Max Power

To be fair, the Boss 9s had heavily modified shock towers, so this isn't apples to apples.

When you open the throttle the manifold vacuum drops away, but if you are using a ported source, that's the first advance the dizzy sees. Ported should have zero vacuum at idle, so cracking the throttle suddenly provides some. Running manifold vacuum to your dizzy is not really a good idea, and even worse if your dizzy is not curved for it. Even if you modified the curve to accommodate manifold vacuum, there are some issues with it. When tipping the throttle, with manifold you lose vacuum, and lose part throttle or tip in response. On an automatic car, when dropped into gear, you see a sudden decrease in RPM, therefore retarding the timing, often causing a stumble or a stall. This is especially prominent on cars with a fair amount of cam. Honestly, if you are running manifold vacuum to idle, you might just as well disconnect it entirely and re-curve to run nothing but mechanical. The improved idle by connecting to manifold rather than port builds a false confidence. Yes, the idle improves (often masking other issues) but your tip in, part throttle and idle to throttle transitions get worse. Often much worse. And many people switching to manifold from a system designed for port fail to do any re-curving, making things worse.

Not at all. Face it, you did not accurately answer the OPs question because you did not consider all the options. Yes, even you can be wrong...LOL!

Gotcha.

Last I really ordered from then was about 6 years ago and I did my full resto. The website indicated back then that everything was in stock, you didn't really know unless you called or waited to open the boxes and looked at the packing slip. If their website now has accurate real time inventory, that is a huge improvement. During my resto, who to order from was a big conundrum. Both NPD and CJ are customers of mine, so I try and be fair. In essence, CJ was better at shipping costs, and if it was a commonly sourced part, they were priced cheaper. When you have a three page spreadsheet of needed parts, the savings are real. NPD was better at having things in stock, and nobody is more picky about having the best available in terms of parts quality than NPD. So, I tried to order the parts where there is only one manufacturer from CJ to save money, and the parts with multiple manufacturers from NPD, as they will only carry the better repros. In hindsight, that was an amazingly difficult thing to determine. Now, since I am not doing a full resto, I am going to NPD so I don't have to fiddle with junk.

Well, even though you don't have a big problem, the scotch and a cigar is a perfect solution. ;)

He never said he is not ever going to go to the track, and if you look again, he never even stated he has a specific problem. He just said he was thinking of putting an overflow tank in. That's it. That's all he said. Any problem here seems to have been created by you.

390 in a 69 Cougar Eliminator. Stock manifolds. Maybe the manifolds are different enough from the 390 to the 428 that it would be easier. It was 30 years ago. I never do engines and trannies separate, ever.

Drake is a mix. They are outsourcing some stuff to China, and a lot of that is spotty. Some of their stuff is great. The only real problem I have had with CJ is backorders. You place a big old order with them and the box shows up with half your stuff. Really a pain when you have project time slotted.

I always install the motor and trans together. You need an engine hoist with a leveler, it helps to jack the back of the car way up, and it helps to have a lot of hands. With stock manifolds and oil pans, even FE engines can be installed this way. Be very careful about ding your radiator support, and with PB I have installed without the valve cover on.

In the grand scheme of things, this is an easy fix.

Are you using a ported source or a manifold source? Factory used ported sources, so if you pull the vacuum advance at idle and it dies, that means the vacuum leak you created is doing it, or your engine is requiring a level of advance at idle of the vacuum advance to stay running. The latter should be the case, at idle you should have no vacuum advance, so the timing shouldn't be killing it, and it is hard to imagine the small vacuum leak created any problems. Will it stay running if you immediately plug the vacuum leak? Are you plugged into a port or manifold source of vacuum for advance? What is your base mechanical timing set at?

Regardless, you stated that "you only need one if your engine overheats or if you have a low pressure cap or faulty cap so if that is the case i would fix the actual problem instead." That is not true. You need one of you are going racing.

It is a requirement at every drag strip in America.

https://www.amazon.com/Modular-Engines-Mustangs-Torinos-Performance/dp/1613252951/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1492009615&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=swap+ford+modular+motors

David Vizard always has interesting things to say about exhaust systems and zero loss systems: http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/exhaust/0505phr-exh/ If there is one thing you should take away from his work, it's that secondary pipe size isn't really where loss occurs as much as header collector length and muffler design. All those 3" pipes mean nothing if the rest isn't optimized, and like a garden hose, as system only flows as well as its tightest restriction, so if your 3" system isn't mandrel bent, you have restriction. For street cars, exhaust is almost always a compromise. Practicalities like sound volume, heat generation, fit, expense are all factors in giving up 5hp here or there in the interest of sanity. As such, my system is the same. 398 CID, Heddman shorties, mandrel bent 2.5" x pipe, going through some sort of Dynomax muffler with a flap in it to eliminate drone, out through mandrel 2.5" Flowmaster tailpipes into custom made 2.5" splitters, ala Mach 1 style. It ain't perfect, but my tires are already my fusible link, I don't need more horsepower.

I took a look at mine yesterday and I am not sure I have anything to add without pulling the moldings. Sorry.

I believe Shelby became considerably less involved in the 68 models, or involved in a different way. Styling was taken over by Ford, as a response to the multiple suppliers of fiberglass bits with inconsistent quality for the 67 models, and Ford chose to sublet it out to AO Smith in Detroit. Shelby also lost their lease to the hangars in LA, and had to move as Shelby American to Detroit around the same time. Also, San Jose had lost interest in stopping production to make the Shelby chassis, so production swithed over to Metuched at that time as well. With all that going on, who really knows what ended up in what? I guess I have never seen official paperwork declaring 427s in 68s, but that sure doesn't mean it didn't happen. At this point I believe everything and nothing, especially if Shelby was running it.

This is a good answer. I can still take photos of mine, but it is OE so it may not be relevant.

You hear lots of tales about stuff that went on at Shelby, stuff off the books and such. I really wonder about the validity of some in 1968, as Ford took over production. Shelby was a wild card, but Ford was a little more straight laced.

As a general rule, long stroke motors make torque, short stroke motors rev and make horsepower. The entertaining phrase to describe the difference between torque and horsepower is....Horsepower determines how fast you are going when you hit the wall, Torque is how far you push the wall after you hit it. Side oiler 427s just had an oil channel in the side of the block which you can see from the outside, a separate dedicated feed that re-routed oil to the mains first, then the cam and valvetrain, the top oiler routed oil to the cam and valvetrain first, then the mains. I imagine it addressed spun bearing failures in racing applications. If you want to be an FE expert, buy this: https://www.cartechbooks.com/how-to-build-max-performance-ford-fe-engines.html

Ford was fairly typical in how many manufacturers look for solutions to challenges within. The FE was originally designed to power ever heavier and well appointed family sedans, and considering the design of the Y Block, the 352 2v was a big improvement as a smooth running, torquey and reliable powerplant. In the early 60s, performance started to sell and you saw bigger inch versions developed to answer that bell, with the 390, 406, 410 and 427. Ultimately, the large bore-short stroke 427 was the most successful in the racing arena, for obvious reasons. The 390 became the go to sedan engine and truck engine, the 427 through 67 mostly was the performance offering, and the 428 was developed for luxury applications like T-Birds where more torque was desired over the 390 offerings, without the racy characteristics of the 427. The early 428s were also police package engines. Ford than figured out that if you put a halfway decent cam and slightly better heads on the 428, the 427 wasn't really necessary anymore. That's why you saw a handful of 427s in 68 in applications like the Cougar GTE (switching from solid lifter to hydraulic lifter cams in the process) and mid year the CJ 428 arrived, which took over the 427s primary duties. The main difference between the 68 Shelby GT500 and GT500KR was switching over form the 428 Police Interceptor to the CJ version. Ford knew that the heavy old design would need replacing and the 429/460 came in to play, a design that is still sold through Ford Motorsport today. Similar to early FEs, the 429s really got their start in Lincoln and luxury applications before Ford waved their performance wand at them. So, with only 2 cubic inches separating the 427-428-429 engines, they all served a purpose for a time, and all made perfect sense at that time.

Mustang interiors are very stylish, much better than much of the competition in 1969. Unfortunately, that stylishness eliminated a lot of traditional gauge mounting points. Thsi ashtray is about the only good spot, especially on a car with air. The steering column tachs are even worse on these cars.

Scat ProCar seats seem to be a popular choice at shows. I have a set and they are great. Kind of a period look with modern comfort. I just don't like the look of the modern Sparco type of race car seat in a vintage interior. Gutted interiors with roll cages, etc, they look great, but if you are combining racing style seats with plush interiors with ashtrays and such, it's like wearing a black tuxedo with brown shoes.

Weather this week is not very cooperative, but I will try and get another pic. As you can tell, a good portion of my top is gone.