Topic: delete

[65Autolite]

delete

[Brian Conway]

No idea.  Think the cut-out is for a shock tower ?  Brian

[svo2scj]

Any help?    http://www.kitfoster.com/images/2005-5-11_Ford260V8Web-Large.jpg

Mark

[67gtasanjose]

I have looked at this heat riser a number of times on Ebay and I am interested in finding out what correct applications (Ford models) it was for and years.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/152361643582

Very similar to the 65-67 style Mustang version but the recessed area is NOT for a Mustang. Perhaps a similar small car, perhaps not a regular production car. (as mentioned, clearance for suspension parts) I would think a Falcon version would be same as a 65-66 Mustang. For example, there were a few Econoline V-8's made. I've only ever seen one and engine was out of it. That one had a 4 speed on the tree...I felt that it was a shame that it had been junked when I saw the factory-looking setups in the engine bay for the V8.

[Andrew@MagMustangs]

The notch is to clear the RH Convertible cowl brace. They are the only cars I have ever found this style of notched heat riser on. I should specify that this style of riser with the straight tube can only be used with the Early 'Oil Bath' Style Air Cleaner with the small lid opening on top. That air cleaner is Not MCA approved. The straight tube riser is a few inches taller than the curved tube risers that the MCA accepts in concours judging. 

[carlite65]

i think you are talking about two different items here. the snorkel with the cutout is only for early-mid 65's with the short braces. the heat riser tube pictured above is not correct for mustang applications.

[Andrew@MagMustangs]

FWIW, this heat riser is part number C3DZ-9A603-A and was originally designed for the 63 Falcon Sprint/Comet S-22 with 260 to clear the RH shock tower. Just so everyone can rest easy knowing why it is notched in that manner and where the design came from initally.

 

[Andrew@MagMustangs]

Not misrepresented. Just not listed for All of the applications it is correct for. I won't bother explaining why I know this is correct for some Mustang convertibles. My views on this one are not in line with MCA judging guidelines and I have had conversations like this way too many times before.