1965 Engine upgrades - Vintage Mustang Forums

 6Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 10:24 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 97
1965 Engine upgrades

I recently acquired a 1965 GT coupe (prairie bronze). It will need some work on the rear quarters and the outer wheelhouse bottoms (patch) and a front fender along with a new paint job. The paperwork came with a picture from 1970 of the car covered with wedding streamers and shaving cream.

The car needs a little tune up and carb adjustment and checking the brakes, but can be driven over the summer. In the late fall, I will pull the engine and redo that and the engine bay. I will have the body work done and then painted. The interior is in great condition and should only need new handles, visors and brackets, bezel replacement and the dash repainted (will probably do the door interior.

I am looking to do the proverbial upgrading the horsepower and maintaining the stock look. The car will be street, no racing, but looking for a kick in the seat. In reading some of the prior threads I came across this build by 22GT:

67 289 2V. Upgrades:

C9OZ-6250-C hydraulic "HiPo" camshaft.
Screw-in studs
Port-matched heads link: 289/302 Cylinder Head Port Matching
Edelbrock Performer RPM intake manifold (or Cobra)
Edelbrock 600 cfm carb (a Summit 600 would cost about $40 less)
Stock distributor recurved to BOSS 302 spec.
289HP air cleaner


218/218@.050 (290 adv), .470"/.470" valve lift. Almost exactly the profile of the 289HP, except using hydraulic lifters.

Several questions I had, is the block and heads are 1965 non smog (4/65 build date) and set up for a 4bbl, so would the above need any modifications?

Also if I chose to use a Autolite 4100, Venturi 1.12 600cfm carb, could this replace the Edelbrock Carb?

And for the intake, could I use the Ford over the counter Cobra such as SFJD-9425-F Alum intake? I imagine the Hipo intakes are crazy money. Or would staying with the iron intake and doing the porting but I guess more sane?

Someone suggested a C9OX-9424-A, but not sure if that would require me to get 351W heads and R-4698 C9OF-9510-R Holley 600CFM carb

The car comes with factory A/C and just needs the compressor rebuilt, but will go back in the car. My budget for this part of the build is 1000-1500.

If the car needs the bottom end done, it would be done .30 over and what would be a complementary set of pistons? (separate from the budget above)

At that time, I will be getting the heads done with a angle value job (and ported and match to the intake as needed).

Sorry for the long rant, just trying to get my ducks and budgeted funds in line for the fall/early winter.

Thank you,

Bob
rcarleton is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 10:35 AM
Moderator
 
HoosierBuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Probably in the garage
Posts: 6,589
It certainly depends on your goals, but my thought is that any money spent on the stock heads would be better spent on a set of aftermarket aluminum heads with larger valves (I went with AFR165's on my c-code) but beware that you will likely have to change your pistons if they are stock c-code without valve reliefs.

You seem to be pretty hung up on the hipo specs, and I'd also point out that there have been a lot of improvements in SBF upgrades over the years that would be a vast improvement over what ford had available in the mid-60's. For example, any of the available aluminum 4 barrel intakes would work fine. You don't need a hipo one and it's doubtful it would perform any better than a $180 aftermarket unit.

Phil
JSHarvey likes this.
HoosierBuddy is offline  
post #3 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 10:57 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 97
Hi the pistons are still stock for the 4v A code. I like the look of the old school and want to keep it stock, but realize I will not get the gains over the newer stuff such as the alum heads and intake for both the weight and the flow. I may give in to going that way, but I currently cant walk away from the mid 60s setup (stubborn and foolish).
rcarleton is offline  
 
post #4 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 11:50 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Surfside Beach,SC
Posts: 665
I would go with a stouter camshaft(but that's just me) There are many-many-many better/more modern options as far as cams go.

Totally off subject but....I kept the 289 in my 66 and built a later model roller cammed engine in the mean time. Clean up over bore....hyperutechnic pistons(installed backward on the rods)...ARP rod bolts(ONLY weak spot on a SBF engine!) Windsor jr. heads....9.5:1 CR balanced assembly....windage tray...roller rockers....custom cam(230/236duration@050 550 lift 108*LSA)....
degreed and advanced the cam timing....idles pretty snotty but grrrreat on the street)..re curved the distrib timing... Took my time and enjoyed the build WHILE...I still enjoyed the Mustang. Sold the 289 engine and flywheel and FI off the donor engine to "help" defray some of the cost on the build.
Took one day(working by myself) to swap out engines. EZ-PZ.
Good time to clean and spray paint the engine compartment!
Several ways to skin the proverbial.....pony!
6sally6

Last edited by 6sally6; 06-14-2017 at 11:53 AM.
6sally6 is offline  
post #5 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 01:17 PM
Senior Member
 
zray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the road in NE Oklahoma
Posts: 9,815
The 1.12 Autolite carbs were ALMOST exclusively for big block engines. The problem with using them on a 289/302 isn't the 1.22 Venturi size. It's the fact that the primary boosters are calibrated for a big block engine. Replacing those with the correct 289 HiPo primary boosters is almost impossible due to scarcity. Really, if you want to stick with a 4100 Autolite, then you are better off with the 1.08 carb. The performance will be better in the low and midrange where most of your driving will occur.

Z
JSHarvey likes this.

zray is online now  
post #6 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 02:03 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 97
Thank you,

I have the 1.08 that came with the car, someone offered me a 1.12, but the specs seemed more for the 390. That would confirm it.
rcarleton is offline  
post #7 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 07:43 PM
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 31,297
Several questions I had, is the block and heads are 1965 non smog (4/65 build date) and set up for a 4bbl, so would the above need any modifications?

Also if I chose to use a Autolite 4100, Venturi 1.12 600cfm carb, could this replace the Edelbrock Carb?
Sure

And for the intake, could I use the Ford over the counter Cobra such as SFJD-9425-F Alum intake?
Whether the lettering is Cobra or Shelby, it's the same item.

I imagine the Hipo intakes are crazy money.
Actually, dirt-common at flea markets. I see them lying on the ground all the time. It's the same manifold as an ordinary 289 or 302 4V.

Or would staying with the iron intake and doing the porting but I guess more sane?
Already have an iron 4V? Keeping that will cost you power, I'd guess maybe 25 ponies.

Someone suggested a C9OX-9424-A, but not sure if that would require me to get 351W heads and R-4698 C9OF-9510-R Holley 600CFM carb
The C9OX-9424-A is a 351W manifold. Cannot be used on a 289/302. Too wide.

The car comes with factory A/C and just needs the compressor rebuilt, but will go back in the car. My budget for this part of the build is 1000-1500.
The AC repair is a completely separate issue.

If the car needs the bottom end done, it would be done .30 over and what would be a complementary set of pistons? (separate from the budget above)
Flat-tops would give you about 10 hp more, but would probably force you to use higher-octane fuel.

At that time, I will be getting the heads done with a angle value job (and ported and match to the intake as needed).
Hardened seats come as 3-angle.
Woodchuck likes this.

Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.
22GT is offline  
post #8 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 10:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Woodchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Vermont
Posts: 29,790
Send a message via Yahoo to Woodchuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by 22GT View Post
Several questions I had, is the block and heads are 1965 non smog (4/65 build date) and set up for a 4bbl, so would the above need any modifications?

Also if I chose to use a Autolite 4100, Venturi 1.12 600cfm carb, could this replace the Edelbrock Carb?
Sure
Sure, but the Summit M2008, now available in a 500cfm (500-599cfm) has all the features of the 4100 with much more tunability. The 4100 is still a GREAT carb, but getting the RIGHT one,
with the RIGHT boosters, tuned for YOUR build is darned difficult for all but the 4100 experts.



And for the intake, could I use the Ford over the counter Cobra such as SFJD-9425-F Alum intake?
Whether the lettering is Cobra or Shelby, it's the same item.
My choice is the Weiand Stealth, with the identification ground off, painted black to match the block.


I imagine the Hipo intakes are crazy money.
Actually, dirt-common at flea markets. I see them lying on the ground all the time. It's the same manifold as an ordinary 289 or 302 4V.
Yep. Same manifold that came on the "A" code.

Or would staying with the iron intake and doing the porting but I guess more sane?
Already have an iron 4V? Keeping that will cost you power, I'd guess maybe 25 ponies.
Unless there's some good reason to keep the iron heads they'd be better off tagged and bagged on your parts shelf for storage and replaced by a nice set of non-smog AFR165's, painted black, of course.

Someone suggested a C9OX-9424-A, but not sure if that would require me to get 351W heads and R-4698 C9OF-9510-R Holley 600CFM carb
The C9OX-9424-A is a 351W manifold. Cannot be used on a 289/302. Too wide.
Ditto.


The car comes with factory A/C and just needs the compressor rebuilt, but will go back in the car. My budget for this part of the build is 1000-1500.
The AC repair is a completely separate issue.
Just be aware that the "purists" know that you couldn't get A/C with a HiPo in '65, if you're going for the "copycat" look.

If the car needs the bottom end done, it would be done .30 over and what would be a complementary set of pistons? (separate from the budget above)
Flat-tops would give you about 10 hp more, but would probably force you to use higher-octane fuel.
No need to go .030" over if .020" will do... '65 A-code pistons WERE flat-tops, but I'd go with flat-tops with valve reliefs and pay particular attention to compression height to keep "squish" between .035-.040" to avoid the tendency to detonate.

At that time, I will be getting the heads done with a angle value job (and ported and match to the intake as needed).
Hardened seats come as 3-angle.
Shiny new aluminum heads won't need a valve job...
...

Bart

What, me worry?
- Alfred E. Neuman

Woodchuck is offline  
post #9 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 11:39 PM
Senior Member
 
kenash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Severna Park, MD
Posts: 4,713
Since you want to keep it looking stock, you might consider Windsor Jr. iron heads. They look stock and but have bigger valves (190/160) for increased breathing. These heads can be whittled a bit to get an increase in CR. You can throw in a 302 kit to gain a little increase in stroke for TQ.

Ken ..
64 1/2 Poppy Red too!, Cvt. Resto-Mod
333 Cu.in. T5z, 3:55, Dual 40 mm DCOE Webers
Performer RPM, CI cam, TFS/TWs, Tri-Ys, Discs w/Shelby Drums
Severna Park, MD
kenash is offline  
post #10 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-14-2017, 11:55 PM
Senior Member
 
zray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the road in NE Oklahoma
Posts: 9,815
I've used Ferrea 1.94 / 1.60 valves in a few HiPo heads. It's a tight fit, but doable. The trouble is, larger valves mean less intake charge velocity. Not a problem when you get the rpm's up, but there is a noticable drop off in low speed torque, something a 289 doesn't have a lot of anyway. If I was running a 4 barrel carb w/o a Paxton, I'm not sure I'd go with the larger valve. I'd have to thunk it over ....

Z

zray is online now  
post #11 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-16-2017, 11:43 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 97
Thank you for the responses!

I am not trying to replicate the K-code specs or parts, just wanted to add some horse power to the car knowing that the 225 was gross and most likely overstated. There is no intent to use it other than street. However I do like the gains of the newer components, but the engine is still stock (outside of replacement belts, hoses and spark plug wires.

I guess I would like to have the valve job on the heads (keep the same size valves), some porting, possibly go to the Shelby/Cobra intake, if I do not stay the iron. I will have the block looked at and either honed or .20 as needed.

For the flat top pistons with relief valves, is there one mfg better than the other? Also should I be looking at ones related for 9.5:1 CR?

I will get the rods reconditioned if still good, or is there a better option for that?

If I go with the Cobra/Shelby Alum intake, is the Autolite 4100 1.08 still adequate? My friend rebuilds carbs, so he can help me dial it in as needed. Would this or Weiand Stealth cause and clearance issues with the hood and carb?

Also based on that would I be looking for one of the Cams mentioned above or does this set up change that?

And finally I was looking at using the exhaust manifolds (vs headers) but using a set of hipo manifolds into either the GT exhaust setup (with mufflers and resonators) or the arvinode exhaust system.

I have tried to upload pics of the car, but I can only get the pics down to 30kb. I will try again to reduce them further.

Bob
rcarleton is offline  
post #12 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-16-2017, 12:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 4,541
You can use the Cobra high rise intake with a 1/2" spacer (for proper sealing because it WILL NOT otherwise) with the 4100 and the HiPo air cleaner and element with 1/2" hood clearance...so long as you have stock engine mounts.
zray likes this.

Regards,
Patrick
patrickstapler is online now  
post #13 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-16-2017, 02:47 PM
Senior Member
 
zray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the road in NE Oklahoma
Posts: 9,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickstapler View Post
You can use the Cobra high rise intake with a 1/2" spacer (for proper sealing because it WILL NOT otherwise) with the 4100 and the HiPo air cleaner and element with 1/2" hood clearance...so long as you have stock engine mounts.
^^^^^^^^^^. This. !

it's the waffle bottom of the Autolite 4100 that makes a seal with any intake except the stock Ford iron intake such a problem some vendors sell an 1/8" steel plate for the sealing purpose. But as Patrick points out, a 1/2" phenolic spacer is the best solution. Of course you must use gaskets between every surface.

The 1.08 Autolite will be plenty of carb for you even when used with a Cobra Hi Rise intake, in my opinion.

I certainly would try it first to make up your own mind, before contemplating purchasing another carb.


When looking for an intake, there are several lower cost intakes that do a very good job. Summit sells an edlebrook / cobra Hi Rise knock off caLled the phase 2 or level 2, at $179.95 it's 1/3 the price of a blue Thunder cobra lettered Hi Rise intake. You can always have the Summit name milled off the intake if it bothers you. I use one of those summit intakes on my '66 GT350 while I was restoring the original Cobra Hi Rise intake. It worked very well.

Here is the link to it:

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-226033

If you shop on eBay or elsewhere be sure NOT TO BUY a Cobra Lo Rise manifold. They were made for the 260 cubic inch Cobras, and are more restrictive than even your stock Ford iron intake. No one likes the performance from them.

Regarding the pistons, these are highly recommended. And come in all overbore sizes. Like 0.020, etc. if you now have std. bore, don't let any machine shop or other doofus talk you into boring out to +0.030" . It's very likely that +0.020" will clean up your bore, and be a perfect fit. Automatically going to 0.030" would needlessly remove more of your cylinder walls than needed, and deprive you of having the pleasure of driving the car another 250,000 miles and then getting it overhauled again to the 0.030" size.

0.020"

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/s...cp20/overview/

0.030"

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/slp-h273cp30

PM me if you need any other details.

Z


Last edited by zray; 06-16-2017 at 02:55 PM.
zray is online now  
post #14 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-16-2017, 08:26 PM
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 31,297
Thank you for the responses!

I am not trying to replicate the K-code specs or parts, just wanted to add some horse power to the car knowing that the 225 was gross and most likely overstated. There is no intent to use it other than street. However I do like the gains of the newer components, but the engine is still stock (outside of replacement belts, hoses and spark plug wires.

I guess I would like to have the valve job on the heads (keep the same size valves), some porting, possibly go to the Shelby/Cobra intake, if I do not stay the iron. I will have the block looked at and either honed or .20 as needed.
The iron manifold is barely adequate to the cam upgrade you propose.

For the flat top pistons with relief valves, is there one mfg better than the other? Also should I be looking at ones related for 9.5:1 CR?
Compression ratio involves the heads as well as the pistons. For the record, when I say "flat top", I mean the stock 60's item, which always had valve reliefs. There were, IIRC, some truly flat-top pistons in the 80's, but a) they suck, and b) they won't fit your 289 anyway.

I will get the rods reconditioned if still good, or is there a better option for that?
No. The stock rods, with proper reconditioning and modern bolts, can easily sustain 7000 rpm.

If I go with the Cobra/Shelby Alum intake, is the Autolite 4100 1.08 still adequate?
With a stock C3AZ-V cam, yes. But your whole point was to upgrade the cam, so no, your C9OZ-C cam will strangle on that 480 cfm 1.08. The 500 Summit won't be much better. I do like the Summit, but with the cam upgrade a 600 is mandatory.

My friend rebuilds carbs, so he can help me dial it in as needed. Would this or Weiand Stealth cause and clearance issues with the hood and carb?
I've never seen it as a problem.

Also based on that would I be looking for one of the Cams mentioned above or does this set up change that?
The C9OZ-C is an excellent, all-around street cam, easily capable of providing you 320 hp.

And finally I was looking at using the exhaust manifolds (vs headers) but using a set of hipo manifolds into either the GT exhaust setup (with mufflers and resonators) or the Arvinode exhaust system.
I have the HP manifolds, put them back on when I tired of the usual noise, heat, loose bolts, and pavement scraping of the headers. They feed into stock 66 GT exhaust. Car runs (and sounds) very well.

I have tried to upload pics of the car, but I can only get the pics down to 30kb. I will try again to reduce them further.

Bob
Strange, this photo is 209kb, uploads perfectly:

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 6T09A.jpg (95.8 KB, 89 views)
Caper50 likes this.

Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.
22GT is offline  
post #15 of 21 (permalink) Old 06-16-2017, 08:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 4,541
BTW folks...that pic rarely graces our presence...enjoy.

Regards,
Patrick
patrickstapler is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome