Topic: 1967 s-code mustang valve covers

[67gt390fb]

I have a 12/15/1966 San Jose built s-code non-GT mustang that I am trying to restore.  vin 153681 .  I am trying to figure out which style of valve covers would be correct for this car, the  chrome Powered by Ford ones, or the chrome 66 style? or?    pictured below is what I am calling the 1966 style valve cover

[J_Speegle]

IMHO your car isn't an "early" car but almost mid year.

Looking at other Oct - Dec built 67 San Jose 390's I would suggest that the Powered by Ford version is the original. Good thing is they should be easier to find than the other version 

[WT8095]

Unless I'm misinformed, the valve covers (both painted and chrome) were installed at DEP. Car assembly plant should not be a factor.

[J_Speegle]

Unless I'm misinformed, the valve covers (both painted and chrome) were installed at DEP. Car assembly plant should not be a factor.

Respectfully have to disagree. Cars built at near the end of production (for example) would not be expected to have been built with engines build back 6 months prior.

When the car was assembled would give us an idea of when the engine was likely assembled and in return the valve covers likely being installed at that time. By comparing cars built about the same time with similar delivery time periods IMHo is our best choice since (at least I don't) have a large collection of engine assembly dates and related details of each

Agree that assemble plant alone is a key part of the comparison and search but one that did produce a sampling, took into consideration similar time lags in the supply system and provided a fair number of samples for me. Could add in the other two plants but at this point believe that the results will be the same

Not like they warehoused completed engines or parts to build them for any great period of time from interviews with the workers. Just didn't have the room

Interested in what would you suggest as a guide or resource for answering the OP's question?

[J_Speegle]

Just noticed that Brant/Virginia Mustang now has the chrome Powered by Ford chrome valve covers for same. All bright, shinny and new for about $170 a pair

[WT8095]

Respectfully have to disagree. Cars built at near the end of production (for example) would not be expected to have been built with engines build back 6 months prior.

When the car was assembled would give us an idea of when the engine was likely assembled and in return the valve covers likely being installed at that time. By comparing cars built about the same time with similar delivery time periods IMHo is our best choice since (at least I don't) have a large collection of engine assembly dates and related details of each

Agree that assemble plant alone is a key part of the comparison and search but one that did produce a sampling, took into consideration similar time lags in the supply system and provided a fair number of samples for me. Could add in the other two plants but at this point believe that the results will be the same

Not like they warehoused completed engines or parts to build them for any great period of time from interviews with the workers. Just didn't have the room

Interested in what would you suggest as a guide or resource for answering the OP's question?

I'm sorry Jeff, I don't understand your reply. I didn't say anything about engine build date. My point was that, to my understanding, FE engines shipped from the Dearborn Engine Plant with their valve covers installed, and therefore the car assembly plant shouldn't be a factor. Is that the case, or were some vave covers installed or swapped at the car assembly plant(s)? The reason I ask is because your first reply focused on SJ-installed 390s, and I wondered if there was any reason to not look at Dearborn & Metuchen installed engines.

[J_Speegle]

I'm sorry Jeff, I don't understand your reply.

No problem - would not be the first time my writing skills were found lacking

I didn't say anything about engine build date. My point was that, to my understanding, FE engines shipped from the Dearborn Engine Plant with their valve covers installed, and therefore the car assembly plant shouldn't be a factor. Is that the case, or were some valve covers installed or swapped at the car assembly plant(s)?

Like you wrote I too believe that the engines were shipped with valve covers in place so the important thing/detail would when comparing the detail when the engine was assembled. Unfortunately we don't know when that was on the OP engine nor on any or the vast majority of the samples I have pictures and notes of.  Because of that I believe we have to fall back on when the cars were built or expected to be built - the only date the OP provided and we can guess at based on the VIN of samples

The reason I ask is because your first reply focused on SJ-installed 390s, and I wondered if there was any reason to not look at Dearborn & Metuchen installed engines.

The most likely reason was conditioning. He mentioned San Jose - have plenty of San Jose examples (more total than either of the other plants - 5 times more, if you count Shelby's than both the other two plants combined)  - so that is likely why I looked there first and found a pretty clear pattern.

Looking at Dearborn and NJ production there is only one car/example that didn't match my earlier post. As usual a single finding would be discounted for lack of support at this point following customary practices

Hope this explains my reasoning's and findings at this point

[WT8095]

Thanks Jeff. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing a vehicle assembly procedure in which valve covers were exchanged, or anything like that.

[jwc66k]

You also have to consider what dealers might have done to a 390 Mustang to enhance its sale. Remember, "chrome" sells.
Jim

[Paperback Writer]

I’ve done a little bit of research on these early-style 390 valve covers, but don’t have enough data to make any definite conclusions.  However, here are the latest door tag dates I’ve seen so far for 390 cars with the early-style valve covers at each of the three assembly plants:

Dearborn – 7F02S124xxx = November 25, 1966
San Jose – 7R03S159xxx = December 28, 1966
Metuchen – 7T03S118xxx = October 3, 1966

Note: door tag dates aren't as accurate as the actual assembly dates listed on the Marti reports, but it's the best I've got on these three cars.  The actual assembly dates could have been 2-3 weeks before or after the dates listed on the door tags.

It should also be noted that unlike the later “Powered by Ford” valve covers, the early-style valve covers are asymmetrical – the driver’s side and passenger’s side are not the same (see last photo).  The photo from the original poster shows two driver’s side valve covers.

[J_Speegle]

I’ve done a little bit of research on these early-style 390 valve covers, but don’t have enough data to make any definite conclusions.  However, here are the latest door tag dates I’ve seen so far for 390 cars with the early-style valve covers at each of the three assembly plants:

Dearborn – 7F02S124xxx = November 25, 1966
San Jose – 7R03S159xxx = December 28, 1966
Metuchen – 7T03S118xxx = October 3, 1966

Are these single vehicles or individuals (groups - just the highest VIN shown) and with no "earlier cars" with the Powered by Ford covers?


To add to the data for San Jose have multiple cars built earlier than 7R13159xx you show IMHO suggesting that those may not be original to the car

7R1159xx - Oct 6th Projected build date
7R1229xx - Oct 14th actual build date
7R1288xx - Oct 28th Projected build date

[Paperback Writer]

Hi Jeff,

These are just the single vehicles that I have seen with the early-style valve covers that have the latest dates listed on the door tag (projected date).  They are merely points of data...

I should have noted that these three cars were claimed to be unrestored as well.  Yes, it is always possible that these cars were originally equipped with the “Powered by Ford” (PbF) valve covers, and then at some point, they were replaced with the early-style covers.  However, given the rarity and obscurity of the early-style covers, versus the relative ease of buying brand new PbF covers, I don’t see why anybody (let alone three people) would go to the trouble of doing that – the swap usually goes the other way around...

I too have seen the PbF covers on cars with earlier build dates, but unfortunately, all of the examples of Sept./Oct. cars with PbF covers that I have photos for were of restored cars, so unfortunately, I can’t really rely on them as “proof” of the earliest example of PbF cover usage...

Question for you - are the three October cars you listed below (7R1159xx, 7R1229xx, and 7R1288xx) examples of original/unrestored cars with the PbF valve covers?

Looking though my documentation, I think we could safely say that most (if not all) of the 390 cars built prior to October 1, 1966 came with the early-style valve covers, and then the transition began to take place sometime after that date.  Does your data agree with this assertion?

[J_Speegle]

.......I should have noted that these three cars were claimed to be unrestored as well.  Yes, it is always possible that these cars were originally equipped with the “Powered by Ford” (PbF) valve covers, and then at some point, they were replaced with the early-style covers.  However, given the rarity and obscurity of the early-style covers, versus the relative ease of buying brand new PbF covers, I don’t see why anybody (let alone three people) would go to the trouble of doing that – the swap usually goes the other way around...

Could always work either way depending on what the owner has read, was told or had seen. Outside pressure or suggestions. That's why multiple unrestored cars IMHO are the best resource at this point given no smoking gun (documents from Ford reporting that they changed something on a specific date or the like)

Question for you - are the three October cars you listed below (7R1159xx, 7R1229xx, and 7R1288xx) examples of original/unrestored cars with the PbF valve covers?

Yes all unrestored. Typically I don't take details nor pictures of restored cars

Looking though my documentation, I think we could safely say that most (if not all) of the 390 cars built prior to October 1, 1966 came with the early-style valve covers, and then the transition began to take place sometime after that date.  Does your data agree with this assertion?

At this point I think that is safe to say based on what we have collected and seen to this point - and making the point that this is not a "hard line"

[67gt390fb]

there is a  right hand, left hand in the valve covers in my picture (at top).  the right hand cover has only a round hole for the pcv grommet to fit into,  the left hand cover is set up  for a twist on neck or cap.    I already have both those and the Powered by Ford covers,  will go with the PbF covers. 

    (so,   if I understand correctly,  the stock pair of valve covers I show are a Fairlane application, and not used on the mustang )

[Paperback Writer]

Hi 67gt390fb,

The passenger side cover is vastly different from the driver side - the PCV hole was located in the center of the cover.
The attached photo below will show you what I mean...

Cheers!