Topic: '68 dual exhaust rear leaf spring shackles

[Bob Gaines]

Just to be clear, My car received no deduction on the spring shackles, but it sparked a good conversation, which I feel was cleared up here.  Thanks guys.

Many judges are still not aware of the staggered shackles let alone the use or none use issue in 68.

[Bob Gaines]

+1 not that we are talking about it here but 69 also I dont see the staggered studs. Assembly manuals are helpful but they are kind of like AMK hardware, majority of time they are correct but often miss the mark.
Bottom line is this guys, it takes a lot of time and research to understand all the nuances of these cars and its not something that can be covered in a book. When it comes to judging I know its frustrating that not all are aware of all differences but thats just the way it is. Most simple rule of judging: when you don't know give the car the benefit of the doubt

That is why I haven't mentioned 69 it in any of my posts  .

[specialed]

Don't know about 65-68 but I would think the same way as 69-70 as its more about installing shackle on assembly line on LH side there isn't enough clearance room getting long shackle stud thru bushing on top rear frame rail on lh side since the gas tank is offset to lh side since spare is on rh side for weight balance.  RH side no issue installing studs either direction but try doing that on LH side as very little room between gas tank & rear frame rail shackle hole. Isnt this also the reason the dual chrome tips have those 2 dimples pressed in them where the 2 pipes are welded to outlet pipe for lower shackle clearance when installed on either side?

[Paperback Writer]

+1

Both the '67 and '68 Assembly Manuals show it as Mike describes, and my '67 390 Convertible is the same way as well: driver's side nuts are staggered (upper nut inside/lower nut outside), and the passenger side nuts are both to the outside...

And sometimes the assembly line guys just got it wrong!
(Must be logged in to see photos below)

[CharlesTurner]

I wouldn't say definitely for all '65 dual exhaust either, but certainly seen the staggered on some cars.

[specialed]

paperback writer  what car & where built is the photo of the rear hanger J-hook as that looks like the TALL version for dual exhaust cars  since that is another part still not documented & tall version hook never serviced & don't show a different part # in book but only shows up on certain 67-68 dual exhaust cars?

[Paperback Writer]

1967 S-Code Convertible, built in San Jose - September 1966...

[Bob Gaines]

I wouldn't say definitely for all '65 dual exhaust either, but certainly seen the staggered on some cars.

I wouldn't ether . For myself that is why I choose to use "typical" in a description  that way it covers the anomalies that happen from time to time that are more not typical . With hundreds of thousands of units the odds are good that there will be some kind of deviation from time to time of the typical or what was engineered to happen .

[CharlesTurner]

I wouldn't ether . For myself that is why I choose to use "typical" in a description  that way it covers the anomalies that happen from time to time that are more not typical . With hundreds of thousands of units the odds are good that there will be some kind of deviation from time to time of the typical or what was engineered to happen .

Maybe we should make the words 'all', 'every' and 'absolutely' bad words here on the forum??   

Seems 66-67 was probably the sweet spot for the staggered shackle on dual exhaust cars.

[Bob Gaines]

Maybe we should make the words 'all', 'every' and 'absolutely' bad words here on the forum??   

Seems 66-67 was probably the sweet spot for the staggered shackle on dual exhaust cars.

I have learned and  followed the lead of a certain larger then life ex fireman and eliminated them from my vocabulary "typically"

[specialed]

Make note here MR 67 gaines & look at paperback writer TALL J-hook picture or has anybody figured out the 2 different height dual exhaust J-hooks yet? here is a good original example fall 66 built san jose car & built same plant & time 67 dual exhaust shelbys built also.      paperback writer is your car turn-down tips or gt chrome tips with cut-out rear valance as that might make a difference?

[sportyworty]

Don't know about 65-68 but I would think the same way as 69-70 as its more about installing shackle on assembly line on LH side there isn't enough clearance room getting long shackle stud thru bushing on top rear frame rail on lh side since the gas tank is offset to lh side since spare is on rh side for weight balance.  RH side no issue installing studs either direction but try doing that on LH side as very little room between gas tank & rear frame rail shackle hole. Isnt this also the reason the dual chrome tips have those 2 dimples pressed in them where the 2 pipes are welded to outlet pipe for lower shackle clearance when installed on either side?

Spec Ed the Cougar GTE did not have the dimpled quad tip. Just the same rolled quad tip as a Mustang but without the dimples. Watcha think about that. Good debate

[Paperback Writer]

Make note here MR 67 gaines & look at paperback writer TALL J-hook picture or has anybody figured out the 2 different height dual exhaust J-hooks yet? here is a good original example fall 66 built san jose car & built same plant & time 67 dual exhaust shelbys built also.      paperback writer is your car turn-down tips or gt chrome tips with cut-out rear valance as that might make a difference?

The car originally had the chromed GT quad exhaust tips/cut-out rear valance - however, the tips were missing when I bought the car, and it was obvious that most of the exhaust system from the "H" pipe back had been replaced at some point in the past, but I do believe all the exhaust hangers/brackets were original (as were the rear leaf spring shackles)...

I think we're getting a little off-topic here, and should probably start a separate thread about exhaust hangers/brackets if we want to discuss it further...

[specialed]

The reason I pointed the TALL j-hook out as it may have something to do with the staggered shackle combo & which exhaust tip was used.   If you put both c7zz j-hooks beside each other they are easy spotted being same design only 1 taller than the other made from 2 totally different stamping tooling & there has to be a reason why ford engineered the 2 differently & has to have something to do with clearance issue.   Kerrry  did the gte cougarhave a different rear valance panel (cut-out )  & usesame rear hanger set-up as mustang since rear springs are mounted differently & longer than mustang as this may explain not having the 2 dimples in the chrome tips.  I have asked several 67-68 experts about why the TALL J-hook was used on some dual exhaust mustangs & never got a documented reason why or which plant it was used but never seen the staggered shackle or the TALL  j-hook used  on a 69.

[Oz390]

well...I'll hijack my hijacked thread on this comment... 

 

it takes a lot of time and research to understand all the nuances of these cars and its not something that can be covered in a book

Respectfully, this is the kind of comment in this hobby that kills me...   and why I feel MCA is a fatally flawed organization.

Basically, this common refrain that "It is too hard to write down what I know is right"

Flame suit on...  but I call BS.

A lot of data?  Yes, of course. But for most that would indicate the need to document, not memorize?

Bob Mannel did a great job (in 1998) that shows it can be done. If he can do what he did for ~8 years of Ford small blocks, as an individual, ~15 years ago, it seems odd the MCA can't even come close to 1/10th (maybe 1/100th?) of the info he provided in written form to this day. Let alone he dug into engine internals and a lot of stuff most folks don't see, and most judging focuses on mainly the open and obvious.

After 35-ish years (don't recall exactly when MCA came to be, mid 70s'?) for the MCA to hold up a few pages of sketchy information in the open, and provide judging sheets that are seen as intellectual property with instructions not to distribute the forms and results?  Corporation, not cooperation? 

The view that "it is easier to remember all aspects of a few years of one car's details by tribal lore and oral history and regurgitation/rote than by writing it down"... ??  Really?

I'd suggest a few centuries supporting the small growth of documentation from the invention of the printing press, to encyclopedias, to web pages, to Wikipedia, etc. have shown oral histories are a bit weak as a formal source of documentation. 

Not a popular opinion, for sure, but I'll stand by it.