Topic: How does a stock 67 390S code drive? Pros and Cons?

[robz64]

Hello to All,

I hope the forum can give me a true grit opinion of how a stock 390 SCODE drives and the pros and cons of owning a big block? I'm most curious how the front end handles with such a large piece of metal/engine. I'm not planning on racing it, just enjoying the cruise and feel of the power behind the wheel. There is no reinforced shock towers and no bracing/sway bars whatsoever, all stock the way a 67 came from the factory.  I have my sights set on one to purchase. Thank you for your help in advance in making a decision.

[RoyceP]

I prefer big block Mustangs over small block or 6 cylinder. Having twice as much power is a good thing.


Drawbacks, right rear tire life is brief if you have an open differential. Stock tire sizes are too small, the tires howl at embarrassingly low speed on turns. There is lots of body roll because the front sway bar is too small and there is no rear sway bar. Biggest drawback, the steering box lubricant gets cooked by the proximity to the LH exhaust manifold. Most cars have no lubricant if they are 50 + years old and the steering box will be shot as a result.


You will never notice the missing torque box but the unit body will crack earlier so look for problems like separated spot welds, cracks and frame misalignment on high mileage examples. High school age drivers loved these cars, and often crashed them so accident history is a problem. The gas tank is too small on long trips. The car needs power steering. The car needs power disc front brakes.

[robz64]

Hello RoyceP, Thank you for your thoughts and guidance. I will check these things out once I get to look at it.  It sounds like a 67, 390 with the combination of body and engine can eventually be a money pit? I understand the engines are hard to work on because of the size in the compartment as well?

 

[jwc66k]

I prefer big block Mustangs over small block or 6 cylinder. Having twice as much power is a good thing.

Compared to my 66 289 HP, you are driving a F250 - with a load in the bed.
Jim

[RoyceP]

No I would say it's the other way around. The small block and six cylinder cars cost exactly what a big block powered '67 costs to restore. When you get done with the 390 version it's a more powerful car that is worth more if you decide to sell.


The 390 is generally much easier to work on than the 289 versions. Particularly the water pump and front timing cover are simply designed and easy to work on. Ditto the oil pan - it's a lot simpler than the 289 version and all of the bolts are the same. The oil pan gasket on a 390 is a far better design - no separate seals and no additional places to leak.


Most of the handling issues are easily solved by using a modern low profile radial tire. The tires are too skinny on all '67 Mustangs, it's not unique to the 390 powered versions.

Hello RoyceP, Thank you for your thoughts and guidance. I will check these things out once I get to look at it.  It sounds like a 67, 390 with the combination of body and engine can eventually be a money pit? I understand the engines are hard to work on because of the size in the compartment as well?

 

[jwc66k]

The small block and six cylinder cars cost exactly what a big block powered '67 costs to restore. When you get done with the 390 version it's a more powerful car that is worth more if you decide to sell.

A 289 HP is not a six cylinder. If you go in a straight line, a 390 might beat a 289 HP, put in a turn and you find out all about boat anchors.
Jim

[J_Speegle]

Hello to All,

I hope the forum can give me a true grit opinion of how a stock 390 SCODE drives and the pros and cons of owning a big block? I'm most curious how the front end handles with such a large piece of metal/engine. I'm not planning on racing it, just enjoying the cruise and feel of the power behind the wheel. ...............

Interesting question but if your being honest and just want a comparison about enjoying a cruise and the feel of power behind the wheel then I think you be happy with a stock 390 67 as you would be with many other models that year. Good thing is that your likely going to get power disc brakes with the combination as well as power steering. Of course if your just cruising then choice of transmissions is not as important as when your discussing more spirited driving

Of course this is where the conversation expands and moves away from what your interested in and none will feel or drive like a new car but that is not the comparison at the moment

I've been asked over the years which Mustang is my favorite and I can never respond since like your kids each has its pros and cons. Given different situations I would choose different cars and I've been fortunate since I was 202 or so to have owned multiple cars at the same time so I didn't have to make one car fill all my needs, driving styles and uses. Looking back at those times I'm not always thinking about pure stock cars.

Pros and cons of a 67 390 IMHO

- Spark plug changes - con though you may only do it once during your ownership
- Holley carb - for me a pro
- Dual exhaust - a pro for the sound for most
- Can be a little hotter in the interior than a 6 cylinder or 289 on those hot days - or at least that's how if feels
- Most often paired with the GT or GTA package - a pro for most
- Typically a bit more expensive - can be a pro or con since it will likely be worth more when it comes time to sell
- Won't come across many others at shows and car get togethers - Most people like the extra attention

We could come up with some very different cars if we let our minds wander a bit (cars with comp suspension and K codes) but that was not the question nor likely related to the car your considering.

Of course there are allot of difference and you could also compare the three different body styles with just as many or more things on the list

Also all of this mental comparison is not worth anything IMHO if the car in question is a poor (or worst) example to begin with but that is another discussion

[robz64]

Thanks Jeff.  The car has been kept like a baby, I don't even think it was driven much at all. The engine compartment has most of its original parts and original heads. Power steering, power front discs, decor package, rear gray painted panel, original floors with the proper red oxide as well as drip marks. Original color, but with a repaint. The only thing that was replaced was the torque box. I'm actually shocked how well it has been taken care of. Btw, San Jose car!  I own a 66 GT with a 289 A CODE, and I love it. I'm thinking about putting the new Goodyear F17/14 Radials on them on the 67 390, thoughts?

I want to thank you and the guys for chiming in on my question. I'm still open to more suggestion and things I should look for once up on the lift. Pics will follow on the car I was talking about.  Btw, it sounds very powerful and healthy. One more thing, the gentleman added a 3.50 and took out the original 3.00, which he still has. 

[robz64]

Btw, it's a GTA, with AC

[robz64]

A 289 HP is not a six cylinder. If you go in a straight line, a 390 might beat a 289 HP, put in a turn and you find out all about boat anchors.
Jim

Hi Jim, you seem to be not too keen on 390's and prefer the 289?  Is it because primarily of the build of the 67 and weight of the body and distribution or engine? what would you do to stabilize the 67? Rob   

[jwc66k]

- you seem to be not too keen on 390's and prefer the 289?  Is it because primarily of the build of the 67 and weight of the body and distribution or engine? what would you do to stabilize the 67? 

You keep missing the full notation I've used in this thread - 289 HP. That's 289 "High Performance", 271 Horse Power at 6,000 rpm, with a redline of 7200 (however, that's not recommended by Ford). That's not the GT-350, just a regular production Mustang.
There are a lot of suspension components available for 67 Mustangs, but this is a Concourse Forum. My current "K" is stock.
Jim

[ExportMach]

My dad owned a '67 GT convertible with the 390 and a 4 speed. It was LOADED with options and I LOVED driving it. He had restored it to stock except he installed some decent sized BF Goodrich radial TAs. With the stock 3.25:1 differential it was still very easy to lay down a couple of black stripes. Very comfortable to drive and certainly a lot of sex appeal. He went further and restored a tri-power induction system he had found and that made the wow factor even higher when the hood was up at a show. The fuel mileage improved a little but honestly it was the gut punch when you romped on the gas pedal. Six barrels is better than four.

[J_Speegle]

Hi Jim, you seem to be not too keen on 390's and prefer the 289?  Is it because primarily of the build of the 67 and weight of the body and distribution or engine? what would you do to stabilize the 67? Rob

Generally if your going to push either hard on curvy roads you will notice the difference in weight ratio front to rear and the torque of the big block verses quick and high revving of the small block. Even 6 cylinders can be fun to toss around.

As far as addressing and making any of these better driving  and possibly more "fun" in that way yes that is something for other forums to help out with given our focus here and once you start down that rabbit hole you leave the original look and feel behind.

Did own a 67 390 GTA fastback at one point Pretty loaded with AC deluxe interior and the taillight grill with a great color combination. Car handles especially nice and I used it for auto cross for a while (still could not keep up with the light quick revving imports on tight courses) and had allot of fun before I redid the car and sold it to buy the next car. It was not your usual 67 since it had also been ordered with the competition suspension package that for me made all the difference

But that, like finding a nice K code Mustang, would not an easy task not inexpensive