06, 2019, 09:06:30 PM
Thanks Bob!! Great info as always. Well, I'm doing things a little different but striving to find the "right parts" as always. I've found most of the really hard parts for my original engine except the correct air cleaner. I know where a few are but none are obtainable.
Seems also to be the subject of raw aluminum vs. black crinkle finishes? I've seen both but in 67 you just never know with production issues and such.
Regards,
Matt
Matt, very early GT500's had the bare aluminum sand cast lids. Then there was a transition to the wrinkle finish sand cast lid . FYI the sand cast lids were typically paired with the sand cast base The last style was the diecast lid which was wrinkle finish from the beginning of it's introduction to the end of 67 production. Your 1594 car was quite a few hundreds of cars past the transition to the diecast lids /bases IMO. To be clear your car should have a diecast wrinkle finish lid and die cast base. All of the diecast 2X4 bases had the reinforcing ribs and the S7MS engineering number.BTW you know someone who has both diecast and the sandcast air cleaners extra on the shelf just waiting to be put into service ;) .
Quote from: Bob Gaines on July 06, 2019, 09:33:37 PM
Quote from: 67GT500#1594 on July 06, 2019, 09:06:30 PM
Thanks Bob!! Great info as always. Well, I'm doing things a little different but striving to find the "right parts" as always. I've found most of the really hard parts for my original engine except the correct air cleaner. I know where a few are but none are obtainable.
Seems also to be the subject of raw aluminum vs. black crinkle finishes? I've seen both but in 67 you just never know with production issues and such.
Regards,
Matt
Matt, very early GT500's had the bare aluminum sand cast lids. Then there was a transition to the wrinkle finish sand cast lid . FYI the sand cast lids were typically paired with the sand cast base The last style was the diecast lid which was wrinkle finish from the beginning of it's introduction to the end of 67 production. Your 1594 car was quite a few hundreds of cars past the transition to the diecast lids /bases IMO. To be clear your car should have a diecast wrinkle finish lid and die cast base. All of the diecast 2X4 bases had the reinforcing ribs and the S7MS engineering number.BTW you know someone who has both diecast and the sandcast air cleaners extra on the shelf just waiting to be put into service ;) .
I'm wondering if I know them also? Maybe they'd sell me a base? :o
PM sent Mr. Gaines. Thanks!!