Re: [Classic Mustang] 1967 v8 swap?

Simon wrote:
> Ray Davison wrote:
>> Even keeping it rather original I would never spend the energy trying to
>> improve a 289. Ford already did it. It's called a 351W and is almost a
>> bolt-in. And the 302 gives you lots of choices while still using stock
>> parts. And that 9 inch rear end was a bolt-in.
>
> Point is you can say that any engine of smaller displacement is less
> worth the time energy and money because there's always something larger
> you can start out with.

My comments had nothing to do with displacement, just general
improvement. The 289 was OK in 65. Today there are better starting
points. And I assumed the the goal was to keep it relativity simple.
Both the 302 and 351 are easy to install in an early Mustang. Big
blocks are not.

Ray

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/classicmustang/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/classicmustang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:classicmustang-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:classicmustang-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
classicmustang-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/