brushwolf

Some 2v will pull better at low rpm on takeoff. No contest overall though, generally the 4v is going to add probably 15 hp by itself. If that were not the case why would hi-po cars not all be using 2v carbs? The 2v can't process enough fuel and air at higher rpm. Not much point in switching the intake, if retaining a 2v carb. The engine is an air pump. More gas and fuel going in and out creates more power. Boring the engine by itself adds a few CI, that's it. That is major, major engine work and part of a complete rebuild. And you said nothing radical, which a total rebuild would be imo, if engine is mechanically sound now. Cam selection depends on compression ratio, intended rpm use, transmission and rear gears, tire sizes etc. Many cams available, but just the non-retarded version of timing sets will be noticeable. Any cam company like Crane or Crower, Edelbrock can advise what will work best with your other components. Changing timing set requires pulling water pump and front cover off engine, belts, pulleys, etc. But, if you are also switching intake then you are most of the way to changing out the cam anyway.

If it is all stock, it probably has a 2 barrel carb and points ignition. 4 barrel carb and aftermarket aluminum intake for 2v heads, plus switch ignition to electronic using one of the conversion kits. 400M exhaust manifolds are also better than the 2v exhaust manifolds. Get a 1970 timing chain and gears, the later ones are retarded timing from the factory. While you are in there, might as well do a better cam too, though..

For anyone reading this who has not already done so: Rebuild your door hinges before even starting any other corrections involving these long heavy doors which wreak havoc on hinges Even a teensy bit of slop at the front is multiplied exponentially at the rear. You will still have alignment and gap issues, but they will be consistent...

I have had literally hundreds of cars, lots of convertibles among them. The convertibles even in good condition have way more horizontal flex. First, noticed this on a 57 convertible back in 1968. And that was with massive x-frames in them besides full perimeter frames. Every convertible I have had since then exhibited that same horizontal flex tendency, and the tight doors if one end lifted. So use jacks and lifts with extra care on any convertible. And as mentioned, having a drivetrain in it - or not - may well effect door gaps on convertibles also. But, yours is not a convertible and the metal rigid top makes a huge difference. Even rusty hardtops usually have more horizontal rigidity than pristine convertibles. I also do prefer having the drive train already in before exterior paint in either a convertible or a hardtop, but that is mostly because I worry about scratching expensive new paint. These cars do seem to exhibit really poor gaps even from the factory. But, it was the 70's and that era was not known for quality. That said, I was told by a restorer years ago that you need to start with the doors parallel to rockers (with original straight door bottoms) and set gaps from the B pillar going forward. That is the baseline, good gaps on rocker and rear of door to quarter. Don't worry too much about front fender to door alignment at that point. Depending on how the front fender is adjusted can throw everything off. With the door bottom to rocker panel straight that usually is going to give you the best alignment to the quarter that can be obtained with the hinges. If a decent uniform door to quarter gap cannot be established, I am conflicted about building up original unmolested door edges by welding, cuz that means no door that is not similarly modified will fit right either if a replacement is ever needed. Since we are typically talking about an eighth of an inch added at most, I wonder if building the quarter leading edge might be preferable instead? Then deal with any front fender to door gap issues, if any present.

I did the 460 (it was already built at the time and 351c was out to repair rear main leak and pull bad C6 anyway..). 429 mounts, 429 PI exhaust manifolds (simplicity, but better flow than 71 460 manifolds), had a big spline Torino toploader on hand already too. Used the 71 Lincoln Mark 3 radiator and the 351c PS pump bolted to the Lincoln brackets. Install was not complex. Standard smaller spline 4 speed is tough, but will be taxed similarly with either a stroker or a 460, so isn't a big factor between the 2 options presented, idt. If jacking up a 351c to approach 460 torque outputs, then similar power load either way. Weight factor can be minimized with aluminum intake and aluminum 460 heads, moderate or high-buck versions.. Aluminum radiator and water pump if so inclined.. Downtime? A year or more? If the 351 is driveable now, it won't be once a stroker project is undertaken. With the 460 you can continue to drive the 351 continuously until 460 is ready and you have acquired any needed conversion parts. And you can change your mind in the interim if you want... Cost? 460 build with aluminum heads is probably in the same ball park cost-wise as a good stroker, but with likely more durability/longevity. Keep the original 351c to sell with the car when the time comes (it will..). The 351c is one of my favorite motors. I have 3 of them. But the bolt-in aspect and large engine bay built to take the big block has an appeal and ease that swapping a 460 into most other cars just does not approach.

Not sure if the stock Lincoln ones fit, but suspect they might (there are several variations thru the years, early ones are most compact). But the 429 PI manifolds do fit well in my 73 with 460 and appear to be a better flowing design without header headaches. Nothing to modify beyond adding header pipes to mate to existing 351c dual exhaust. Not sure if the PI manifolds are hard to find anymore, but a few years back they came up on EBay now and then..

I have a good flat hood off a southern origin car (not rusted underneath or on top) and a couple of scooped hoods in MN. Flat hood wouldn't fit with my BB and aftermarket intake.

IDK about 71, but my 73 I think is original and they are Phillips head screws with large diameter integral flat washer on them.

I had always assumed that the 71-73 Mustang was far heavier than earlier models, but the difference does not appear to be that much given that the 429-460 BB fits and torque provided far outweighs weight gain. These numbers are from ClassicMustang.com and do not specify engine size so likely these are all versions with small blocks, anyone have contradictory information? 1967 - 2,758 lbs 1968 - 2,758 1969 - 3,122 1970 - 3,122 1971 - 3,086 1972 - 3,086 1973 - 3,126 (presumably 40 added lbs. is mostly impact-resistant front bumper, so similar weight to 71-72 if using the earlier bumper) So, if these published weights are roughly correct, the 71-73 does not appear any heavier than similarly-equipped sought after 69-70 models and only 3,086-2,758 = 328 lbs more than the much smaller 67-68 which chassis won't easily accept the 385 series engines that easily offsets that much added weight with additional torque.

First one I ever saw was bright orange 72 Mach and belonged to the brother of a friend. Thought it was kind of strange looking with the flat back window and saw it as just another evolution of a popular car that didn't look like an improvement. Decades went by and I still didn't really care for them, but ended up taking one with broken C6 in trade on a Corvette I had decided to sell. At first I was just going to sell it also, but never got around to actually making much effort to do so. Being I had the empty garage stall and the body appeared fairly well-preserved, it got the vacant Corvette garage stall. It had an Atlanta Falcons window sticker on it, so it had been a southern car and the transmission issues had kept it off salted Minnesota roads until I got it. As I had it sitting in my garage, I gradually began to appreciate it more visually, became aware of the mechanical improvements over earlier models and that it really wasn't all that much heavier than immediately preceding versions. And it had the 385 series-friendly engine compartment while I already had a professionally rebuilt 460 sitting on a stand that would bolt right in. Once that idea took hold, really had to convert it to a 4 speed. Then it really needed Mach gauges, wiring and different rear axle to suit the replaced drivetrain. Subframe connectors to handle the extra power.. Of course, 429 coil springs and rebuild the steering and brakes... While all this transpired, it became clear that structurally, the car was really solid. Likely due to southern origins followed by years of inside storage since it came up north, Couldn't just leave the perfectly good flat hood on it, so it got the scooped hood and eventually decided it really should have functional Ram Air, so now it does (along with sport mirrors, wing, chin spoiler, etc..). Now I think the body style looks tough, instead of odd. So, for me it just kind of grew on me and it's gradually become part of the family, though many other cars have come and gone over the years. The nephew I got it from wants to get it back now I recently heard, but I am no longer inclined to part with it. Hopefully won't need to for many years yet.

Always preferred sticks and still do, but as you get older the automatics do have some advantages that you may appreciate more. In addition to keeping you behind the wheel, if you have a spouse that isn't too stick-proficient and you might want to have fill in now and then as the driver, it gives you more options. Sitting here recovering from shoulder surgery and with a spouse that is downright scary using a stick, I am even considering going with an automatic in one of my project cars that for years I would have never even considered and have accumulated all the stick parts to finish. Am assuming I will be functional in the right arm in a couple months again. But, even if I am not then the automatic looks preferable to riding shotgun.. So, a 59 TBird I am working on will remain automatic (modified C6 replacing the CM & modified 390 instead of original 352) and my 73 fastback with 460 will remain converted to manual... Gives me multiple options that I would never have considered 10-20 years ago..

I removed my fastback 73 rear glass for headliner replacement and intend to re-install it shortly once recovered from shoulder surgery. I think I would rather use the sealant method than the tape and seeing if there are any additional pointers or precautions to doing it this way. Have a new rubber gasket and assuming there is only one type of 3M glass sealant, do I fit the rubber to the glass, inject continuous 1/8" (?) bead in the outer gasket lip with the window laying flat? Turn it over and do the inside also, or is just the outside sufficient? Once the sealer is installed between the gasket and glass, then use small rope technique as usually used on older cars to fit the window with gasket assembly into the opening and after that, inject a similar continuous bead (1/8" diameter again?) between the gasket and the metal flange on the outside only. Then install exterior trim and no wait time necessary since sealer never fully hardens anyway? That about it? Any cleanup hints in case sealer gets on glass or body during the process? I may be over-thinking this, but trying to make sure the steps are all perfectly clear in my mind and I can jump right into it once my arm is functional again. My pain-killer med's are not conducive to focus and concentration. Thanks, Mike

That is a huge engine bay and would look strange with most of the smaller engines unless all bulked up with turbos and such stuff. My 460 is already built and installed, but if I had to do it over today I would still go 460 - but with CJ aluminum heads and intake to bring the weight down. Even more brute torque and horsepower for a reasonable price, without having to deal with complexities/costs of turbo's, electronic controls, etc. CJ aluminum heads and intake are not cheap either, but core 460's abundant and available cheap. When built up modestly, you get all the power you could want (or most people would want) in a fairly simple and easier to repair and troubleshoot package than the newer engines - and it all pretty much bolts together. Plus, there is an abundance of bolt on parts to be had aftermarket since some of these cars came with 429 and the 460 is the same motor with a longer stroke. Even with the big block I have a reasonable amount of room to work around motor, though if using headers that would make it a little tougher. My car just uses 429 PI exhaust manifolds which flow better than stock 460 manifolds and fit well. Extra horses from headers weren't worth the headaches of adding them to me. I agree with previous poster that said the weight is the biggest downside of the 429/460, but if you can afford the cost of turbos and extensive mod's or acquisition costs for some of the newer/smaller motors, the aluminum heads for 429/460 are probably cheaper in the long run than all the mod's - and you don't end up with a car that is too far removed in appearance or complexity from what the factory issued. Also agree that both 351c and 351w are even easier, no big weight penalty and can get by without aluminum heads, if that cost is a factor. Plus they have the most flexibility as far as your choice of transmissions. Not sure why anyone would use a 302 (or stroked to 347 302), being it is a tiny motor and engine bay is too big visually for it. I have built a couple 460's, 351C, have a 351W on test run stand and building an aluminum head 302 right now. But the 302 is going in an MGB, so it doesn't look like a peanut in the MGB engine bay, while it would in my 73. No one of these all Ford motors has been noticeably more costly to rebuild than others yet either. In fact, the both my DOVE headed 460's were cheaper to build than the 302 (and would have been even without the aluminum heads on 302), but that is mostly a function of inflation apparently, as 460's were built years ago and 302 just now. Machine shop prices for boring, head rebuilding, etc. are a lot higher than 15-20 years ago. But having a block machined or heads rebuilt isn't much different from one engine family or displacement to another these days. So, I'd go with 429/460 first (the most torque for the money), then either 351C or 351W (both can be stroked to about 400 CI without breaking the bank too, if displacement is an issue and you dislike the 429/460 option). Again mostly everything bolts together.. But why stroke a smaller motor to get more displacement when BB is probably even cheaper with even more displacement and will be more durable as well, since it is not stretched to its limits? Coyotes, LS motors, 302 or V6? All fine motors for other applications, but in a 71-73 engine bay? Why torture yourself and your finances when both simpler and cheaper options are available that fit the car appropriately? Regardless of how fond you are of the car, some day you will tire of the car and want or need to sell it. The odder the combination, the worse beating you will take on parting with it. Nobody else has one equipped that way? That's cuz almost nobody really wants them modified that way and that will become apparent when you try to sell it, if it isn't now. My two cents... :D

Just thought I would update this now that new solenoid and transistorized voltage regulator are installed. Took a while since I am also working on a rebuilt roller 5.0 2000 Explorer motor (now with aluminum heads) for an MGB swap. Swapping out the solenoid on the 73 did nothing, car still ran when key turned off. Found out I was wrong that the voltage regulator had been replaced once I had removed it. It was probably original, just looked new cuz I had apparently removed, painted it nicely and re-installed it when engine compartment was cleaned up for 460 install. So, then installed the new regulator though getting doubtful it would make any difference either. It did though.. :) Car shuts off with key now. :D Apparently the car continuing to run when key turned off was due to stuck contacts in the old mechanical regulator. It has a riveted cover, rather than being held on by screws, so couldn't easily take it apart and haven't opened it yet. Not sure I'll even bother taking it apart now to confirm, since it is already replaced and working with the nice Motorcraft transistorized unit anyway, but motivation returning after that obstacle finally surmounted. Onward to the next tasks, finally...

Thanks! Didn't see the image first time I looked at your reply. Switch looks kind of like some old brake light switches too.. Have to see if I can find automatic shifter I took out of the car and see if NSS is still on it.