1966 Mustang Fastback, 514 cubic inch engine? How too!?

ChaseVarnado · Aug 10, 2005

Nevermind its only 543 pounds!

Cobain03 · Aug 10, 2005

i saw somewhere that it was 6xx lbs. i thought the total weight of the springs would be like 1000 lbs+ cause of two springs but i dont know.

ChaseVarnado · Aug 10, 2005

Is that correct? Those two spings together equal 1100ibs? Am I fine to go?

65up2d8 · Aug 10, 2005

The springs are 550 pounds per square inch, which just tells you how firm they are. This has absolutely nothing to do with the weight of the motor other than the fact that you probably do need some pretty stiff springs for the weight of the engine you are discussing.

Cobain03 · Aug 10, 2005

bigger motor means you need stiffer springs....

SoCalCruising · Aug 10, 2005

Just to be difficult, why not build a Dart or World-based 427 Windsor (or even bigger)? You can make 600hp without much trouble and it will fit between the frame rails. Use as much aluminum as possible on the motor and it will only weigh slightly more than an all-iron 289. The motor will cost at least as much as the 514, but the rest will be soooo much cheaper.

ChaseVarnado · Aug 10, 2005

Going with the 514.. With all total control parts..

SoCalCruising · Aug 10, 2005

I have the total Control front suspension .... it requires shock towers. To my knowledge, your only choice is the Mustang II suspension.

Your "big block" TCP suspension is for 67-up cars. It won't fit in the '66.

dodgestang · Aug 10, 2005

Cobain03 said:
351 cleveland will not fit without mods. a windsor is smaller in sizer and will fit.

Not to be-labor a point....but WRONG

Anyway...my opinion on the whole 514 in a '65 has been expressed in that other forum this question was asked.

Cobain03 · Aug 10, 2005

unless you call hammering in the towers and still having the manifolds rub the side when you rev it not a mod, or even having to buy the speciality headers which kind of cobbles the look of it up, then i dont know what to tell ya.

dodgestang · Aug 10, 2005

Cobain03 said:
unless you call hammering in the towers and still having the manifolds rub the side when you rev it not a mod, or even having to buy the speciality headers which kind of cobbles the look of it up, then i dont know what to tell ya.

I don't know how many times I have to say it.

It bolts in.
You buy Ford Power train headers BFD.....everyone buys headers. Here's a thought, paruse my website and watch as a 65 mustang with a 351c in it goes from dumb thinking PO installation to clean crisp and fast installation.

dodgestang · Aug 10, 2005

ohhhh and BTW - I'm not trying to be a smart arse or high jack a thread..sorry if I came accross that way

Cobain03 · Aug 10, 2005

headers are a mod lol. ok ok im half way right i give you that much.

anyways back to the topic, how you gonna afford all of this?!? 7 or 8k for the motor alone, another 3 or 4 for front suspension, 2 or 3 for misc.

ChaseVarnado · Aug 10, 2005

SoCalCruising said:
I have the total Control front suspension .... it requires shock towers. To my knowledge, your only choice is the Mustang II suspension.

Your "big block" TCP suspension is for 67-up cars. It won't fit in the '66.

Sorry sorry I meant 1967!

Can the total control fit?

I can afford it, its not the much to me at all so. It is but I can live with it!

ChaseVarnado · Aug 10, 2005

Anymore help, thanks guys!

65up2d8 · Aug 10, 2005

SoCalCruising said:
I have the total Control front suspension .... it requires shock towers. To my knowledge, your only choice is the Mustang II suspension.

Your "big block" TCP suspension is for 67-up cars. It won't fit in the '66.

SoCalCruising is exactly right. The coil over setup still needs shock towers. You would need an MII setup (sure thing), an RRS setup with notched towers (possibly), or a Griggs setup with notched towers (possibly; but the best handling of any of these). No matter what, you're going to need to do a lot of studying up on this, and it will still be very expensive. If you don't do your homework, this could be so astronomically expensive its beyond belief.

ChaseVarnado · Aug 11, 2005

Ok wait so I need the Mustang II Suspension Package and Assembly with anyone of these coilovers front end? And total control wont work, even with notched shock towers?

65up2d8 · Aug 11, 2005

Cobain03 said:
headers are a mod lol. ok ok im half way right i give you that much.

anyways back to the topic, how you gonna afford all of this?!? 7 or 8k for the motor alone, another 3 or 4 for front suspension, 2 or 3 for misc.

I think you're being quite generous with yourself saying you're halfway right. I don't mean any offense here, but its pretty common knowledge that a 351C will, in fact, fit in a 65-66. As far as the header issue, who on this forum does not intend to use headers on a non-stock build?
I know you're a young fan of these cars, and that's a great thing as we need young fans of these cars to keep the hobby alive. I would, however, point out that in 17 years of being in this hobby/addiction, I don't know the answer to the majority of the questions on this forum, and when I don't know the answer to a question, I don't comment (unless, of course, its a subject that leaves room for argument ). I certainly don't want to discourage you, but from your posts its obvious you are speaking off the cuff or have been misinformed. The person asking for advice needs solid answers as they may act upon that advice.

65up2d8 · Aug 11, 2005

ChaseVarnado said:
Ok wait so I need the Mustang II Suspension Package and Assembly with anyone of these coilovers front end? And total control wont work, even with notched shock towers?

You need to check out Rod and Customs Motorsports, the Reenmachine post at the top of this forum, Heidt's, etc., in detail. You can't use coilovers for a stock, shock-towered car with the MII front suspension. The MII suspension setup, if you order the right one for this application, however, should provide everything you will need. Once again, do your homework. I can't stress enough how much money you will spend on mistakes if you don't have a better understanding of what's required before embarking on such a project, which is very expensive in and of itself even if done right.

SuperDave · Aug 11, 2005

A better question is WHY drop a monster motor in an early Mustang? Unless you spend some HUGE dollars on preparation, the car simply isn't going to hold up to the torque that such a beast will generate.

Such a project would be outrageously expensive even if you were capable of doing the work yourself. The term: "drop-in" is deceiving; it over-simplified the complexity of the project.

Better to start with a much more doable build up of a 302 which IS a "drop-in". Save the huge engine for when you have the $$$$. experience and skill to undertake it.

1966 Mustang Fastback, 514 cubic inch engine? How too!?

ChaseVarnado

New Member

Cobain03

Active Member

ChaseVarnado

New Member

65up2d8

Member

Cobain03

Active Member

SoCalCruising

ChaseVarnado

New Member

SoCalCruising

dodgestang

Active Member

Cobain03

Active Member

dodgestang

Active Member

dodgestang

Active Member

Cobain03

Active Member

ChaseVarnado

New Member

ChaseVarnado

New Member

65up2d8

Member

ChaseVarnado

New Member

65up2d8

Member

65up2d8

Member

SuperDave

Early-Model Mentor

Similar threads

1966 Mustang Fastback, 514 cubic inch engine? How too!?

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Member

Active Member

New Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Early-Model Mentor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency