1969_Mach1

I like the exhaust note of Flowmasters but the deep resonating sound can sometimes be too much. I use a 3" in/out Big Block 2 series on my truck and it's quite. I've heard the Super 44's are loud. Funny you mention compression ratio. The guy I use for exhaust asked me what compression ratio I had when discussing how loud different mufflers would be. I'm happy with the Borla mufflers I finally chose. They have a 2.5" inlet/outlet and don't have that deep resonating sound, even with 10.7:1 CR.

I've read the hood mounted tachs were dealer installed. I like them but don't like the idea of drilling in my finished hood. Like many other repro parts, more than likely only one mfg. is reproducing them so you'll get the same thing regardless of where you buy it.

I would think the brackets should follow the glass contour, not sure though. Hopefully somebody else will know. I watched the video from West Coast Classic Cougar and on my car all the original glue had to removed from the channels. What I did to center the glass in the channels was insert two 1-inch wide thin pieces of rubber in each channel in a U-shape so that the glass would be centered and snug in the channel. The remainder of the regluing was the same. My channels follow the glass contours.

JXL, it may also be the Flowmaster mufflers causing the deep interior noise at idle. That's a common characteristic of many of the Flowmaster mufflers. I know the original 40 series are bad in that respect. The 50 series are a little better. The 70 series, which is too big for these cars almost sounds stock. To help reduce that deep resonating interior noise Flowmaster has offered for many years the Delta Flow version of most of their mufflers, including the 40 and 50 series. Lastly, large diameter exhaust tips that some people like also increase exhaust noise.

Nice. That will make life easier. I wish I had a shop big enough for one. In California most everybody gets a 2 car garage and a postage stamp sized yard.

Also, is your FMX acting up? Are you looking for a trans that is built up to tolerate high horse power? In stock form, up through 1997 when the 351W stopped being used, a larger automatic trans was always coupled with the 351W. I conclude, in stock form, the C4, AOD, and 4R70 are not suited for the 351W. This is my opinion, and I know others will disagree. To the best of my knowledge the 351W was coupled with an FMX, C6, or later E4OD.

I haven't used a coil over setup on these older Mustangs. But from your picture my initial thought regards the upper mount. I question applying all the suspension vertical loads to those upper little rubber shock type grommets. I would think they might squish like a pancake.

Nice 304 Stainless Steel exhaust BuckeyeDemon. I see the grey color inside the tail pipes, what type of fuel are you running? I cannot find any shops in my area that will work with 300 series Stainless Steels, only the 400 series stuff and then they want a fortune for the material.

Thats right Max Power. In 1970 on 351W motors they went to a water pump with a drivers side inlet and used different brackets for the alt and P/S. Completely different setup than 1969 for 351W motors.

The 1969 351W the water pump outlet is on the passenger side. Like others mentioned, you will need brackets for the alternator and P/S pump. You will need the Alt pivot bolt bracket that bolts to the cylinder and the pivot bolt bracket for the P/S pump. The brackets are needed because the pivot bolts on a the taller 351W line up with the cylinder head front freeze plugs. I know the 351W cars came with an FMX and used a 164 tooth flex plate and I believe the 302 with C4 setups had a 157 tooth flywheel. If your 302 flex plate has the correct 28 oz. imbalance it might work since you are reusing the C4. I see rwcstang did it, so I guess it works okay.

I wish I could but I have no way to record a video. Mine are Borla's Pro XS series, 14" long case and 2.5" diameter inlet/outlet. Actually they sound similar to the video clips BuckeyeDemon has posted in this thread only mine are a fair amount quieter. You'd think they would sound similar to the Magnaflow mufflers of similar construction but they don't. I also have a 3" diameter X-pipe which people tell me has an affect on the sound. I don't know because I have always had the X-pipe on it. Like others have posted in this thread, 2.5" tail pipes are about the max that will fit over axles and between the rear leaf springs and fuel tank.

I can't speak for exit location but Borla has high end straight through design mufflers. I had a set with 2.5 inch inlets and outlets installed on my Mach 1. These are 304 Stainless Steel, (not polished) and very well made. I don't have the interior drone with them but I also have my exhaust exit in the stock location for 1969 Mach 1's. I don't know why you don't find Borla mufflers on many muscle cars. In my area of Northern California Borla mufflers are used frequently on late model dirt track stock cars so they are fairly robust.

Was there some type of law suit related to butyl installed windshields? From the professional glass installers I've seen, they don't clean the pinch weld. They simply leave what is there and dress it up with new urethane. That's where I was thinking the time savings was. I'm sure like yourself, there are some that take the time and pride to do a proper installation.

Yeah, going through the NPD catalog will help. If it is a manual trans, there are a lot of clutch differences. The 351 uses an 11 inch clutch, 164 tooth flywheel, larger bell housing, trans front bearing retainer to fit the larger bell housing, different Z-bar, and different linkage rods that attach to the Z-bar. Some people use the 10.5 inch clutch and related parts from a 302, but its not correct. If its an auto, I think barnett468 mentioned the different shifter box and rod for the FMX trans. Originally, they used the FMX with the 351W and the C4 with the 302. Something tells me in stock form, the FMX was more robust than the C4.

I haven't seen a glass shop use butyl. Even on older cars that came with butyl like ours. I would have to think its because the urethane is faster to work with. If you have ever watched glass shops replace windshields that uses urethane they typically don't clean off the old urethane. They simply dress it up with some new urethane and install the new windshield. Then use a rag with solvent to clean up any mess. I'm not saying butyl is better than urethane or visa versa. I think it will come down to your preference. If you have the glass, its easy to install yourself. That's actually my preference. There are few people I trust working on my cars. The rear glass is fairly easy to install as well.

Those were installed to hold the drum on during assembly. Every new Ford or GM car I worked on with brake drums that slipped over a hub or axle had them. Even into the late 1980's. I've purchased them at a Body and Paint supply store. They called them push nuts where I bought them. You can probably even find them at a Napa auto parts store.

RPM, $325 was a good buy. Sometimes you get lucky and the item doesn't have much value to the seller.

I installed a Carlite front windshield. Well, I had a glass shop install it with urethane. Since the original was installed with butyl plus for some unknown reason I didn't like the urethane. Maybe because I didn't like the installer, I don't know. Anyway, I removed it, cleaned off all the urethane, and reinstalled it with butyl. It's been fine. The butyl is not nearly as messy to work with, but can be stiff on a cold day.

You are probably in the ball park. Perogie's lists a used original Nodular Case for $495. So $500 for a complete 28 spline trac-lok carrier in an original Noduler case that may or may not seed some attention is fair.

barnett468, thanks for taking the time to write up the information. After reading through it, it's obvious by design that as pin overlap increases the crankshaft stiffness (or rigidity as we M.E.'s would say) increases. Which apparently Ford engineers consider when designing them. I don't doubt there are instances where a 351W block broke with a forged crank. But for my curious mind, I wonder why. Simply because the crank was forged doesn't make sense. Other factors must come into play. Maybe an issue with not quite the correct balancer. It seems across the board, imported metals are inferior. They may have the same designation and chemical make up but the imported metals always seem either more brittle and fracture or yield (take a permanent deformation) at lower loads then the US counterpart. I worked for a food equipment mfg. for 10 years and occasionally they would purchase imported Stainless Steel. The welders and fabricators always had issues with cracking while forming, poor weld ability, and gauge thicknesses always at the minimum of the range for a particular size.

barnett468, thanks for taking the time to write up the information. After reading through it, it's obvious by design that as pin overlap increases the crankshaft stiffness (or rigidity as we M.E.'s would say) increases. Which apparently Ford engineers consider when designing them. I don't doubt there are instances where a 351W block broke with a forged crank. But for my curious mind, I wonder why. Simply because the crank was forged doesn't make sense. Other factors must come into play. Maybe an issue with not quite the correct balance. It seems across the board, imported metals are inferior. They may have the same designation and chemical make up but the imported metals always seem either more brittle and fracture or yield (take a permanent deformation) at lower loads then the US counterpart. I worked for a food equipment mfg. for 10 years and occasionally they would purchase imported Stainless Steel. The welders and fabricators always had issues with cracking while forming, poor weld ability, and gauge thicknesses always at the minimum of the range for a particular size.

Is it 28 or 31 spline? Does it also have the Daytona pinion housing? What is the condition? Ring and pinion gears still in good condition? They are not too easy to find these days.

I certainly understand you don't want a crank that flexes, at least I don't. Just trying to make sense out of why a stock block will break with a forged crank and not with a cast crank under the same conditions. I tend to believe it happens. But there's some physical condition happening, impulse dampening through flexure, increased vibration transfer of the more dense forged crank. I actually completely forgot and didn't have twist in mind when the idea of flexing was mentioned. But bending that can be from the forces applied to the rod journals by the connecting rods that not in the direction to rotate the crank. It could be many things, I'm not certain.

On one side-of-the-coin that seems reasonable. The more flexible the crankshaft, the more the forces applied to it are dampened by bending of the crank, and fewer are transmitted to the structure, in this case, this engine block. Actually, technically, maybe this is referring to an impulse. Not %100 certain without reopening an old text book but the idea is there. On the other side, anything cast is more brittle than its forged counterpart. So disregarding the block, in theory, a cast crank will break before its forged counterpart.

I see this thread is mainly about building a stroker motor, which I don't have. But my 2 cents are I do agree with the posts stating to not use Hypereutectic pistons. They cannot tolerate much high pressures from detonation or nitrous (if you plan to use it), etc. I've seen the head of a Hypereutectic piston broke off from detonation. Also, if a builder recommends the KB Hypereutectic pistons, be aware those have the top ring land moved closer to the top of the piston. Because of that, you will have to run a much larger ring end gap. I used one set of those KB pistons, and after what seemed like filing thousands of miles off the piston ring's ends to obtain their recommended end gap, I thought never again.