1966 - Page 2 - Vintage Mustang Forums
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #16 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-14-2016, 08:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 9,384
At the front, driver side of the engine is a squiggly metal tube about the diameter of your pinky. That's the "hard" fuel line coming from the fuel pump. The top end of that line should point toward the carburetor. For some reason, yours is pointing toward the front of the car.

As you can see in the picture, connected to the hard fuel line is a rubber fuel line about the diameter of your index finger. It's currently running in a half-loop toward the front the engine, perhaps dangerously close to the engine fan.

The small canister next to the oil dip stick is a fuel filter. From there the fuel line runs to the carburetor. I would politely suggest you cut out some of that fuel line and run it behind the distributor instead of in front of it. This makes it less likely the fuel line will rub or get caught on something.

The comments about the brake master cylinder refer to the fact that modern master cylinders have two reservoirs. Yours has one. This is not as safe as a "dual bowl" master cylinder. This is because if your brake system develops a leak. all the fluid can leak out leaving the car with no brakes. With a dual bowl, the braked are divided into front wheels and rear wheels. If one side leaks, the other will still work.

Does the car have 4 or 5 lug nuts on each wheel?

Currently working on a 1970 Mach 1 project. See it here: http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/vi...ode-build.html
Klutch is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-14-2016, 08:51 PM
Senior Member
 
Woodchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Vermont
Posts: 33,350
Send a message via Yahoo to Woodchuck
IF you have a single-bowl master cylinder and IF you have a poorly-maintained brake system and IF you have a hand brake that doesn't work for beans then maybe it would be a good idea to install a dual-bowl master. My '66 still has the single-bowl master but I DO have a dual-bowl on the shelf to go on in the Spring. If you have drum brakes all around you can pick up a '67 manual drum brake master cylinder and convert it. If you go with disc brakes on the front you can swap to a '74 Maverick manual disc brake master, Raybestos #MC36440.

As the others have said, check on that fuel line. I am a stickler for running a hard line directly from pump to carb with no rubber hose under pressure. I've had one engine fire from a split hose that wasn't more than 6 months old and never want another.

Bart

What, me worry?
- Alfred E. Neuman

Woodchuck is offline  
post #18 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-15-2016, 12:45 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartl View Post
If you go with disc brakes on the front you can swap to a '74 Maverick manual disc brake master, Raybestos #MC36440.
Nice. Is it designed for use without a booster? Easy hookup using old two lines in? Does brake rod length change?


Quote:
Originally Posted by bartl View Post
As the others have said, check on that fuel line. I am a stickler for running a hard line directly from pump to carb with no rubber hose under pressure. I've had one engine fire from a split hose that wasn't more than 6 months old and never want another.
+1. Edelbrock makes a hard line "L" fitting to replace the banjo bolt with screw in fuel filter. From there you can hookup an AN steel braided line to fuel pump with flare at the pump.
http://www.jegs.com/i/Edelbrock/350/...FcEWHwodQoYMaw
Fastback97 is offline  
 
post #19 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-15-2016, 01:09 AM
Senior Member
 
Woodchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Vermont
Posts: 33,350
Send a message via Yahoo to Woodchuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastback97 View Post
Nice. Is it designed for use without a booster? Easy hookup using old two lines in? Does brake rod length change?
Yes, it's made for a manual disc setup. Use with your old brake push rod...it has the groove to retain it. You'll need an adjustable proportioning valve and 10# residual valve to add in-line in the rear brake circuit and use the original distribution block with the rear port plugged. My recommendation is to make up 2 new lines from the master to the proportioning valve and distribution block...you can use pre-made 3/16 line with adapters on the M/C end or get the correct-size 3/16 tube nuts for the M/C end...the threads are different than original.....

Primary Outlet Size: 7/16"x24
Secondary Outlet Size: 9/16"x18

Bart

What, me worry?
- Alfred E. Neuman

Woodchuck is offline  
post #20 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-15-2016, 07:12 AM
Senior Member
 
Fordguy65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 665
My 65 was a converted from a six cylinder as well. One of the first things I had to do was upgrade the steering linkage to the heavier duty V8 items. Something to check. I don't know how to describe the six cylinder component's but when you compare them to their V8 cousins they look spindly as heck.

Good luck with the car. Make sure your son understands these cars are not to be taken lightly. There is a 5 ft. steel shaft pointing at your chest so following distance is crucial. Lots of threads on that here on the forum so we don't need to go onto that but I suggest you read them...

Jim Smith
Atlanta, GA
1965 Coupe 5.0 GT40 Intake and Heads, 65MM TB, chipped, T5, Shelby drop, roller idler, subframe connectors, Magnaflows, Hurst shifter, MS clutch, BFGs on 15" TTDs, Roller perches, Bilsteins, 3.54 gears, LS, Needs everything else...
"If you didn't build it; it's not really yours."

Last edited by Fordguy65; 01-15-2016 at 07:12 AM. Reason: sp
Fordguy65 is offline  
post #21 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-15-2016, 07:24 AM
Full gallop this way --->
Supporting Member
 
4ocious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Durham, NC.
Posts: 5,471
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fordguy65 View Post
My 65 was a converted from a six cylinder as well. One of the first things I had to do was upgrade the steering linkage to the heavier duty V8 items. Something to check. I don't know how to describe the six cylinder component's but when you compare them to their V8 cousins they look spindly as heck.

Good luck with the car. Make sure your son understands these cars are not to be taken lightly. There is a 5 ft. steel shaft pointing at your chest so following distance is crucial. Lots of threads on that here on the forum so we don't need to go onto that but I suggest you read them...
Good point here about the safety aspect with the steering column. If the car doesn't already have them, get proper 3 point seat belts in there. This should be high on the ol' priorities list.

4ocious is offline  
post #22 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-15-2016, 11:58 AM
(actually Slim Jr now)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 24,597
You have been given lots of suggestions.

o are you near local Mustang club. or near a vintage Ford club?

o do you have a friend who is mechanically inclined?

o looking at your posted pic it looks like a lot of quick fixes have been done. Non original changes aren't necessarily
bad. It's kinda like DIY electrician or plumbing. Temporary hook ups may work temporarily but be unsafe.

Recommend you get a 66 Ford/Mustang shop manual, maybe even a Chilton. Start with brakes. If the original set up has
temporary band aids or needs repair that's a life and death issue before big worry about single reservoir master cylinder.

Engine. The fuel system should be first concern. Whoever swapped the engine mangled the original gas line and hooked up
a long hose over to the carburetor. That may in fact work for years but it indicates quick sloppy work that may cause
problems any time.

Not to be picky but the chrome air cleaner, valve covers with the chrome wing quick remove nuts are pretty but ignore
real potential safety issues.

New shocks and spark plugs were nice starting projects with your son, but safety issues should be first concern.

By the way what made you think the engine is a hi po (K code). It may in fact be a hi po. So you understand why we
are in doubt.
o K code cars demand a big premium. Original K (hi po) engines, and their accessories demand big money
for restoring iconic K code cars. As an engine swap way more power can be gotten from a modified 289
for a lot less money.

o the 4 barrel carb A code Mustangs were very popular 65-67 and the dress up (chrome) stuff was very
popular. Many looked at this and thought "hi po".

o many put dual exhaust on a A codes. As a reminder if your car has duals the driver side pipe should have
the brake line modified for dual exhaust to keep the brake line from getting too hot causing brake failure.

Not to swamp you, there's a lot to check out other that added non stock safety improvements.


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.
slim is offline  
post #23 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-15-2016, 01:31 PM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 11
Garage
Hey All, we're taking off for a couple days but didn't want to leave all these really important and thoughtful responses without a quick post. I've got a friend, who used to be a mechanic, coming over Monday to go over all your suggestions and advice. Can't thank you all enough for all of this! Hopefully one day we'll be able to contribute, and I can tell already I should upgrade membership to help support the site.

So...I bought this car from my nephew on the cheap because he just didn't have time to work on her. He had it appraised and the guy said if it was a "rust-bucket" (which it isn't) he'd value it at around 15K. Either the appraiser didn't know what he was talking about, or there's something special here. Either way we're fine on the deal because we only paid $3500 and if you check out the pics in my "garage" you'll see a really nice body and a pretty immaculate interior.

Thanks again for the lengthy answers!
31flies is offline  
post #24 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-15-2016, 03:24 PM
Senior Member
 
22GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 33,854
If it's actually not rusty you did fine. If it runs, even better.

Amateur restorer. Well, sometimes I have been paid for it. But not right now.
22GT is offline  
post #25 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-16-2016, 04:34 AM
Senior Member
 
tom991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Vero Beach, FL but currently live in Germany
Posts: 2,957
More than likely it's a 289 or 302. Count the number of bolts holding the bell housing to the block. That will eliminate it being a 221 0r 260. If the assembly date is anywhere in 1966 it's a 289. The car looks pretty good for a $3500 buy.
tom991 is offline  
post #26 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-18-2016, 08:25 PM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 11
Garage
Well, I found a number stamped into the block, just behind the intake manifold near the firewall. From what I can find online it just doesn't seem to make sense.

8R110012

So what do you guys think?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg block number?.jpg (98.4 KB, 13 views)
31flies is offline  
post #27 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-18-2016, 09:13 PM
PetesPonies
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Well that number tells you virtually nothing as that is the partial VIN for the car it came in originally. It does tell you it was a '68. So, that is probably enough for what you need to know?
post #28 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-18-2016, 09:22 PM
Senior Member
 
Woodchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Vermont
Posts: 33,350
Send a message via Yahoo to Woodchuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by 31flies View Post
Well, I found a number stamped into the block, just behind the intake manifold near the firewall. From what I can find online it just doesn't seem to make sense.

8R110012

So what do you guys think?
'68 Model Year
Assembled in San Jose
Sequential Serial 110012.

No 289 HiPo's in '68 so it's either a 289-2V "C" code or a 302-4V "J" code. Pulling a valve cover will tell. The 289 will have "289" cast into it and probably a "2A" in the lower left outside corner. The 302 will have "302" cast into it.

Bart

What, me worry?
- Alfred E. Neuman

Woodchuck is offline  
post #29 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-18-2016, 10:32 PM
PetesPonies
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
No, it could very easily be an F code 302.
post #30 of 30 (permalink) Old 01-18-2016, 11:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Woodchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Vermont
Posts: 33,350
Send a message via Yahoo to Woodchuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by PetesPonies View Post
No, it could very easily be an F code 302.
Not likely being assembled in San Jose.

Bart

What, me worry?
- Alfred E. Neuman

Woodchuck is offline  
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










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