1978 Mustang II

[Robert Swartz]

Originally Posted by Paul Wong

There is absolutley no need to do a baseline on this for any reason. Its a 12 second U car put together with some skill. If this does not go 13's then Stock is not for you. Good score.

Paul,
Guess this is about as brutally honest an assessment as I can ask for. Right now, I'd be tickled pink to get the thing together and kiss the index. I freely admit I stumbled into this car by accident. Like other newbies, I have that learning curve to go through. Plus I'm starting this with zero Ford parts. I have some scrounging, trading and work to do.

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

I'm working on a lightweight 8" package for at least one or two of these combos now.
If we could add in a few more...might be able to get the price down a bit ...?

Mark,
I will definitely need a converter. Your name was one of the first to come up after I settled the deal on this car.

[Marty Knox]

Congratulations, Robert! Does this mean the end of E/FS for you?

[Robert Swartz]

Originally Posted by Marty Knox

Congratulations, Robert! Does this mean the end of E/FS for you?

Marty,

No, the E car is alive and well. Been mainly working on our bracket car and doing a lot of garage straightening. This is a more tuneable, workable combination. Has a ton more potential. Unlike my E car, which is an IHRA only car. This car can be run in either "HRA".

[Robert Swartz]

Spent some time at a backwoods salvage yard today. Managed to find a 302 long block with the correct casting number 2 barrel intake. It was setting out in the elements and is missing the timing cover and water pump. Am positive the block is locked up. Won't know what I have until I tear it down. Am hoping the heads will be salvageable, if they are the correct casting number?

Thought I had found a set of Hooker headers over in Ohio. After contacting the guy and having him verify the part number, they were actually for a 71-73 Mustang. A little research saved me a trip and possibly buying something else I couldn't use. He did tell me he had a lot of sbf parts. Even said he had some 2 barrel carbs. I may still yet have found a source for some usable parts.

It's been 36 years since I last worked on a SBF. Need to go buy a couple books and renew my knowledge of these engines.

[Joe Toller]

Originally Posted by Robert Swartz

Spent some time at a backwoods salvage yard today. Managed to find a 302 long block with the correct casting number 2 barrel intake. It was setting out in the elements and is missing the timing cover and water pump. Am positive the block is locked up. Won't know what I have until I tear it down. Am hoping the heads will be salvageable, if they are the correct casting number?

Thought I had found a set of Hooker headers over in Ohio. After contacting the guy and having him verify the part number, they were actually for a 71-73 Mustang. A little research saved me a trip and possibly buying something else I couldn't use. He did tell me he had a lot of sbf parts. Even said he had some 2 barrel carbs. I may still yet have found a source for some usable parts.

It's been 36 years since I last worked on a SBF. Need to go buy a couple books and renew my knowledge of these engines.

Robert, if the heads are shot let me know, turns out my Comet had a 78-vintage motor in it, the heads (D8OE) are really nice, recently overhauled. I cleaned up and put 77 heads on the shortblock and calling it a 77 lol! Lots of 2bbl 302 stuff here in Montana, holler if you need something!

[impstocker]

Hello, i have a question when you said the "pads were reversed" on the rear. I just did a 9 inch rear for a friends 64 Falcon. It was a junkyard rear that I started with without brakes. I believed I assembled the brakes right using a diagram, but one side the drum is tight. Seeing this is my first Ford experience i seem to run into these problems (on third set of front spindles-right now) Could my pads be "reversed" They seem to be the same side to side> I do.t want to hijack this thread, but i could use some help.
Will Lamprecht I/SA 65 Impala inprogress.

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by impstocker

Hello, i have a question when you said the "pads were reversed" on the rear. I just did a 9 inch rear for a friends 64 Falcon. It was a junkyard rear that I started with without brakes. I believed I assembled the brakes right using a diagram, but one side the drum is tight. Seeing this is my first Ford experience i seem to run into these problems (on third set of front spindles-right now) Could my pads be "reversed" They seem to be the same side to side> I do.t want to hijack this thread, but i could use some help.
Will Lamprecht I/SA 65 Impala inprogress.

Will , Robt. was talking about rear "shoes" not pads. And no , switching a primary shoe with a secondary won't, in itself prevent the drum from slipping on.
New drums, news shoes....you're gonna start out on the tight side. I suspect the shoes weren't centered..that's all.

[B/S 428]

hi-I was wondering about the correct carb size for this combo-I looked on the NHRA website and it does not list venture size? tried researching the part number listed and found it is a 1.21 not a 1.08? thanks-Brian

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by B/S 428

hi-I was wondering about the correct carb size for this combo-I looked on the NHRA website and it does not list venture size? tried researching the part number listed and found it is a 1.21 not a 1.08? thanks-Brian

99 % of the 302 2v's have to use the 1.08 carb.
Apparently there is one that can use the 1.21,, but I'm gonna stay out of that situation.

[Tom keedle]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

99 % of the 302 2v's have to use the 1.08 carb.
Apparently there is one that can use the 1.21,, but I'm gonna stay out of that situation.

and I, uh, have one sitting here, waiting for a new home...