Skip to main content

148 replies

anyone have vintage engine compartment photos to share?

panteradougpanteradougMember
This is my 68 Shelby GT350. It's been stroked to a 347 with the original block, balancer, and race ported heads. 1.94" intake valves/1.60" exhaust valves. 2.02's wouldn't fit. The valve guides are not accurately centered from the factory. Converted to a solid lifter cam, and went to a Holley 2x4 (1850) set up.

The reason I post this is because it is the same basic engine as in the 'goose, a '68 302 4v.

It uses the Ford 427 2x4 linkage which mounts the carbs backwards.

The intake manifold is the Blue Thunder reproduction "high-rise" manifold which is port matched to the heads.

Personally, this would be on the agenda for me in a "goose".

It is relatively trouble free, and goes like stink.

My Pantera makes about 100 hp more, but that is an unfair comparison because of the different heads.

I wouldn't exactly call it a sleeper but it is undercover enough for me. With the look of the 302 SB, no one suspects it is 5.6 litres. It aslo "hides" a NOS cheater nitrous oxide system as well.

I wouldn't mess with Webers on a 'goose. This set up here produces noticibly more low end because of the progressive throttle design.

Probably some finagaling would need to be done because of the "jack" shaft mounting in the 'goose, but I can testify this set up "runs" and is very civil on the street.

Attachments

Hide
Images (1)
  • 2x4_Holleys_in_68_Shelby
Last edited by panteradoug
deniscdeniscCaretaker of 8MA1244 '70 Euro Mangusta DRIVE THEM, THEY WERE MEANT TO BE DRIVEN, IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT ONE, BUY A POSTER!
OK here is my take on it.

There may have been 4-5 Mangusta built with 289HiPo's, but as a Mustang/Shelby guy I/we/you should know there were no 289s available after June 68, so the Euro/US thing is crap. I have a late car 8MA1244 and it has a 302 and unless you get down and dirty under the starter to see castings, see the front crank pulley or pull the heads one can't see the difference. 4 ways to ID a euro car; Km speedo, no rear markers (car in article is US car), and 2 tone tailights (which some owners now have changed)and some cars have a park lamp in the outer front HL ( but that is hard to see unless you turn on park lamps or see the flat beam.

As far as I understand my car (I have quite easily pulled the trans to change clutch BTW) there is no way the cast iron manifold would ever fit in there. When I purchased my car it had a 750Holley4160 with mech secondaries with the linkage on driver's side, it went like stink was real thirsty. left a trail of fumes and kept-up with cats, but I thought it was way too much carb, went to a 625 Holley 4150 vaccum secondaried with choke and lost a bit of bottom end but everything bolts fine, still plenty of fun to drive and a litle less thirsty, (a stock early Cat is still a few points better on gas on the highway though - ask Charlton Smiler )

my 2c but we are waaay off subject here.
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:
Originally posted by Denis C:


my 2c but we are waaay off subject here.


Thanks for the heads up! I'll keep a lookout for the Mangusta Secret Police! Eeker

FYI, there were 289's including the HP available through the Ford Parts system into the early '70s. Stating that there were only 4 or 5 289hp cars would seem that is speculation on your part.

...AND the thread is about original ENGINE COMPARTMENT PHOTOS...are you reading this Secret Police Razzer

Show me the documentation. Big Grin

...and NOT TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE Dennis, but you have just stated that you didn't get your car in the original configuration. It had already been modified.

...AND the original subject of the post is about pictures of the original engine compartment. Are you reading this MSP? (< Mangusta Secret Police)
Roll Eyes
Last edited by panteradoug
deniscdeniscCaretaker of 8MA1244 '70 Euro Mangusta DRIVE THEM, THEY WERE MEANT TO BE DRIVEN, IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT ONE, BUY A POSTER!
Don't want to start a pissing contest, but Ford did not have any crate engine program till the late 80's, Up until then we would pull the motors from the assembly (read: not engine plants). So motors were as they would have been on production cars. IIRC motors in the parts system were long block & short blocks, NO drop-in or dressed assemblies. So in theory yes 289 may have been available, but highly improbable as the cost and labour would have been much higher (DeT was a cheapskate) Mark and Jerry have supplied engine tags and the motors are J code motors.

FWIW: I have spent a few hour doing the research and will stand by my findings.

John: the repro Autolite plug wires look right but are not very good, most early mustang restorers use Taylor brand wires, they need to be custom fitted but look right and last a long time.
panteradougpanteradougMember
The J code was only manufactured for one model year. 1968.

If your theory is correct then I would think that there would be later 302's in the later cars?

There are 69, 70 and 71 models of the 'goose.

No matter. No pissing contest for me. I just dribble now. Smiler

How well are the Mangustas documented by Detomaso? Manufacturing dates would have been kept, no?

I would think that might effect this carb reversal situation too?

J codes have their date codes stamped into the block near the water pump and the engine tag has the engine date on it as well.

You could document that information with enough owners reporting to a central registrar I would think?

Detomaso could have bought a batch of J codes and just stored them until gone. That could account for all J codes into the '70 models too?
Last edited by panteradoug
V vyprgt2Member
As I recall, the 4100 was phased out in 1967 and superseded by the 4300. Other than 289 hipo in 1967, the only later cars that received 4100's were police cars- I think, anyway.
so, wouldn't almost all Mangustas, except the first ones, have 4300s? If Denis's theory about DeT and 289s is right, then all but a handful of cars at most would have 4300s.

Wild speculation here, but maybe DeTomaso designed the Mangusta with 289 and 4100 in mind and when 4300 came along it wouldn't fit due to jack shaft and so he put them in "backwards"?.
1046, 1108 and 1126 provide somewhat compelling evidence as they are overall mostly original cars -

Doug, thanks for posting these scans. They are great
panteradougpanteradougMember
quote:
Originally posted by vyprgt2:
As I recall, the 4100 was phased out in 1967 and superseded by the 4300. Other than 289 hipo in 1967, the only later cars that received 4100's were police cars- I think, anyway.
so, wouldn't almost all Mangustas, except the first ones, have 4300s? If Denis's theory about DeT and 289s is right, then all but a handful of cars at most would have 4300s.

Wild speculation here, but maybe DeTomaso designed the Mangusta with 289 and 4100 in mind and when 4300 came along it wouldn't fit due to jack shaft and so he put them in "backwards"?.
1046, 1108 and 1126 provide somewhat compelling evidence as they are overall mostly original cars -

Doug, thanks for posting these scans. They are great


I think that is reasonable speculation, yes.

Since almost all of the Mangustas apparently were for the US market, I would think DT didn't want to touch the engines. They were already designed to comply with the then current EPA and California emissions regulations.

Reversing the carbs seems the simplest solution to clearing the existing jack shaft. Speculation on my part of course. Smiler

I enjoyed looking at that article again. Hadn't seen it since the mid '70s.

I'm glad it was helpful to you.

I like these cars too and these discussions I think are helpful in finding accurate information. I have never seen anyone attempt to document Mangusta details before?

That's why I participate in them. Not to bust 'em on DennisC. Wink

I did find this though http://www.mangustainternational.com/
Last edited by panteradoug
L leeaMember

Guys, the pictures above are from 8ma1046. I believe the carb orientation is correct, at least for that car Smiler

 The clue is the choke riser, see also the header pics that Steve L posted today, showing a clear attachment on the left header for the choke riser. 

(ps, picture of choke riser on 8ma1074)

Attachments

Hide
Images (1)
  • 8ma1074 choke riser
Last edited by leea
L leeaMember

Pic of 1046 on the linkage side. Detail of throttle cable bracket. carb is #C8ZF-C (used on 4-speed 302). fuel lines were 2 runs of copper, first wrapped around the fuel pump and was spliced to the one clamped to the intake manifold on the driver's side. pictures from 2 cars here (ignore the steel line).

Attachments

Hide
Images (7)
  • 1046_carb
  • throttle cable bracket
  • throttle cable bracket 2
  • 8ma1076 fuel lines
  • 8ma1074 fuel lines
  • throttle cable bracket
  • fuel line routing
Last edited by leea
panteradougpanteradougMember
Back in the days of debating whether the US should have more stringent emissions laws,someone, somewhere stated that steel tube headers, and air injection into the exhaust ports didn't go well together at all.

It was said that because what the air injectors actually did was continue the combustion into the exhaust manifolds, the steel tube headers would burn out.

Granted there doesn't seem to be many if any high mileage Mangustas that we can look at to check out the condition of the headers, but seeing these couple of sets here, there doesn't seem to be any indication that the headers were getting burned through?

Interesting.
PreviousNext

Add Reply

Views: 8,161
Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×