200cui in my 66 Mustang

[addo]

Sorry, you are correct!

I am typing with odd fingers at present because of minor injuries to three "usual" fingertips. Just would have hit the wrong keys.

1969 is one of those "magic numbers". Look at the relative values for similar stuff from 1969 and 70; often the earlier one is worth more. Swansong of the '60s, year of Woodstock etc etc. It is and will continue to rub off on unrelated things - like a '69 Mustang 250...

By potential I mean as a performance item particularly but also in that motor's residual value.

 

[Anonymous]

I actually picked the engines up to find a good engine to build on.

I'm waiting for mike getting the alu heads done - but most things from mike is for the 200 right?

Would it be better to find a 200 cui ?

By the way, thanks for helping me here .

I wanna get you right, your point is that the 69/70 engines and stuff from that time is getting more and more worth because of the small amount of the stuff around the world? (right?)

 

[addo]

It's not so much rarity as people getting emotionally attached to a particular year. A 1969 Fender Stratocaster is worth more than one from 1970. They're both equally badly made in similar numbers! What is the justification in charging more for one? Emotion. Same for the '69 250.

I tend to suggest the 250 over the 200 as it uses some parts that interchange with 289/302 like bellhousings and clutches. Means cheaper bits to buy. For an aftermarket cylinder head that will cost the same no matter whether you put it onto a 200 or 250 - why not maximise the benefit of your expense?

Yes, there are some installation issues that you will have to negotiate. However, they're readily resolved. We get a little pampered expecting everything to come out a box and just fit right on. A competent machinist and engineering firm will easily see what's required and resolve these issues.

Cheers, Adam.

 

[Anonymous]

If the 250 interchange with 289/302 it must be a good idea to choose that engine.

I'm waiting for my inline handbook to come - perhaps i can get a better idea about what to do with the engine.

Could be great to know more about what parts from the 289/302 that fits the 250..

Thanks,
Daniel

 

[Anonymous]

i dont think any of the parts interchange......except in transmission/drivetrain

 

[addo]

Yes, that's what I meant. Bellhousings and clutches, specifically.

 

[Anonymous]

1970 cougar XR7 351c

I can get one of these cars (cheap) with 9" rear axle and disc brakes - would it fit my 66 mustang ?

 

[addo]

The axle would be a little bit too wide for original wheel offset. You either need to narrow it, or use modern wheels that have greater offset.

The 351C would not fit without modification to the engine bay.

 

[Anonymous]

Okey, the engine is already sold - so i'm just wondering about taking the rear axle and the disc brakes.

I won't trade my 6-banger away for an v8

 

[addo]

It will depend how rare these are. The correct width part from Currie is under USD$1000 but without gears.

Rear axles are easy enough to narrow. It may be expensive in Denmark, depending on how the workshops charge. It seems this operation is carried out mostly in countries other than the US (places where supply of an exact fitting item is less common).

There are stories about earlier diffs with the disc brakes, having a tendancy for weakness after renewing wheel bearings. However, this has not resulted in axle breakage for anyone I know (maybe an out-of-date rumour).

Regards, Adam.