Topic: 65-66 Hi-Po Alternator, changeover from -C to -H pulley?

[J_Speegle]

I have some questions and observations on this topic:
1. Where and when were alternators installed?

At the plant IMHO

2. There was a previous discussion and pictures of a blue alternator fan on a 289 but I think it was for a Dearborn car. The claim was a blue fan on a 66 Shelby which was a San Jose only production. See question 1.

For Shelby specific answer We've got about 6-8 66 Shelby's that were built with the blue fan scattered through 66 production - my wife's car unfortunately being one of them. Since it was an alternator suppler thing it does not appear impossible for some of these could turn up at other plants if that supplier was supplying more than one assembly plant.

Don't believe anyone has documented one on a NJ 64-66

A general statement of "errors" without specifics does nobody any service.

But the fact that allot of documents and published items do include mistakes and that each should be in total and cross checked with other information and findings. Don't think its about ignoring or automatically discounting information.  Think to be a good researcher you need to be at least a little pessimistic 

[CharlesTurner]

1. Agree with Jeff on alternator installation, at the assembly plant, probably in an engine build up area where the transmissions were attached and accessories/options installed.

2. While I appreciate bringing up the detail about the blue fan, it is slightly off-topic as my original question had to do with the pulley for a hi-po.  Sorry for any confusion that might have caused.

3. Would be happy to discuss errors in the Gregory book in a different thread.  As Jeff mentions, we have to be guarded when mentioning references.  I applaud the folks that take the time to put these books together, just that once it's printed, it can't be corrected and we end up having to do perpetual damage control.

[jwc66k]

But the fact that allot of documents and published items do include mistakes and that each should be in total and cross checked with other information and findings. Don't think its about ignoring or automatically discounting information.  Think to be a good researcher you need to be at least a little pessimistic 

Would be happy to discuss errors in the Gregory book in a different thread.  As Jeff mentions, we have to be guarded when mentioning references.  I applaud the folks that take the time to put these books together, just that once it's printed, it can't be corrected and we end up having to do perpetual damage control.

To add to that, the HP book is in its fourth printing. I assume that corrections were included, and the Bob Mannel engine book has 11 pages of changes (available online). Those two books are "semi-active" in that they are being used and the authors are still "taking arrows". My point is to contribute, not criticize. You seem to be a bit apprehensive about that.
Jim

[CharlesTurner]

The Gregory book is not semi-active at all.  The 4th edition was a re-write of the 3rd, from scratch, as the original template files were lost.  The 4th edition wasn't even updated by the original author, it was done by Marv Shaner, with Gregory's approval.  From what I understand there were a few edits made and the registry info updated.  I seriously doubt we will ever see another edition.  The hi-po website has been hanging on a string the past couple of years, hardly any participation there now.

The Mannel book was a solid resource when it was published, one of the best I have ever seen.  I personally would not compare the 2 books as one was done right and the other one more like a pocket reference with a registry attached.

In no way was this intended to criticize but more to point out that some sources are reliable and some are not.  If you'd like to wave around the hi-po book as the ultimate reference, then go ahead, but it would be silly for you not to be apprehensive about the content given that there are known errors.