OK, why would you say that you had to pull the engine to change plugs with a 428, then recommend using a 390 ?68stangman said:Of the mustangs of that body style that had 428s originally, the engine had to be pulled just to change the spark plugs. I would go with a 351 stroker variation, or a 390. The 390 is an FE if you have to have a big block, and will be easier to find for a rebuild.
The GT500 first appeared in the 67 model Shelby's. Then again in 68, 69, and 70.68stangman said:I believe the gt 500 was a '68.
I agree, but wasn't it only the GT500KR that had the 2-4's ?reenmachine said:Again, Like D.Hearne said above, the '67 GT 500 didn't have a 428 CJ. It had a 428 PI with 2 4-barrel carbs.
This thread is extraordinarily full of bad info, so take it with a grain of salt.
D.Hearne said:You didn't tell me anything I didn't already know about the 428PI and CJ motors. The only difference between the CJ and PI motors were the heads. The CJ's got lowriser 427 heads.The PI motors had std FE heads. The rods were also the same, as were the cranks. The rods were known as the PI rods before the CJ came out. Both had the same forging and 13/32 bolts. The cranks weren't any difference in strength, all 428 cranks were the same in that regard, the differences were in the balance weight.
EL1NOR said:I was answering another member's questions, not trying to teach you anything.
Sorry, I'll believe the Shelby registry's facts before I believe yours.
-Tim
D.Hearne said:Spoken like a true Elenwhore believer
D.Hearne said:I agree, but wasn't it only the GT500KR that had the 2-4's ?
So tell me, how many FE's have you rebuilt,EL1NOR said:Spoken like a true Think-I-Know-It-All
D.Hearne said:So tell me, how many FE's have you rebuilt,taken apart, or otherwise studied first hand ? As for me, I've had numerous 390's, a couple of 410's, ditto for 428's and two 427's. I may not know everything ( yet) but I'll stake my experience against yours anyday.
You didn't have to pull any FE, be it a 390, 427 or 428 to change the spark plugs. I never did it on my 390 or 427, the 428's the same motor. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------And as for you, Elinor, just because it's printed in a book, doesn't mean it's fact, The reference books are WELL known to be full of mistakes. But if you want to believe what some Yahoo printed in a book as gospel, go ahead and be my guest, you'll be the misinformed one , not I.68stangman said:So it was the "Cobra Jet" and 302 that were first introduced in the '68 model year. I was thinking 428 overall based on the trivia section on vintage-mustang.com. Stand corrected.
It must have been the 50 or so drag versions of the 1968 1/2 Cobra Jet that had to have the engine removed to replace the plugs. If I find it, I'll repost.
D.Hearne said:You didn't have to pull any FE, be it a 390, 427 or 428 to change the spark plugs. I never did it on my 390 or 427, the 428's the same motor.
I agree, you never had to pull an engine to change plugs in a big block stang.... SOMETIMES though, the drivers side valve cover could be removed to increase clearance to get the #8 plug if you have power brakes (at least I did on my '69 - made life a whole lot easier)
The only Fe cars that I can think of that were exeptionally nasty to get to the plugs were the 427 Fairlanes and the older Thunderbolts. The worst Ford powered car to get plugs on that I worked on was a 1965 Sunbeam Tiger... the car had HOLES in the trans tunnel to get the #4 and #8 plugs...
-There was also one prototype 1967 GT-500 CONVERTIBLE that eventually became the protoype for the 1968 Shelby convertible. "Evidence indicates this car still exists."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?