Ford questions from a Chevy guy

MuscleCarFanatic · 05-31-2001, 04:10 PM

First off, Its cool to be on your message board. Here's my situation...My brother is looking into getting a 67-69 Ford Mustang and working on it, much like I have done with my '68 Chevy Camaro. We have always loved all old muscle cars, and I completely encourage him.

Thats why I'm here, to help him with his research. Anyways, here's my questions (keeping in mind I know nothing about Ford engines and such)...

1)What are the differences between Ford truck and Ford passenger car engines?(ie. chevy truck engines generally have higher decks than thier car engines I believe)

2)We are planning on getting a Mustang with a 289 and probably dropping in a larger engine. I believe that 67-69 mustangs are wider than the earlier ones, but how big of an engine does this allow to fit? I heard somewhere 390, but I have seen some bad *** mustangs with 428's (didn't the GT500 have a 428)?

3)What opinions do any of you have as far as a good steet motor for Mustangs of these years? (289ci+) It'll see some hard driving and a little street racing against a local "Team" of Imports, but will also be his daily driver, atleast for awhile.

Thanks for the help...

Rev · 05-31-2001, 05:46 PM

Hey Muscle, glad you came to MW.

1.) I think truck engine blocks and marine blocks had some extra webbing and possibly extra thickness in the cylinder walls (not sure about that).

2.) 67-69 Mustangs will accept 390-427-428 engines. To make one of these potent requires all sorts of expensive components. Building a CJ with after market parts is expensive, expensive, and more expensive. Can be done, but is not cost effective.

3.) The smart thing to do here (my opinion) is to buy a Ford crate engine 392 and put a carb (750-850) and headers. This will probably cost $6000-7000 +. Produces over 400 hp and in a 67-69 Mustang should be plenty for street/ strip use. Probably will require lots of other mods, suspension, gears, stall, trans, etc. to make everything work best. My $.02.

Rev

------------------
'66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph
1/4 mi.

[This message has been edited by Rev (edited 05-31-2001).]

Fostang · 05-31-2001, 10:25 PM

I agree with rev although I have seen 460 engines with extensive modification. The 392 would be great if you'd like a lot a hp from big cubes plus if you feel like 400 hp isn't enough you can always add a little of the giggles. I prefer to stay with the 302-289 engines in mustangs. Even these little cubes are effective on putting out some big numbers on the dyno.

BTW- I use to own a 68' ss rs with an aluminum headed 396 12 bolt posi. I hated blowing out the transmission so often (twice in one month) and didn't want to buy another one since it was on warranty that I sold it. The car in itself looked pretty crappy but boy was it fast. Gotta love changing sparks plugs on that, or driving over speed bumps with the headers, ahh the enjoyment of a cramped interior.

------------------
67'fastback-Edelbrock carb,intake,cam,valve springs.Rhode lifters, CompCam rocker arms, windage tray,cerama coated headers,dual flows with H-pipe, modded c-4,tci stall converter,perma cool electric fan,aluminum water pump,griffen aluminum radiator,accel 8.8 cable,wide cap distriburator,magnetic pick up,v-matic hurst shifter,edelbrock performer nitrous, carter electric fuel pump,ignitor coil,solid motor mounts,magna racing suspension,poly urathane bushings,under rider traction bars, comp. eng. s

Tom351 · 06-01-2001, 08:56 AM

I would suggest a 351W or stroker small block.

------------------
67 Fastback - Arctic White Pearl paint
351W ,Trick Flow Aluminum Heads, Edelbrock TorkerII, Carter 750 CFM, Comp. Cam 477/510 219/233@.050, Performance Automatic C-4 Trans, 3.55 gears, Front Disc Brakes, 1-1/8" Fr. 3/4" rear sway bars.

My 351W Fastback

69fastback · 06-01-2001, 09:42 PM

Building a 428 is not as expensvie as people think it is. If u want one though get a car that already has a 428 in it. The parts for a 428 to modify are easy to get and don't cost anymore more than any other motor.

The best way to go though is probaly the 351 alot easier to work on and u can get 427 cubes out of one if u want to. The good thng is it doesn't take up as much space as the 428 does. My motor touches the shock towers on both sides.

I would look for a 69 with a 351 wich is not hard to find and mod it some and that will be more than enough to dispose of rice.

------------------
69 428 cobra jet: tons of mods.
97 f-150 5.4 xlt mark III
BUCKLE UP. SUCK IT IN.
Objects in the mirror are about to disappear...
QUICKLY!!!!!!

MuscleCarFanatic · 06-04-2001, 03:24 AM

Thanks for the info. Is there much of a difference in the handling caused by a 289 or 302 engine vs. something like a 428? What about the 351W? I don't know exactly how the actual engine sizes vary between these engines (other than the obvious difference in cubes)? And at the moment, my brother is favoring the 67-68 coupes, and we will probably not go with any kind of crate engine, unless we can't find what we want without going that route. Thansk again.

05-31-2001, 04:10 PM	#1
MuscleCarFanatic Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Kennewick, Wa, USA Posts: 17	Ford questions from a Chevy guy First off, Its cool to be on your message board. Here's my situation...My brother is looking into getting a 67-69 Ford Mustang and working on it, much like I have done with my '68 Chevy Camaro. We have always loved all old muscle cars, and I completely encourage him. Thats why I'm here, to help him with his research. Anyways, here's my questions (keeping in mind I know nothing about Ford engines and such)... 1)What are the differences between Ford truck and Ford passenger car engines?(ie. chevy truck engines generally have higher decks than thier car engines I believe) 2)We are planning on getting a Mustang with a 289 and probably dropping in a larger engine. I believe that 67-69 mustangs are wider than the earlier ones, but how big of an engine does this allow to fit? I heard somewhere 390, but I have seen some bad *** mustangs with 428's (didn't the GT500 have a 428)? 3)What opinions do any of you have as far as a good steet motor for Mustangs of these years? (289ci+) It'll see some hard driving and a little street racing against a local "Team" of Imports, but will also be his daily driver, atleast for awhile. Thanks for the help...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Safety Issue 64 - 70 Mustangs	Mach1 Cobra Jet	Classic Mustangs	20	07-11-2005 08:06 PM
South Florida Ford VS Chevy Dyno Day!!	SpeedInjected	Ford Show & Go	0	11-08-2003 12:47 AM
Lets do a ford vs chevy meet/cruise to carlsbad on sept. 14th	46stang	Ford Show & Go	10	08-12-2002 11:43 PM
1969 Ford Mustang Mach 1 questions...	xxkewlguyxx	Classic Mustangs	1	05-09-2002 01:23 PM
Ford T-Stat questions??	Chevyguy	Windsor Power	1	10-23-2001 12:35 AM

05-31-2001, 05:46 PM	#2
Rev Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Houston, Tx. Posts: 3,887	Hey Muscle, glad you came to MW. 1.) I think truck engine blocks and marine blocks had some extra webbing and possibly extra thickness in the cylinder walls (not sure about that). 2.) 67-69 Mustangs will accept 390-427-428 engines. To make one of these potent requires all sorts of expensive components. Building a CJ with after market parts is expensive, expensive, and more expensive. Can be done, but is not cost effective. 3.) The smart thing to do here (my opinion) is to buy a Ford crate engine 392 and put a carb (750-850) and headers. This will probably cost $6000-7000 +. Produces over 400 hp and in a 67-69 Mustang should be plenty for street/ strip use. Probably will require lots of other mods, suspension, gears, stall, trans, etc. to make everything work best. My $.02. Rev ------------------ '66 Coupe, 306, 300 HP, C-4, 13.97 e.t., 100.3 mph 1/4 mi. [This message has been edited by Rev (edited 05-31-2001).]

05-31-2001, 10:25 PM	#3
Fostang Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Stockton, Ca Posts: 599	I agree with rev although I have seen 460 engines with extensive modification. The 392 would be great if you'd like a lot a hp from big cubes plus if you feel like 400 hp isn't enough you can always add a little of the giggles. I prefer to stay with the 302-289 engines in mustangs. Even these little cubes are effective on putting out some big numbers on the dyno. BTW- I use to own a 68' ss rs with an aluminum headed 396 12 bolt posi. I hated blowing out the transmission so often (twice in one month) and didn't want to buy another one since it was on warranty that I sold it. The car in itself looked pretty crappy but boy was it fast. Gotta love changing sparks plugs on that, or driving over speed bumps with the headers, ahh the enjoyment of a cramped interior. ------------------ 67'fastback-Edelbrock carb,intake,cam,valve springs.Rhode lifters, CompCam rocker arms, windage tray,cerama coated headers,dual flows with H-pipe, modded c-4,tci stall converter,perma cool electric fan,aluminum water pump,griffen aluminum radiator,accel 8.8 cable,wide cap distriburator,magnetic pick up,v-matic hurst shifter,edelbrock performer nitrous, carter electric fuel pump,ignitor coil,solid motor mounts,magna racing suspension,poly urathane bushings,under rider traction bars, comp. eng. s

06-01-2001, 08:56 AM	#4
Tom351 Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Atlanta,GA,USA Posts: 278	I would suggest a 351W or stroker small block. ------------------ 67 Fastback - Arctic White Pearl paint 351W ,Trick Flow Aluminum Heads, Edelbrock TorkerII, Carter 750 CFM, Comp. Cam 477/510 219/233@.050, Performance Automatic C-4 Trans, 3.55 gears, Front Disc Brakes, 1-1/8" Fr. 3/4" rear sway bars. My 351W Fastback

06-01-2001, 09:42 PM	#5
69fastback IRAQ VET Join Date: Feb 2000 Location: high desert California Posts: 1,480	Building a 428 is not as expensvie as people think it is. If u want one though get a car that already has a 428 in it. The parts for a 428 to modify are easy to get and don't cost anymore more than any other motor. The best way to go though is probaly the 351 alot easier to work on and u can get 427 cubes out of one if u want to. The good thng is it doesn't take up as much space as the 428 does. My motor touches the shock towers on both sides. I would look for a 69 with a 351 wich is not hard to find and mod it some and that will be more than enough to dispose of rice. ------------------ 69 428 cobra jet: tons of mods. 97 f-150 5.4 xlt mark III BUCKLE UP. SUCK IT IN. Objects in the mirror are about to disappear... QUICKLY!!!!!!

06-04-2001, 03:24 AM	#6
MuscleCarFanatic Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Kennewick, Wa, USA Posts: 17	Thanks for the info. Is there much of a difference in the handling caused by a 289 or 302 engine vs. something like a 428? What about the 351W? I don't know exactly how the actual engine sizes vary between these engines (other than the obvious difference in cubes)? And at the moment, my brother is favoring the 67-68 coupes, and we will probably not go with any kind of crate engine, unless we can't find what we want without going that route. Thansk again.