1965 mustang 427 side oiler swap

scrutinium · Jun 27, 2008

I've been searching for someone who has done this and I cant find anything or anyone who has done it. I want to take the 289 out of my 65 mustang and put the genesis 427 side oiler in. Does anyone know how difficult this would be, or have any info about it? Thanks in advance

D.Hearne · Jun 27, 2008

You'll have to either cut the shock towers back or do a Mustang II front suspension conversion to make it fit.

67CoupeDriva · Jun 27, 2008

Right O - big blocks won't fit into the 65-66's without some major surgery. Thought about a 351 stroker?

Stang427W · Jun 27, 2008

I'm putting a 351W, which is still a small block, although its stroked to 434 Cubic inches , It is still a paint to fit the headers without notching the shock towers. With a stroker i get the big displacement, but a lighter engine, which will give you better performance and handling... Give it a thought, strokers are the way to go...

hipo_p51 · Jun 27, 2008

big block? my 331 stroker will smoke ANY carburetored big block. besides, when you hit the turn in the road, the small block just makes more sense.

D.Hearne · Jun 27, 2008

hipo_p51 said:
big block? my 331 stroker will smoke ANY carburetored big block. besides, when you hit the turn in the road, the small block just makes more sense.

You just haven't run into the right big block Stang and driver YET.

woodsnake · Jun 27, 2008

big block? my 331 stroker will smoke ANY carburetored big block. besides, when you hit the turn in the road, the small block just makes more sense.

I must differ. There is a reason we have big blocks, other than just ****ty gas mileage......

Sicarius428 · Jun 30, 2008

For a 65, you are much better off putting a 302 or 351w stroker in. Even the 351w is a tight fit so any FE is going to take a bit of cutting. The 65 is a really light platform. Keep it that way and use it to your advantage. You will be much better using a 67+ chassis for a FE.
Kevin

I also disagree with the 331 > FE... Nobody can deny that a cast iron big block does not turn well... but a straght line is where 7 liters of displacement is king.

SadbutTrue · Jun 30, 2008

hipo_p51 said:
big block? my 331 stroker will smoke ANY carburetored big block. besides, when you hit the turn in the road, the small block just makes more sense.

As others have said, your combo might be crazy, but all else being equal big blocks are gonna be faster. I gaurantee you there are big block mustangs out there that are faster than your 331 can ever hope to be.

Now, a big block classic (particularly a 66) thats better balanced (ie, can handle, accelerate, be daily driven and still haul ass) than yours? Perhaps not. 65-66s weren't made for big blocks, 302 based strokers are perfect for them.

Sicarius428 · Jul 1, 2008

I'm sure you wish more people would answer your questions instead of telling you the reasons for NOT doing it. If your intended usage is straight line, cornering is not much of a concern. Even if cornering is a concern, it's a challenge that can be overcome by some good engineering.

He did as "Does anyone know how difficult this would be, or have any info about it?" Not to say that he doesn't know much about mustangs and I mean no disrespect, but with a low post count we can only assume that he might be in for more than he bargained for. It is not a simple engine swap and what was stated by D.Hearne before was pretty spot on. No doubt it would be an awesome sight though...
Kevin

10secgoal · Jul 1, 2008

You don't want a big block anyways. There some small blocks that you will NEVER be able to beat. Even though you could stroke it and make 700 on pump gas. BUt you would still lose to SB's. lol

Loup-garou · Jul 1, 2008

D.Hearne said:
You'll have to either cut the shock towers back or do a Mustang II front suspension conversion to make it fit.

Option #3 - replace the shock towers with '67-'68 pieces. That'd give a "factory" appearance, and with a hot FE under the hood, it'd probably be wise to replace the radiator support with a '67 piece, too - a big-block radiator will definitely be needed.

D.Hearne · Jul 2, 2008

Loup-garou said:
Option #3 - replace the shock towers with '67-'68 pieces. That'd give a "factory" appearance, and with a hot FE under the hood, it'd probably be wise to replace the radiator support with a '67 piece, too - a big-block radiator will definitely be needed.

That won't work. The 67-70 engine bay and chassis is wider than a 65-66. It's not just the towers that are different, the whole chassis is wider.

wild goose · Jul 2, 2008

It was done back in the 60's with a straight axle from a ford econoline van (cant recall the year) and with a steering box from a Australian falcon mounted, outside the front rails on the drivers tire side. The reason the Australian falcon box was used , was because it is opposite drive and was suitable for mounting on the outside . Room in the engine compartment becomes non -existent.
The car will be almost useless for anything but a super fast straight line drag racer. If you can get the tires to hook expect a 9-10 second car in the 1\4 mile

Loup-garou · Jul 3, 2008

D.Hearne said:
That won't work. The 67-70 engine bay and chassis is wider than a 65-66. It's not just the towers that are different, the whole chassis is wider.

I saw a few '65-'66 cars done this way, back before the MII swap became popular. IIRC, those cars had either 351 Clevelands or the 351W-based "Clevor", neither of which would fit between the factory shock towers without deep notching.

The first one I saw at a local car show. I recall being a bit confused because *something* looked different - it took me a few minutes to realize what it was. If the frame rails are closer together on the early cars, then I agree - it still might not offer enough room for an FE (which is an inch or so wider than a 351C), despite *lots* of work and expense.

BLWNUS · Jul 4, 2008

Hi, I'm from Australia and I thought I would reply to this topic, even though it isn't a 427 side oiler, my father is currently building a 66 GT Coupe with a 514 big block using the rrs kit. Here is a pic

dennis112 · Jul 4, 2008

D.Hearne said:
That won't work. The 67-70 engine bay and chassis is wider than a 65-66. It's not just the towers that are different, the whole chassis is wider.

Although this isn't the whole engine bay, from personal experience I found that the 67-70 radiator support has the same exact widths between the front frame rails AND from apron top to apron top (where the fenders bolt) as the 65/66. Same overall height too.

I found this out when I grafted one to my 65' when I upgraded to the 24" wide radiator for my 393w. Mine was spec'ed as a 68' core support. Here is the final product:

This does make me curious about the general engine bay width of a 67/68 (not counting the shock towers.)

Note: The apron is not a bolt-in swap nor is it a direct replacement for the 65/66 due to other differences, such as battery placement, hood bumpers attachments, latch attachments, and some other cosmetic differences. I've purposely made mine look stock and had 2 afternoons involved from start to finish, including R & R' ing the front grill, valences, and bumper.

D.Hearne · Jul 4, 2008

That the radiator support interchanges surprises me. I know the track width between these cars is different, the 67-70 being 2" wider. Just where the difference in width was accomplished, I always assumed was in the frame rails. I think I'll measure the width of this on my 77 Comet and see how it compares.

runawayabc123 · Jul 4, 2008

D.Hearne is right. The 67 is 2 inches wider. I guess it just means that Ford engineers cheaped out to use the same radiator support and found the 2 inches of width in the towers. (This doesn't supprise me about Ford.)

You have to look at the swap this way:

-Wow factor
-Cause I want a big block in a 66
-Cause driving fast in a striaght line can be fun too
-Cause a small block that can beat a big block can be crazy expensive past my budget

If you fall into these groups, just ignore those telling you can't do it, but remember their reasons why and have a plan to over come them.

So, if you really want a big block in a 66, go for it. Just remember this is a harder swap and the nay-sayers just want to make sure you understand what you are getting into before you put big dollars down on the project, than give up and sell it off as a loss (because you will only make your invested money back in the "fun factor").

Good luck!

D.Hearne · Jul 4, 2008

It's been my experience that when a small block beats a big block, it's not due to the power generated between the two, it's the big block's massive torque that overcomes the suspension and/or the driver's ability to control it. The wow factor is the best reason to do an FE swap, powerwise, you can build a stroker small block that'll equal an FE's power and for no more money. The only way to equal the wow factor of a big block in my opinion is to go with a multiple carbed motor (hence the reason I have a three duece setup on my 331) A single four carbed Windsor gets the same "ho-hum" response from me as a small block Chevy.

1965 mustang 427 side oiler swap

scrutinium

New Member

D.Hearne

New Member

67CoupeDriva

Member

Stang427W

New Member

hipo_p51

Member

D.Hearne

New Member

woodsnake

Sicarius428

Active Member

SadbutTrue

Sicarius428

Active Member

10secgoal

Active Member

Loup-garou

D.Hearne

New Member

wild goose

New Member

Loup-garou

BLWNUS

New Member

Attachments

dennis112

D.Hearne

New Member

runawayabc123

Member

D.Hearne

New Member

Similar threads

1965 mustang 427 side oiler swap

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Attachments

New Member

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency