lanky

A bad paint situation cannot really be covered up with a wrap, the imperfections show through.

^This. Time to change wheels.

I have to give a quick shout out to Forever Sharp steering wheels. I bought one a while ago and I really like it, especially since the horn works! Few know about them but they have good reviews.

I officially swore off ever using a Grant wheel again after battling to get the horns to work right. I now use a forever sharp steering wheel and really like it, horn is fully functional and has given me no problems yet.

My sending unit goes from full to 3/4 super quickly, then from 3/4 to about 1/4 takes disproportionately more miles, then from about 1/4 down I never risk it and fill up as soon as it's around 1/8 tank. Original sending unit has never given me problems surprisingly.

Forgot to add that when I had the two boxes side by side you see how much bigger the borgeson was...considerably!

I also converted over to the manual link setup. And yes I could visually tell that the box was longer by comparing it to the frame rail in that area. Apparently a little is a lot w/respect to this.

@1969 Mach 1: I am very curious now! I only wish I had a length measurement too so I can compare with my 16:1 box. BTW the saginaw pumps (if thats what you're using) work great at idle, but for me when cruising or going fast the steering is way too light. There are valve kits offered to tune the assist down and eventually I will get to that.

My Mach: I just realized that I may not have posted everything on this forum yet oops... Let me know if you want me to PM you some links but I'll summarize here. I am running 6.7 degrees of caster. They based the 16:1 boxes from some Isuzu or Toyota or something and I am sure they weren't setup with more than 7 degrees of caster. There is terrible on-center numbness caused by this bind, which is what causes the car to wander like you have read from other peoples experiences. The bind I speak of is because of the following for those people interested. The borgeson, although in line with the steering column like it should be, puts the center link in a lower position than the factory box does. This is because of the box being longer so they mounted it so that it would bolt on which it does. This wouldn't be a problem if the idler arm had a joint at the connection with the center link but its just a pivot point. The hole in the center link for the idler to go through is at a different angle than the idler is set up for from the factory. It works, but the junction is such that smooth movement is only happening with the wheel turned more than about 1/2 turn or so. Once the wheel is turned this much the angle of the idler arm better matches the center link and the steering feel is there/fine. 1969 Mach: I would love pictures of the new box, as many as possible please! I am wondering if they started with an entirely new case etc. If the problem I speak of above was fixed via design that would sure make a huge difference for how the car drives. I have fantasized some way of creating or modifying an idler arm with some kind of ball joint type thing or just one with correct geometry with a Borgeson...

Just so you know the lost turning radius is significantly more than the drop bracket does with stock P/S. My opinion on this subject is the following: If the stock system could have a better ratio gear box, that is how I would have done mine (even in hindsight). I have a Borgeson 16:1 and its ok, but a design flaw creates bind between the center link and idler arm at the center of steering. This makes the car not return to center well and creates numbness in terms of steering feel which I hate. I have other posts you can read with more details if you're interested. I have heard the newer 14:1 boxes are a different design but to me that has not been seen/verified. My stock leaky system had better feel and way better return than my Borgeson does. Caster band aids this issue but doesn't fix it contrary to what some say. For a rack, IMHO its not worth it unless you really spend a lot for something top end like the TCP setup, the RRS setup (my personal favorite) or the like. They all have their drawbacks, either with install, fitment, design etc.

Lately I have been looking at Hooker Maximum Flow mufflers. Of the straight through variety of mufflers, they are the quietest/most drone free from what I have read. Its a straight through design too. I think they sound awesome and I will probably go with them when I do my exhaust.

PMed

I saw that video and was really suprised at the results...I certainly still wouldn't want to do that, but I can't lie if I bought a set of coated headers I probably would do it if I had to.

I have assumed anyone running high port heads would need custom 1 3/4" headers made. When I look at my car it's hard to imagine stock headers working...interested in responses on this one...

I thought they always put them under the seat? That's where mine was.

When I did my outer tower braces, I too had a mobile welder come out. He did an extraordinary job with the welding, but the prep work was all me. He even gave me a discount because when people usually say prep work done he finds that it is not, but it my case it was.

You can do what I did and put the outer braces on the outside of the shock tower. Yea yea I know its not the same as the ones on the inside, but it's got to be better than nothing, it's not hard to do the prep work, and you don't have to remove the engine! I agree about having a nice shock tower brace and monte bar...

As someone that has been looking for 164t parts, I am finding much more options for the 157t setup. Either will work, I just wanted to maximize clutch size. Boss 302's ran 164t but that may have been because twin disc setups weren't around yet. I'm going aluminum for my flywheel, and my car is mainly street. The 164t in aluminum is still like 7 or 8lbs heavier than the 157t aluminum so I figure it's a decent compromise for a street machine that sees track time. I fell in love driving a friends car with an aluminum flywheel , and since I am planning my toploader swap I figured I might as well. Anyone got a 164t manual block plate lying around?

Not to hijack here, but what's with the red fasteners Ford used in certain places? Is it anticorrosive coating or something? Seen them a few places...

Like a few have said you are definitely running the incorrect temperature thermostat. I bet without the AC on this would make your car's running temperature be even better, however I also tend to think with 10.5 compression and AC that your radiator isn't up to task.

For the record I have posted why the return to center issue exists if you're wondering. To be honest I hate the steering feel because of this with my borgeson box, and it definitely makes me wonder if an EPAS system with the factory box (+ lots of caster like I have) would work better. I am pretty anti-rack for old mustangs and just wish the borgeson/others were designed with the proper geometry in mind. I have been tossing ideas around in my head for how to modify the idler arm to take into account the change in geometry because I think this would help tremendously...

I did have to trim the column outer tube because the rag joint was rubbing. NOT MY PIC

I have a set of kyb gas a just front shocks off my 1969 mustang with less than 1000 miles on them. Perfect working condition. Best offer

And how does one ensure that the transmission is in line with the differential?

I really like my wheel I purchased from forever sharp steering wheels. The horn actually works unlike Grant (never buying another ever). Check em out