68 Shelby GT-350 J-code - Vintage Mustang Forums
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 06:08 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 52
68 Shelby GT-350 J-code

Hi Guys,

What is the going price on these? are they rare find? How is it compares to 67 K-code mustang (price wise & collector wise)?

Cheers,
pakoris is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 06:31 AM
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 28,607
The 67 K code Mustang is more rare than either the 67 or 68 GT 350. In a fair comparison, the GT 350 probably still has the edge in price, though. As always, condition is the single most important factor.

Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.
22GT is online now  
post #3 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 06:34 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 52
How much the 68 350 goes with reasonably good condition with AC/PS ?
pakoris is offline  
post #4 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 07:46 AM
Senior Member
 
dalorzof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 5,539
Clean and correct, fastback ~$70k, convertible ~$80k Both +/- $10k as a ballpark.

Solid projects $45-60k.

All dependant on condition and what's missing.

Believe PS was standard, AC optional. AC might add a bit, but not much.

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
- Douglas Adams



8R03S : 76A I 2A 15M 72 5 U
8R01S : 65A B 2A 28M 72 7 5 - Factory GT
8R01C : 65A M 2A 01E 72 2 W - CS/GT
8F01X : 65A I 2G 20E 24 1 U - EXP500 repli-bute

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h1...pr_07_tiny.jpg
dalorzof is offline  
post #5 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 03:26 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 52
Thanks dalorzof,

Any ideas for the K code mustang pricing?

If you have a choice which one you choose? k code or 68 gt 350?
pakoris is offline  
post #6 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 03:46 PM
Senior Member
 
caveeagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: St Charles, IL
Posts: 1,384
I would take a '67 K over the '68 any day of the week. (w comperable price/condition)

Keep in mind:

>'67 was the last year for the K
>'67 was the last year Shelby actuall built the cars. (early shelby mustangs)
>All '67 GT350s were K codes
>Because of the introduction of the 390 'thunderbird' engine, the K option was pretty rare.

mark
----------------------------
04 SVT Cobra, Torch Red (daily driver)
67 'vert 302,4spd,Red/Red (almost ready!)
67 Coupe 289,auto,black/black,deluxe (sold)
67 Coupe I6 to V8 conversion (sold)
caveeagle is offline  
post #7 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 04:12 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 52
caveeagle, so 67k code mustang more collectible than 68 shelby 350?
pakoris is offline  
post #8 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 04:23 PM
Supporting Vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,615
Collectible and valuable are two different things... But that said, a similarly-restored 67 K-code would probably bring about as much as a similarly-restored 68 GT350

A similarly-restored 67 GT350 would bring yet more money, as they're in stronger demand, even though the rarity-nod goes to the 67 K non-Shelby.

The 1968 GT350 does not pull as much value as the 1967 GT350 because the J-code 302 was not much of a runner, and that's putting it as politely as possible. Ford fixed that issue in 1969 with the introduction of the 351 Windsor...

I agree with dalorzof's value estimates for restored cars, assuming the restorations really are top-drawer, but I think good projects could be found for less (maybe not for the convertible, but for the fastback).
69bossnine is offline  
post #9 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 04:47 PM
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 28,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by 69bossnine View Post
The 1968 GT350 does not pull as much value as the 1967 GT350 because the J-code 302 was not much of a runner, and that's putting it as politely as possible.
You are being kind. The 68 GT350 is the weak sister of the Shelby pantheon. Based on the J-code GT, the engine was basically the 68 version of the 65-67 A code 289 4V. Like it's predecessor, the J code had the same camshaft and exhaust manifolds as the 289 2V, with only a set of flat-top pistons and a pretty small 4300 4V carb to improve performance. The 68 GT350 was supposed to get the 715 cfm Holley on a Cobra intake (major overkill on this very mild engine) but it was not government approved for emissions, so early cars were stone-stock J-codes. They were supposed to be retrofittted by dealers when later approved, but some owners never bothered.

After seeing 65-67 GT350 with the High Performance 289, the J code 68 GT350 was a major disappointment.

About the best thing you can do with a 68 GT350 is fit a C9OZ-6250-C camshaft and a set of 289HP exhaust manifolds. Really transforms the car, and very subtle.

Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.
22GT is online now  
post #10 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 04:52 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 52
So k-code 289 puts more power than the 68 350?
pakoris is offline  
post #11 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 04:58 PM
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 28,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by pakoris View Post
So k-code 289 puts more power than the 68 350?
Gobs.

Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.
22GT is online now  
post #12 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-08-2013, 08:45 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 21,910
Forget Shelby for a minute. 65-67 standard 289 4V was A code about 225 @ 4800 rpm hydraulic lifter. 68 the A code was replaced by J code 302 4V about 230 @ 4800 rpm hydraulic lifter. 65-67 289 4V hi perf K code 270 Hp @ 6000 rpm solid lifters. K code was dropped for 68 only performance engines were big block. Marketing had announced a hi perf 302 for 68 sorta like the K code (sorta, don't flame me...) the Boss 302 was coming in 69. IMO the J code was a one year orphan and a higher perf one never made it to production.

The 68 no matter the model, including Shelby stood alone with no high perf small block!



Slim

My '64 1/2 vert. Ordered May '64. D code 4 speed, handling package, caspian blue, accent group, Ford blue manual top.

'68 vert. driver. Owned since Apr '78. C code AT, AC, PS, P disc B, PT lime gold, standard black interior and top. NOS RF fender and left quarter.New top and folding glass.

Last edited by slim; 04-08-2013 at 08:48 PM.
slim is offline  
post #13 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-09-2013, 01:39 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 52
Thanks, just for my understanding. The 67 s-code is cheaper than 67 k-code right?
pakoris is offline  
post #14 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-09-2013, 02:12 AM
Senior Member
 
supershifter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Frum Hear Two Their Eventually
Posts: 9,023
67 hipo 289 will blow the doors off the 68 gt350 lackluster 302. 68 gt350 is the slowest of all shelbys and early performance mustnags. 68gt350 was suppose to get a detuned 302 tp engine but the tp heads were a disaster on the track and the plan was scrapped and a plain old 302 with 4v carb went in.

supershifter2 < !
supershifter2 is offline  
post #15 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-09-2013, 06:40 AM
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 28,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by pakoris View Post
Thanks, just for my understanding. The 67 s-code is cheaper than 67 k-code right?
Usually. The The 67 K code included only a couple hundred cars, while the S code was built by the thousands.

Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.
22GT 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