difference in 289 hipo k code and 65 shelby gt350 motor? - Vintage Mustang Forums
Vintage Mustang Forum
HomeForumGalleryClassifiedsAbout UsAdvertiseContact Us
» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
Go Back   Vintage Mustang Forums > General Discussion > Vintage Mustang Forum
Vintage-Mustang.com is the premier Ford Mustang Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-22-2006, 09:09 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 16
Default

what is the difference in 289 hipo k code and 65 shelby gt350 motor? what do i need to convert a k code one? thanks
66FastbackGT is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-22-2006, 09:12 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The DarkSide
Posts: 7,265
Default

Shelby oil pan, intake, valve covers, Shelby Holley 715, Tri-Y headers...I think that's all.
HTH
--Kyle
__________________
The squirrels in my head have spoken.
Cobra 5.0L & AOD swap, here we come.
gotstang is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-22-2006, 10:40 PM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Braselton, Georgia
Posts: 462
Default

What he said. On a side note, in 1967 Shelby decided not to use the Tri-Ys. Instead, he left the hipo manifolds in place. What's interesting, is that the claimed HP output for the '67 is the same as previous models.
__________________
1965 A-Code Convertible (For Sale)
1966 K-Code GT Fastback (Sold)
1969 Mach I 428 Cobra Jet (Project)
Joe6pack is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-22-2006, 11:50 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Halton Hills, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,045
Default

Apologies for leading this thread astray from original message, but in reply to the 67 non Tri-Y header post, this is of course true about standard K-code manifolds being retained by Shelby on the 67 GT-350, but I seem to recall noticing that Tony Branda had in his catalog a Tri-Y setup used with some sort of adaptor he sold, which would allow the headers to work with power steering. I would presume, then, that this header/p.s. adaptor setup would also backdate from a 67 back to the 64.5-66 model years as well. This would allow a K-code (or any other 289 V8, for that matter) to be made similar to 65-66 GT-350 motors and still retain p. steering. Anyother VMF'ers able to verify this?
__________________
[/SIGPIC]67 Fastback GT -- original colour (Frost Turquoise), orig engine. Pic is of me and the Mustang taken in summer of '67, with original F70-14 Wide Ovals. Same car is now restored to "as new" but 3 speed tranny swapped out for 4 gear, with tach dash, original Equalock rear, Opentracker roller perches and idler arm, roller bearing pedal cluster, Cibie headlights, 4100 carb (old 4300 put in storage probably forever)
jfstang is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-23-2006, 12:10 AM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
66kgt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: East Central Illinois
Posts: 1,004
Default

Back in '79 when I bought my kar it had been mildy modified (hotter cam, headers, 4:11 rear), suprised a couple shelby's.

Shelby did very little to the engine...
__________________
1966 KGT Coupe
1983 GT
2006 Roush Stage 2
2008 F250 4x4
66kgt is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-23-2006, 12:07 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lansing, the one in ILLINOIS
Posts: 8,229
Default

The 67's with Tri-y's: the power steering ram needs to be dropped 2" on the left side. Most sellers of Tri-y's sell this bracket too. There is no problem with the power steering pump at all with headers.
__________________
Roddster
67 GT 350 (#0036)("Miss July" 2004) owned since 1971. And I still drive it...SAAC 29 Concours GOLD, Div II, MCA Concours Trailered Gold 2X,
Also: 67 GTA S code COUPE (under construction)
General Shelby and Mustang enthusiast, MCA certified Concours judge
Roddster is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-23-2006, 01:32 PM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Albany, CA
Posts: 1,963
Default

I think the '65 Shelby engine mods also ought to include the side pipes with glass pack mufflers and no cross-over. I'm not sure if this mod was a horsepower adder or a horsepower subtractor. Another power-related mod was the hood scoop. Some sources also mention a dual-point distributor.

Shelby also swapped out the factory toploader for a Borg Warner T-10, removed the back seat, and added overrider traction bars. A 3.89:1 gear was standard, with a 4.11 a no-cost option. Both ratios came with a mandatory Detroit locker.

Removing the back seat would subtract a few pounds. I don't know if the T-10 subtracts weight or adds it. I don't know the effect of a T-10 on rearwheel hp either. The traction bars and gear would definitely help in the quarter mile, and the locker might also help. (I'm not sure if lsd really helps ET's with such low output engines.)

Speaking of output, a GT350 tested by Car & Driver in May 1965 trapped at 95 mph, which with a 3030 lb as-tested weight calculates as 202 rwhp, 253 fwhp. (rwhp = weight x (trap speed/234)^3.)

Whatever the output of the '65 GT350, no one had more experience or success with the Ford 289 than Shelby American. The regular production 289 Shelby Cobras had been running a K-code 289 with the same mods as the GT350 got, since '62 or '63. In racing form, 289-powered GT350R's, Cobras, Daytona Coupes, and Shelby managed GT-40s won just about every series in which they competed.
__________________
The kids' '65 at Marin headlands 1-9-05

http://www.mustangmods.com/data/9461/resized_8.jpg
7_Hubcaps is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-23-2006, 09:15 PM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Braselton, Georgia
Posts: 462
Default

The dual point dizzy was actually a k-code thing. The T-10 was lighter than the toploader, but it wasn't as reliable.

K-codes, GT-350s, Boss 302s, Z-28s, etc. weren't really drag cars. They didn't really have the low end torque needed. I think that a stock K-code actually has more torque than a Boss 302, probably because of the smaller valves.
__________________
1965 A-Code Convertible (For Sale)
1966 K-Code GT Fastback (Sold)
1969 Mach I 428 Cobra Jet (Project)
Joe6pack is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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:

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

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


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.