The Official SAAC Forum
November 20, 2017, 12:09:05 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Login Register Search New Photo Gallery Calendar Contact Chat  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 1967 GT 350 Clutch Fork  (Read 2135 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Shawn
Sr. Member
****
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 476


1807 New in El Paso


« on: February 04, 2016, 06:54:36 AM »

Is the clutch fork for a 67 350 anything special or is it a standard 289 MT piece?

Thanks

Logged
martyjac
SAAC Member
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


Email
« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2016, 09:14:47 AM »

Don't know for sure if Ford catalog is right on this, but it lists C7ZZ7515D for '67 289 special and 390 12" long.The "lopo" fork is C5OZ7515B 9 1/4" long.

Logged
Bob Gaines
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14603


« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2016, 09:19:33 AM »

Don't know for sure if Ford catalog is right on this, but it lists C7ZZ7515D for '67 289 special and 390 12" long.The "lopo" fork is C5OZ7515B 9 1/4" long.
I don't remember this . uh oh  Roll Eyes . I will do some checking. Chug a Lug

Logged

Shelby Car Enthusiast, Collector, Shelby Concours Judge
acman63
SAAC Concours Chairman
Hero Member
*****
*
Online Online

Posts: 6773


Email
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2016, 12:01:23 PM »

I don't remember this . uh oh  Roll Eyes . I will do some checking. Chug a Lug

its called starting into Geezerdom

Logged
Bob Gaines
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14603


« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2016, 12:37:39 PM »

its called starting into Geezerdom
Hysterical

Logged

Shelby Car Enthusiast, Collector, Shelby Concours Judge
1175
Hero Member
*****
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 619


Email
« Reply #5 on: February 04, 2016, 06:54:52 PM »

Good question.  I would like to know the answer to this as well.

Jon

Logged
Shawn
Sr. Member
****
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 476


1807 New in El Paso


« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2016, 04:15:03 PM »

Does anyone have a known original to compare to  standard 289?  Side by side pictures should solve the mystery?

Shawn

Logged
johnsshelby
Hero Member
*****
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 821

oh honey, let me buy it......


Email
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2016, 05:52:22 PM »

Would the answer be in the shape of the ' Z' bar of the Lopo vs the HIPO.

Logged
Bob Gaines
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14603


« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2016, 06:20:57 PM »

Would the answer be in the shape of the ' Z' bar of the Lopo vs the HIPO.
Different geometry would be a reason for a change of fork. With that said the 67/68 hipo z bar and a regular fork seem to be in a straight line which is the same relationship that a regular fork and a standard 289 equalizer bar have. I am not sure if I am missing something or not.I haven't studied this before. Do others have insight that they would like to share?

Logged

Shelby Car Enthusiast, Collector, Shelby Concours Judge
houlis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 95


Email
« Reply #9 on: August 27, 2017, 06:27:11 AM »

Hope it's not too late to continue this thread. Does the 67 Hipo clutch fork have any part or engineering numbers stamped into it, and if so what would they be. Have seen pics of 390 forks with C8 numbers. Thanks. Brian

Logged
houlis
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 95


Email
« Reply #10 on: October 05, 2017, 02:45:47 PM »

Has anyone come to any conclusions as to whether or not the Ford parts catalog is correct in listing the 390 fork for 67 289HP applications? Wonder if the longer length reduces pedal effort. Brian

Logged
Bob Gaines
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14603


« Reply #11 on: October 05, 2017, 07:33:46 PM »

Has anyone come to any conclusions as to whether or not the Ford parts catalog is correct in listing the 390 fork for 67 289HP applications? Wonder if the longer length reduces pedal effort. Brian
Yes. It is supposed to be the 390 one however I have seen the regular fork also. I am not sure what to make of it . It doesn't seem to be a hard and fast rule.

Logged

Shelby Car Enthusiast, Collector, Shelby Concours Judge
BossBill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


Half a rack of Mustangs, Bosses and Shelbys


« Reply #12 on: October 24, 2017, 10:28:13 AM »

Here is a pic of my SJ early Mar GT350 stock clutch fork (next to tape). It's wet due to cleaning in solvent tank just prior to this pic. I assume it's stock as this item came on the car and I don't have any evidence to suggest it's not stock. Bellhousing is correct, flywheel is also. But, not being the original owner, who knows?
As a comparison, below the GT350 fork is a May 65 289 3/4 speed fork.

Neither fork have a part number.

As an aside, I did a clutch R&R many years ago on a GT350 in the 3300's [edit -- 3200s] and remember the odd split on the end of the fork on that car.

[Click on pic to go to my Flicker page. From there click to enlarge]


« Last Edit: October 24, 2017, 01:21:38 PM by BossBill » Logged

Mustangs and Shelbys and Bosses -- oh my.
car 26-JD
Hero Member
*****
*
Online Online

Posts: 3556



« Reply #13 on: October 24, 2017, 11:59:27 AM »

Here is a pic of my SJ early May GT350 stock clutch fork (next to tape). It's wet due to cleaning in solvent tank just prior to this pic. I assume it's stock as this item came on the car and I don't have any evidence to suggest it's not stock. Bellhousing is correct, flywheel is also. But, not being the original owner, who knows?
As a comparison, below the GT350 fork is a May 65 289 3/4 speed fork.

Neither fork have a part number.

As an aside, I did a clutch R&R many years ago on a GT350 in the 3300's and remember the odd split on the end of the fork on that car.

[Click on pic to go to my Flicker page. From there click to enlarge]


Since '67 VIN's didn't go higher than 322X, was it a '68 car or did you mean to type "3200's" ? (Just trying to verify some of the variables)

Logged
BossBill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


Half a rack of Mustangs, Bosses and Shelbys


« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2017, 12:09:04 PM »

Fat fingered it. Damn phone. Stupid Bill. I thought late 3100 or early 3200. I'll have to write an email to verify.



Logged

Mustangs and Shelbys and Bosses -- oh my.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Site Customized by DragonFly Designs StatsPowered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!