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 - 6s1640

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 57
1
Found this nut that actually looks closer to OEM than the AMK nut.  Size is right.

The issue here might be the minimum order is 10,000.  Any body need these?  I will call and see.

Thanks

Cory

2
Hi all,

Can anyone confirm that the AMK stamped nut B-10639 is the same nut used on the Magnum 500 center caps.  They look right, but thought I'd ask if any one has purchased and used on the plastic caps.  Below are images of originals, NOS and the AMK nut.

I sent a note to Brant at VCM, but he was not sure if they were the ones or not, but thought they look the right size.

Thanks

Cory

3
Up For Auction / Re: Real Deal 65 66 Headers or Not?
« on: September 04, 2021, 02:29:34 PM »
I also sent the seller a note asking about the three hole flanges to H-pipe, whether they were loose or welded on.  They are loose.

Thanks for sharing

Cory

4
Wanted to Buy / Re: WTB a M or MA booster for a 4100 Autolite carb
« on: August 30, 2021, 02:33:46 AM »
Hi Dan,

Thank you for the great response.  You are a wealth of information.

Along the same line, can you tell me what a "2 M" booster means?  I have a early NOS C6ZF-C carb with a "2 M" booster.  I have seen other boosters with the No. 2 as well.  I have not seen with the "2" in the MPC.  Do you know what the "2" means?  Attached is an image.  Notice the yellow paint mark.  The other booster has two red paint marks.

Thanks

Cory

5
Wanted to Buy / Re: WTB a M or MA booster for a 4100 Autolite carb
« on: August 29, 2021, 02:34:53 PM »
Hi Dan,

Thanks for responding to my thread.  I was hoping you would chime in.  While digging around the internet, I did find your similar comments on another site.  From the 1975 MPC, the "MA" booster C4OF-9A523-C also came in carburetors C5OF-K, M and T.  From another site, two of the carbs (K & M) were identified as 1965 ci 289 271HP engines for automatics.  Which IIRC, were never produced.  I don't think I have ever heard of these other carbs, but as you say, they are rare as well.

The ZFF carb I am working on has booster CH2 and BA.  It appears the CH2 is for a 1965 CI 289 225 HP automatic car.  Do you think its possible, when the carb was being built back in the day, they were short on the MA booster and installed the CH2?  This booster would be the next best booster to install in the ZFF carb for automatic.  The date code on the tag is late, 7BD for forth week February 1967.  I am guessing the supplier ran short on the MA booster.

Thanks for the help.

Cory

6
Wanted to Buy / WTB a M or MA booster for a 4100 Autolite carb
« on: August 28, 2021, 11:04:31 PM »
Hi all,

Does anyone have a spare that are willing to sell?  Or info what other 4100 carb the same booster might come in.  This is the primary booster to a C6ZF-F or -C carb.

Thanks

Cory

7
Hi Jeff,

Thank you for posting the images of the four radiators.  To recap, all four have the C4ZE-G2 tag attached to W-MO dated coded radiators:

10-65
12-65
  2-66
  4-66

It sure does seam convincing my 1-66 should be tagged the same, right in the middle of your list.  I actually think I might have some of the same or very similar images

Thank you again

Cory

8
Hi Jeff,,

I may have found a source for the C6ZE-H2 tag.  Yearone has them listed.  I placed an order for one.  Cross your fingers they have them.

I will go through my pictures and see if I can find a H2 on a 66 GT350.

Take care

Cory

9
Hi Jeff,

Yes, I did forget to mention it is a standard transmission (four speed).  According to the old AMK radiator tag guide, it should have a soldered on C6ZE-H2 tag, but no longer available.  The current AMK guide shows the C4ZE-G2 tag only good for early 1965 and the C4ZE-Y2 for 1965.   My radiator guy is going to call AMK and ask them why they don't offer the C6ZE-H2 tag any more.  The fall back will be the C4ZE-G2 tag.

Thanks

Cory


10
1966 Shelby GT350/GT350H / W-MO radiator 1-66 and the applicable AMK tag
« on: August 23, 2021, 03:15:26 PM »
Hi all,

What tag should a 1966 Mustang 289 with a 1-66 dated coded W-MO radiator get?  The current AMK guide for this application shows no tag.  An older AMK guide shows C6ZE-H2.  It appears AMK has dropped the H2 tags.  In the absents of the H2, should I go with the G2 or none at all?

Thanks

Cory

11
Up For Auction / Re: Has this car been discussed here yet?
« on: August 15, 2021, 10:11:18 PM »
Hi Owen,

I donít recall seeing this car discussed before. It is a resto-mod clone. Not sure thereís much to discuss here. Are you interested in this car?

Cory

12
Cory,

Certainly one of the benefits of this site is the ability to share knowledge.  Your statement that we are smarter together is spot on.  As for my memory on the HEH-BT, I gathered my information some 20 to 30 years ago.  And of course there is no accounting for inaccuracies in factory documentation.  I do try to be as accurate as possible and hate being wrong.  I apologize for any mistakes and take full responsibility for any that might pop up.

Hi Roy,

Well, your memory is better than your think.  I called Fred Ballard to discuss the HEH-BT Toploader and he was still certain the tranny was a wide ratio.  From my early post I said I would count teeth.  They are 32 (1st) ,31 (2nd) ,25 (3rd) and 23 (4th).  Which means the HEH-BT is, by the physical evidence, not published information, is a wide ratio.   This now clearly explains the difference between a HEH-BT and HEH-BX.  But this now brings up a similar question:  "Why did Ford drop the HEH-BT and replace with the HEH-BW".  It may have to do with the detent, springs and pins.

My question has now been answered.  I will have to call David Kee and suggest him to revise his ID chart plus email Steve at Perogie and let him know.  Its too late to fix the Ford charts.  Thank you all for the help.

Cory


13
Cory,

Surprise, surprise. I worked with Perogie for a number of years.  In fact I taught them how to rebuild toploaders.  Yes George ("the bigger kahuna") would probably know the differences.  They make their knowing the detail differences.  The question for me is are both of these boxes CR and where the heck did I pick up the notion that the -BT is a WR?

As for detent pins and shift rails, if you change everything out as a set, things work out.  But mix them together thinking you can replace one part with another from a different style set and you may find that the box won't shift at all.  Learned that the hard way.  FWIW, I feel that the early style detent set with the beveled pins work better than the later style with the pointed pins.  I think Ford was just trying to save manufacturing money by machining a less costly pointed detent spring.  Not as many machining steps to put a point on a cylinder verses a two sided bevel on each end.

Hi Roy,

See, we are smarter together.  Yes, I agree, mixing the springs, pins and shift rails would not be a good thing.  That we can agree on.

I cannot address your memory on the HEH-BT ratio.  That is why we need each other so we can help each other remember better.

Take care

Cory

14
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/

Hi SG66,

Interesting.  I do know Fred and I expect there can be errors in the MPC.  But Fred is half right.  The HEH-BT was never identified as HiPo in the MPC.  So Fred is correct, the HEH-BT was not used with the 289 Special.  However, I disagree with with the HEH-BT not being a close ratio.  Everything I read says it is a close ratio.  I have a HEH-BT and a HEH-BX.  I will count the input/output rotations on both to confirm close ratio and let you know.  I will also count some teeth.

Thanks for the input.

Cory

15
Hi guys,

I sent a note to Perogie.  They rebuild a lot of these Toploaders.  From Steve's memory too, the only difference is in the detent system, springs (7234) and pins (7C316 and 7235).  Ford was trying to improve the shifting with the HEH-BT but latter dropped.  It must not have worked as well as they thought.   I could not find any differences in the MPC, suggesting maybe Ford only serviced the HEH-BX detents.  This is the answer I got back:

"The HEH-BT and BX interchange perfectly, both close ratio small spline, 28 spline, wide case units, but the earlier BT had the first revision detent system and Ford theoretically "Improved" the system changing the detents slightly  They also changed the case as most BT's I have seen are on the mid-case lettered C5AR case (C5 casting number is in the center of the side of the case) and the BX's are usually on the more conventional High letter location for the lettering.  Ford always changed the number in case of a recall or issue, but overall they were identical - and when I say the detent system changed, it was merely just a change in the spring and detent pin sizes,    This is going off my head but if I think of any other changes on em when I see the bigger kahuna (who even with my 30 years around here, still knows alot more than me) if he knows any other differences."

Thanks all

Cory

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 57