120mm

I am in the process of doing an I-6 to V-8 swap in a 1967 convertible, and have found a nice, low mileage 1974 Mercury Comet V8 Sedan at the local junkyard. Looking in various places, it appears as if the Comet rear end is narrower than a 1967 Mustang. 56.5 for the Comet and 59.25 for the Mustang.

How big of a deal killer is this for width? And is there away to extend the width using spacers? And is just a dumb idea?

120mm

Answer to own question. According to CSRP, '71-'77 Mavericks and Comet rear axles bolt right in; however, overall width is just under 3" narrower. This requires either spacers, interesting wheel gyrations and/or tubbing of the wheel wells.

Just so you know.

120mm

Next question, somewhat more involved. I would like opinions on the wisdom of purchasing the entire drivetrain, (302, C4, 8 inch rear), rebuilding it to higher performance specifications (1974 Comets put out a whopping 130 horsepower with their smog-rated 302s) or just piecing together more desirable combinations from junkyard or crate.

I am torn here; I want o/a 300 horsepower in a driveable combination, but an AOD sounds great, frankly.

69mach1377

I guess you could find wheels with backspacing to make up for the narrower rear...

120mm

I'm looking for something with 3" vs. 4.25" backspacing. Wheels with 3" backspacing would make the wheels fit perfectly in the rear, and I'm staying with 14 or 15 inch wheels, so they shouldn't hurt front clearance.