Seems that the correct 4-speed bell housing for the 67 428 is not easy to find. I've seen comments that the truck housing will work fine (and allow the larger clutch) if strict originality isn't the issue. Looks like the C5TA housing is readily available and affordable. Is there any problem from a functional and appearance standpoint in the C5TA option?
Isnt the starter nosecone area different than the c6oa?
No, I think that it is the depth of the bell. Places the transmission too far back to properly engage the splines enough.
Actually the C5TA truck bell is shorter depth than the 427/28 bell.
You can use a Lakewood "scattershield".
The issue with the C60A-6394-D bellhouse is that it is unique and looks different then the others.
The 390 bell does not look like it and if you use it with a 428 flywheel then the starter teeth are going to hit the inside of the bell. I will add, that is the case with the Lakewood as well.
What you do with the Lakewood is, bolt it on, start it up and let it run until the sparks stop flying. At that point, the two will have machined themselves together.
The 65 Galaxie bell will fit, is built for the big clutch also and looks similar but it has an additional ear on it for the pivot for the clutch equalizer bar and the starter housing looks different.
If you go to the smaller 390 clutch, then you can use the 390 bell, it just doesn't look the same.
The CJ bell is also used on the 67 GT500 and is made to clear the big 11-1/2" clutch cover.
So is the CJ Bell a C8 casting number? What part/casting number should I be searching for?
C5T bell wont allow the 11 1/2 clutch plate. C6O is the proper CJ bell
There is no c8 cj bell housing like some people think the c6oa bell is used from 68 to 70 however the clutch fork pivet bracket is different in 68 -70 having the hole in it for the flat type spring and 66-67 has the fork with the wire type spring clip.
Some of the early 68 GT500's had the wire clip too. The transition happened in early 68 apparently. As a side note try to find a big bearing fork with the wire clip ;) . They were unique to those 67 early 68 GT500 cars. Fairlanes too.
I saw two recently in the FE forum for about 600. No, you do NOT want to run the truck housing.It's substantially different. It also limits your clutch choices. You can't run a centerforce so the lighter clutch choices won't be available to you.
I just found this bellhousing chart on the David Kee Toploader site that shows a C8OA-6394-A that indicates is for the 428 with 11 1/2" clutch. Seems like that would be a good substitute but is it another unicorn?
http://www.davidkeetoploaders.com/bellhousingidchart.htm
The casting number is C60A, not C80A. That could be a "service" PART number but you will never find a bell with that casting number that I know of.
As Mr. Gaines mentioned, they are all the same engineering casting number but there is an early version for the clip throw out bearing lever mounting and a later version.
The casting dates on these bells are as important as anything. You need to decide which is best for you.
They are all "rare". The '67 Shelby dates are rarer still since the numbers are so small vs. the CJ cars.
If you look at "completed auctions/sales/transactions" on Ebay, you will see that most have been sold for around $500. I've seen them advertised for as high as $1,100, but the "completed" file tends to disagree with that number.
Still, find one that you want, then attempt to negotiate. Good luck with that. I'm still looking for a 7E31. I've found just about everything but.
Well now I'm a little shy about using info from that chart but let me try one more. What's the damage (I'm not building a drag car) if I settle for the 11" clutch? Would the C5AA-6394-A be suitable? Just wondering if I can widen the search criteria.
It's not just the 11" clutch. It's what you can get in the bellhousing. I love the Centerforce dual friction I have. Relatively light pedal pressure, great engagement and doesn't slip with almost 600 HP and 500LB of torque. It's a great street clutch that won't kill your linkage.
You can use the 66-67 style or 68-70 style. The fork is readily available and you won't have any funky geometry issues.
It strikes me that the added material in the C60A bell is for clearance of the counterweights on the Long clutch cover. The Ceneterforce is more compact in that area and shouldn't need that additional clearance.
I think that clutch was originally referred to as a 12" clutch when it was used in the 427's? At some point it became an 11-1/2". The counterweights on it have always caused Fords issues.
The Pantera uses one and the counterweights needed to be removed to clear the bell also.
If you are building just a 390, an 11 inch clutch should be sufficient I would think. That should fit within the 390 bell.
The C60A is just one of those things that you want for your 67, 8, 9 or 0 FE. It's one of those visual things like the balancer. They kind of stand out in a crowd?
There are items no one is going to notice if you have. A C7ZX fan clutch or a service or original build date dual point or if you have the right fan. They pretty much all look the same but if you picked a 67 GT500 to replicate accurately, you picked some difficult and expensive parts to find.
Got a SPEC rear? People look for that. $3,200 was the last quote I got for one.
What are you going to do for a thermostat housing? Not only are they unique to the 67 model year, but in addition they are date coded.
You could have picked something simpler.
I hate to admit it but the first thing I do when the hood is up is start looking on the engine for the original production line parts.
The centrifugal weights won't clear. I have the correct Shelby housing. There is actually a warning in the box. I called CF to clarify before installation.
Quote from: The Going Thing on March 13, 2020, 04:45:23 PM
It's not just the 11" clutch. It's what you can get in the bellhousing. I love the Centerforce dual friction I have. Relatively light pedal pressure, great engagement and doesn't slip with almost 600 HP and 500LB of torque. It's a great street clutch that won't kill your linkage.
You can use the 66-67 style or 68-70 style. The fork is readily available and you won't have any funky geometry issues.
Just for a point of clarification given it doesn't really matter ether way in this instance given function over originality, the 68-70 style fork is readily available and also in reproduction .The 66-67 fork is not ether way.
Bob's correct. The good news is if you wind up with the 66-7 bellhousing you can get the conversion to use the later style fork for the early bellhousing.
There is one for sale. Here is the info from the add from the other forum. This is DIRT cheap.
I have one of the big ones for a car/ 4 speed with the big Z on the back. Where are you located? Asking $400 plus the ride.
Larry in Denver (720) 8393477
Left voicemail and sent text. Fingers crossed.
Thanks for the responses and the heads up on the add. To answer a few of the comments, I'm building a 428 (stroker internals) so I'm trying to get my hands on all the heavy duty 428 stuff I can find/afford. I have the correct balancer, intake, PS cooler, oil cooler, and fuel pump. Drew has built a couple of replica carbs and I'm still looking for the other pulleys and brackets. Should look pretty accurate. Need find a good substitute for the original radiator for an AC car and need to find a good kit to add AC to a non AC car. I hae a 9" rear axle built so I probably won't go to the expense of a SPEC rear end.
I am adding A/C to my Shelby. I hunted down all the factory components. You seem to be going to a lot of trouble to make it look as factory. You would be wasting your time once you bought one of the "kits" out there because it will all be for moot.
The dash center vent isn't reproduced. There is a poor quality plastic center vent unit that doesn't match the dash. You also need a different array of pulleys and mounting brackets. All the underhood A/C parts are reproduced with the exception of the vacuum tree for the manifold, and the original type heater valve, brackets for the compressor, both idlers and the crank pulley.
If you're building with a particular goal in mind you need a well laid out plan. You don't want to do this one as an afterthought. It's a relatively involved job that requires a lot of forethought and a bit of capital. It's not a cheap project and will cost well over the aftermarket kit by the time you restore the components you dig up. The only reason I went to the extremes I did is because I have a real car, and If I'm going to make a change of that significance I wanted it to look as if It came that way.
Just some advice from someone who is actually doing what you're asking about, not just throwing their two cents in.
Kindest Regards, Keith
I knew that the AC would be the hardest part from the get go. Since you're going through it with an original car you are probably way ahead of me chasing down the part numbers for the pulleys and brackets so I would very much appreciate you passing that on to me. Like I said previously, I am happy to substitute an incorrect part number as long as it approximates the original appearance so hopefully that will make my road a little easier than yours. What are you doing about the radiator?
I certainly can and will provide the engineering numbers from the pulleys and brackets. I am still trying to ascertain from someone in the know about the clutch. I have a 6.5" and the information shows it should be 6.75. There shouldn't be an issue if the belt grooves are the same.
Spoke with Larry and closed the deal on the bellhousing. Forgot to say earlier that I also have the correct dual point distributor that I'll send to Faron for rebuild (pertronix internals) so I'm closing in on making the motor look correct. Thanks for the help guys.
Doug, what you failed to take into account is weights pull the fingers aft in the housing at RPM. Centerforce had enough issue with it that is TELLS you not to use other style housing and to return the clutch if you do. There's a nice pretty note from them that advises you, liability and warranty disclaimer as well for not heeding the instructions.
Like most 67 FE car owners the disc and cover was 12" from Ford. I changed to the Aluminum flywheel with the CF Dual Friction.
I've got a Centerforce Dual Friction and I would say that the assembly height is significantly less then the Long BUT I would agree that the C60A bell is the way to go.
I would advise any "clone" builders thusly, "if you want to talk the talk, walk the walk". Stop complaining about how expensive it is to make your counterfeit car or build something else.
I have seen three of the bellhousings for sale in recent history. They are priced in between 699.00 and 899.00. I found the add from the other forum for 400.00. I should have bought it for an Ebay listing. It's expensive to replace damaged or missing items for real cars. A lot of FE cars wound up with small blocks after their owners blew them up or had installed scatter shields in the vehicles.
As for the dual friction clutch, there are at least three threads on the cover changes that occurred about five years ago and that they don't fit the non-hump housings in the old FE forum alone and the warning is also right on the CF website.
Here is a picture of the C5TA bell housing on the left and the C6OA bell housing on the right. Notice the "hump" on the C6OA housing and also that the area that houses the nose of the starter is shaped different and a little taller.
Jeff
Looking at the inside of the bellhousing, you can clearly see the hump that allows for better clutch clearance as stated in the posts above. The C6OA housing is the one with the clutch fork in place.
Doug: CF changed the hat on the DF assembly about four years ago. That may account for the change. The new one is significantly taller and it seems to be at the outer edges.
Here is the clutch fork I have been using on the C6OA bell housing. Please comment if this is the correct style clutch fork for a '67 GT500 as I do not know.
The fork is the 68-up style. It appears your pivot is missing from the bell housing. Nothing to be concerned being you have the 68 up style. They are reproduced.
So have we concluded that the CF clutch WILL fit in the C6OA bellhousing and that the 68 fork is the better option?
Well, yes. The change on the C60A Large Z is 66-7 use a wire type retainer for the fork. 68-up uses a spring steel flat clip. Another consideration is the use of the 1 1/6" 10 spline input Vs. the 1 3/8". They use different throwout bearings because the input shaft cone is larger on the 1 3/8 input shaft.
Here is the 68 fulcrum. You'll note it is slotted for the 68 up clip.
Great pics that explain a lot.