So if it hasn't become clear yet by my posts, I'm continually trying to find a suitable path to go with our 66 Mustang.
Right now it has an anemic 78 or 79 200 in it out of a Fairmont.
Per the door vin card it should have a 3 speed manual and 3.2 rear gear.
Whenever they swapped out the original 66 engine, they apparently swapped the manual tranny for a C4 auto.
The engine is tired and in need of Falcon 6 Performance treatment.
Where this is all leading is that, this car is a bit of a beater, and in large part not appropriate for any level of "numbers matching" back to original equipment resto. At least it doesn't feel like that would be a cost effective worthwhile venture. So in my mind that opens it up to building something that is pure fun.
Over the next few years we'll be refurbing rehabbing as we go. I think we've settled on starting with the drivetrain. Over the coming winters we'll move onto the suspension and braking systems.
We want to stay I6. This fall the plan is to pull the head on the 200 and have all the Falcon6 mods done by a local machine shop. Since it has become clear that our 66 is a Mutt, we're not as stuck on sticking with the 200. We have a 1970 250 available to us.
Here's where the questions start.
Real Question 1). 200 or 250 in a 66 Mustang. I've read it's not a bolt in swap. Is the added torque and horsepower from the 250 worth the extra hassle needed to install the 250 in a 66 mustang? Whether 200 or 250 is the choice, we'll be using the D8/9 head from the 200 with either shortblock. More torque equals more fun but is it enough more fun to compensate for the hassle?
Real Question 2). If you had your choice, what transmission yields the most fun hooked up to either a nicely rebuilt 200 or 250? We have a purely functional C4, but we're open to going back to a stick. Or upgrading to a T5 or AOD. I know this is a question of taste, but I'm looking for opinions. Is there a particular pairing that really shines above the rest?
Real Question 3). Is the 3.2 rear gear appropriate for our pure fun equation. If the 3.2 is a definitive weak link we'll look to change it out or upgrade to a stouter diff at this point.
Again I know this is subjective, but I'm looking for the experts advice. If you had your choice what engine(200 or 250), transmission and rear end combination would you put together for yourself in a 66 Mustang.
Thanks,
Harlon
Right now it has an anemic 78 or 79 200 in it out of a Fairmont.
Per the door vin card it should have a 3 speed manual and 3.2 rear gear.
Whenever they swapped out the original 66 engine, they apparently swapped the manual tranny for a C4 auto.
The engine is tired and in need of Falcon 6 Performance treatment.
Where this is all leading is that, this car is a bit of a beater, and in large part not appropriate for any level of "numbers matching" back to original equipment resto. At least it doesn't feel like that would be a cost effective worthwhile venture. So in my mind that opens it up to building something that is pure fun.
Over the next few years we'll be refurbing rehabbing as we go. I think we've settled on starting with the drivetrain. Over the coming winters we'll move onto the suspension and braking systems.
We want to stay I6. This fall the plan is to pull the head on the 200 and have all the Falcon6 mods done by a local machine shop. Since it has become clear that our 66 is a Mutt, we're not as stuck on sticking with the 200. We have a 1970 250 available to us.
Here's where the questions start.
Real Question 1). 200 or 250 in a 66 Mustang. I've read it's not a bolt in swap. Is the added torque and horsepower from the 250 worth the extra hassle needed to install the 250 in a 66 mustang? Whether 200 or 250 is the choice, we'll be using the D8/9 head from the 200 with either shortblock. More torque equals more fun but is it enough more fun to compensate for the hassle?
Real Question 2). If you had your choice, what transmission yields the most fun hooked up to either a nicely rebuilt 200 or 250? We have a purely functional C4, but we're open to going back to a stick. Or upgrading to a T5 or AOD. I know this is a question of taste, but I'm looking for opinions. Is there a particular pairing that really shines above the rest?
Real Question 3). Is the 3.2 rear gear appropriate for our pure fun equation. If the 3.2 is a definitive weak link we'll look to change it out or upgrade to a stouter diff at this point.
Again I know this is subjective, but I'm looking for the experts advice. If you had your choice what engine(200 or 250), transmission and rear end combination would you put together for yourself in a 66 Mustang.
Thanks,
Harlon