Author Topic: Correct Carb?  (Read 8111 times)

Offline 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5093
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #15 on: April 24, 2014, 11:21:19 AM »
Give Kurt a try. He's the one who used to work with Jon at Pony Carbs I was talking about. Check your PM that I sent you to another link of his eBay listings too.
btw, He's mentioned at another thread here on Concours too:
http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=4812.0
« Last Edit: April 24, 2014, 11:39:39 AM by 67gtasanjose »
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) GTA Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Int./Ext. Decor +many options

2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline Paperback Writer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 298
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #16 on: April 24, 2014, 07:36:19 PM »
I know it's a stretch, but here's another thought (and I'm not sure why anybody outside of California would have done it)...

The "Exhaust Emission Control System" was listed as an option on all 1967 Mustang Order sheets, so in theory, a person from any DSO (not just 71 & 72) could have placed an order for a C-6/390 car with the Thermactor system - and therefore a car for DSO 15 could have been originally built with a 390 engine with the C70F-9510-D carburetor (and presumably the rest of the Thermactor system was removed at a later date).

lpprice1024 - do you have a Marti Report for the car, and if so, is there any mention of the "Exhaust Emission Control" option?
1967 390 GTA Convertible
7R03S110###
76B - V - 6U - 30J - 72 - 1 - U
(Actually built on 9/22/1966 - Eight days ahead of schedule)

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24628
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2014, 09:40:13 PM »
..................... and therefore a car for DSO 15 could have been originally built with a 390 engine with the C70F-9510-D carburetor (and presumably the rest of the Thermactor system was removed at a later date).

Consider that many of the documents printed were printed before production or sales started and may include things not really available or correct (remember the 427 engine being listed in the sale lit in 68?

I would say that until Kevin finds an example of this I would think it wasn't a true option IMHO
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline Paperback Writer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 298
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #18 on: April 25, 2014, 07:57:32 PM »
Consider that many of the documents printed were printed before production or sales started and may include things not really available or correct (remember the 427 engine being listed in the sale lit in 68?

I would say that until Kevin finds an example of this I would think it wasn't a true option IMHO
Hi Jeff,

With all due respect, I think this is a little different than something printed in a pre-production sales brochure...

Unlike the '68 427, we know for a fact that Ford put hundreds of 390 engines with the Thermactor Exhaust Emission Control System in the '67 Mustangs destined for DSOs 71 and 72 - so Ford built this engine, and they actually installed it in the Mustang...

Regarding the documentation, there were at least two versions of dealer order sheets for the 1967 Mustang (attached below are examples of the June 1966 and November 1966 versions - are there any later versions?) and both of them list the Exhaust Emission Control System as option "L" for section 43 (or option "O" on the later sheet if they ordered it with the GT option)...

All I'm saying is that I don't see anything on the order sheets, nor have I read anything in the Ford literature that was printed at the time that would have prevented somebody from a DSO outside of California from choosing that particular option if they really wanted it...

Like you say, Kevin Marti should be able to easily confirm this one way or another...

Cheers!
1967 390 GTA Convertible
7R03S110###
76B - V - 6U - 30J - 72 - 1 - U
(Actually built on 9/22/1966 - Eight days ahead of schedule)

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3080
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #19 on: April 25, 2014, 09:01:14 PM »
See the attached.

Exhaust emission control option on a 289 Dearborn car delivered to Iowa.

Clearly not an exact match regarding engine and so on, but does indicate that the option was real at least when this car was ordered.
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
7R02C156xxx
MCA 74660

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24628
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #20 on: April 25, 2014, 09:13:25 PM »
Hi Jeff,

With all due respect, I think this is a little different than something printed in a pre-production sales brochure...

Wasn't referring to brochures or anything like those sorts :)


No problem respectful discussion is a good thing. Plenty to learn and plenty to still discover




Regarding the documentation, there were at least two versions of dealer order sheets for the 1967 Mustang (attached below are examples of the June 1966 and November 1966 versions - are there any later versions?) and both of them list the Exhaust Emission Control System as option "L" for section 43 (or option "O" on the later sheet if they ordered it with the GT option)...

Believe there is a Feb or March version also I've seen



See the attached.

Exhaust emission control option on a 289 Dearborn car delivered to Iowa.

Clearly not an exact match regarding engine and so on, but does indicate that the option was real at least when this car was ordered.

Might also be the result of moving inventory, needing a specific car and a transfer from another location towards the end of the year or a couple of other possibilities. Would be interesting to see the DSO

We have seen examples of cars being ordered in ordered in non- Thermactor DSO's being ordered through those DSO but being delivered  in California in 67. This sort of examples can lead us to all sorts of assumptions IMHO

Remembering these cars - checking with Kevin would not show where these examples were delivered but only where they were ordered through making that way of checking not helpful in this discussion.


But guess we should leave this one to sleep and develop as we find any new facts since this thread has gone off track a bit ;)
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline lprice1024

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #21 on: April 27, 2014, 08:21:55 AM »
Thanks for all the great ideas. I'm having the carb rebuilt. Should pick it up tomorrow. Also having some work done on some fluid leaks. I just don't have any time to do these things myself. Once I get the car back I will post all the numbers that have been mentioned.
Thanks,
LP

Offline lprice1024

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #22 on: April 29, 2014, 04:37:46 PM »
Which Marti report would you recommend?

Offline 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5093
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2014, 04:48:24 PM »
Which Marti report would you recommend?
That would depend on what all you wish to have. "click" on the DETAILS tab to see which one you would preffer. Any report would answer most of your questions. You'll wait several months to get the ELITE report sent, though you still get the emailed copy in about a week or two.
I just bought the ELITE in Mid December, got the framed copy a few weeks ago, got the emailed version in about a week.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2014, 04:50:43 PM by 67gtasanjose »
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) GTA Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Int./Ext. Decor +many options

2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24628
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2014, 05:05:06 PM »
Which Marti report would you recommend?

I've never purchased anything but the Deluxe report. Don't really care if the car is one of whatever nor cared to frame any of the dozen or more that I've purchased. I have at times, made a copy and stuck it on a car from time to time.

Just me ;)
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5093
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2014, 07:09:54 AM »
I do like the Elite report as my choice, but I bought my then 10 year old car at age 16 in 1978 as my first car and do not ever plan on selling it. My car bought in original, beaten and whipped, without any history condition. (a rescue) My intentions are that the report will stay with the car after I am gone to trace it's history better when I am not around to do it myself. I am searching for every detail possible about it's history to keep with it. One day, it will probably go to one of my grandchildren as an inheritance, just like you inherited yours.  If you already have the whole history on a car, or do not care to have it, then the Elite Report is only like having a trophy plaque on your wall. I agree with Jeff's comment about Deluxe reports, probably a great middle of the road approach. You can always order up the Elite option later at a reduced (pay the difference) cost if ever you wanted to. The Standard report IMO, is a good "buyers guide" if you are trying to establish a car's authenticity, but do not know yet if you will actually buy it.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2014, 07:12:36 AM by 67gtasanjose »
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) GTA Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Int./Ext. Decor +many options

2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline lprice1024

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2014, 11:09:08 AM »
Thanks for the info. Just got the carb back from Custom Rebuilt Carbs in Middlesex, NJ. It looks great. I'll be installing it this weekend.

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24628
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #27 on: May 01, 2014, 01:26:09 PM »
Thanks for the info. Just got the carb back from Custom Rebuilt Carbs in Middlesex, NJ. It looks great. I'll be installing it this weekend.


Most likely some fo the finishes are not like original - carb rebuilders always seen to take everything off and plate all the steel parts the same finish - zinc dichromate



Just a heads uo ;)
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5093
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #28 on: May 01, 2014, 01:42:38 PM »
Kurt, formerly with Pony Carbs does work like this:
I'm no expert in the "EXACT" aspects of each model, but this looks far better than "just any rebuilder" does IMO.
These are plated & NOT painted.
I am very please with his work. Very fast turn-around also.
(note: This image is NOT of a Mustang Carb., just serves an example of quality in workmanship)
« Last Edit: May 01, 2014, 01:54:38 PM by 67gtasanjose »
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) GTA Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Int./Ext. Decor +many options

2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline midlife

  • Wiring Guru---let me check your shorts!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2175
    • Midlife Harness Restorations
Re: Correct Carb?
« Reply #29 on: May 01, 2014, 09:27:42 PM »
Kurt, formerly with Pony Carbs does work like this:
I'm no expert in the "EXACT" aspects of each model, but this looks far better than "just any rebuilder" does IMO.
These are plated & NOT painted.
I am very please with his work. Very fast turn-around also.
(note: This image is NOT of a Mustang Carb., just serves an example of quality in workmanship)

Kurt's main job is working in a plant as a plating specialist, so he's an expert in that arena.  I found that out googling his name.
Midlife Harness Restorations - http://midlifeharness.com