Topic: 66 Front Steering 6 cyl vs 8 cyl?

[KevinK]

I looked Anghel's ID Guide for the suspension parts such as the tie rod ends. That's should be easy to match the pictures.
What else do I need to watch out for and ID? Drag link, Idler arm
My friend bought a v8 mustang, confirmed by vin. A shop stated it had 6 cylinder suspension.
We may want to upgrade to power front disc brakes as well. It would be nice to understand what we have before ordering parts. Thanks.

[CharlesTurner]

Upper/lower control arms, spring saddles and strut rods are about the only things shared between 6 cyl and V8.

[jwc66k]

My friend bought a v8 mustang, confirmed by vin. A shop stated it had 6 cylinder suspension.

That's odd. Usually it's the other way around. Some pictures would help, or start with a lug nut count - 4 per wheel is 6 cylinder suspension, 5 lugs is V-8 suspension.
Jim

[KevinK]

So far it's 5 lugs and a single reservoir master cylinder.  I have not seen the car yet.

I seriously doubt a repair shop today, could ID 6 cylinder steering. More likely, they ordered a wrong part and blamed it on being the 6 cylinder parts. They were rumored to have replaced ball joints and said "it had a 6 cylinder front end". So their statement makes no sense.

If we end up going to a front disc upgrade, I should probably figure out what's on the car first. Generic parts books list changes in the brakes at 4/15/66. The Ford parts book does not call out any changes by date. I was researching the rear wheel cylinders and found 29/32" verses 7/8".

[Bob Gaines]

So far it's 5 lugs and a single reservoir master cylinder.  I have not seen the car yet.

I seriously doubt a repair shop today, could ID 6 cylinder steering. More likely, they ordered a wrong part and blamed it on being the 6 cylinder parts. They were rumored to have replaced ball joints and said "it had a 6 cylinder front end". So their statement makes no sense.

If we end up going to a front disc upgrade, I should probably figure out what's on the car first. Generic parts books list changes in the brakes at 4/15/66. The Ford parts book does not call out any changes by date. I was researching the rear wheel cylinders and found 29/32" verses 7/8".

This is why a visual is necessary to see what you have. All 65/66 have single reservoir master cylinders but there are different varieties of Master cylinders within that group. Surprised that the 29/32 rear wheel cylinder showed up in your search given it is used on the 2 1/2 " rear brakes of a 65/66 GT350.

[KevinK]

Oh, that's interesting info. The Ford parts book had nothing listed for the GT 350 and nothing by brake size. Just a 66 listing with no engine for 7/8" and 65/66 8 cyl. For the 29/32".

I also made the assumption that there may have been a late year change 4/15/66 as indicated by generic suppliers that there was a change. I assumed 65/66 was 29/32 and it changed to 7/8.. The Ford book shows this continued info 67, 68, 69 and 70.  I see 71/72 list the brake shoe sizes.

[jwc66k]

Oh, that's interesting info. The Ford parts book had nothing listed for the GT 350 -

Ford "sold" a standard assembly line, stripped down Fastback to Shelby American in 1965 and 1966. That's why there is no listing for GT350s in those years. Special order components were listed on their build sheets - a rare find for almost all San Jose cars.

I also made the assumption that there may have been a late year change 4/15/66 as indicated by generic suppliers that there was a change. I assumed 65/66 was 29/32 and it changed to 7/8..

The 60-68 Ford Car Parts (aka MPC) sect 22 pg 11 (for base number 2261-62 - rear cylinder) shows a change over date for V8 rear brake cylinders from 29/32 to 7/8 inch on 4/15/66 for 1 3/4 inch shoes.
Remember, the MPC is a dealer service replacement document and may or may not, reflect assembly line use. Implementation dates have also been found to be "flexible".
Jim

[KevinK]

I never gave it any thought about the early Shelbys not being in the Ford parts books as I do recall the later cars being listed.

My MPC is the 65-71 version dated 1975. Again I did not realize there was overlap with an earlier version. The later version did not have the date cut off.

Vin 6r07c158535. Would the vin be before 4/15/66?

[J_Speegle]

Vin 6r07c158535. Would the vin be before 4/15/66?

Though we can not be certain since we don't know specifically when each car was built it is very likely that yes 6R07C158535 was completed before April 15 1966

[jwc66k]

Vin 6r07c158535. Would the vin be before 4/15/66?

Per the "Mustang Production Guide, Vol 1", that VIN falls in the late January, 1966 time frame. Close VINs are scheduled from the 24th to the 29th, the 30th being a Sunday.
Jim

[KevinK]

Excellent. Thank you very much for all the info.

[J_Speegle]

Per the "Mustang Production Guide, Vol 1", that VIN falls in the late January, 1966 time frame. Close VINs are scheduled from the 24th to the 29th, the 30th being a Sunday.
Jim

Of course it should be mentioned that publication would reflect the likely date that would have been stamped on the door tag - the projected or scheduled date NOT likely the real date the car would have been completed