WHAT IS IT WORTH
5th Gear Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,266
From: Australia
RE: WHAT IS IT WORTH
ORIGINAL: Bulldog66
[sm=WTFsgign.gif]
[sm=WTFsgign.gif]
390 was never an option, never used in the GT 350, any year.
Sure as hell wouldnt fit in a 66 engine bay without some major mods
3rd Gear Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 537
From:
RE: WHAT IS IT WORTH
ORIGINAL: Aussie66Fastback
it would appear to me that the car pics and the engine bay are not of the same vehicle.
390 was never an option, never used in the GT 350, any year.
Sure as hell wouldnt fit in a 66 engine bay without some major mods
ORIGINAL: Bulldog66
[sm=WTFsgign.gif]
[sm=WTFsgign.gif]
390 was never an option, never used in the GT 350, any year.
Sure as hell wouldnt fit in a 66 engine bay without some major mods
Thread Starter
1st Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 64
From:
RE: WHAT IS IT WORTH
Okay my bad there was a mistake on my part I went out there and talked to Bobby the one that installed all the engine and powertrain work. This is what it has: The 390 ci motor from a 1967 mustang tag code is 390 C 67 1
7-A 310 J
The transmission codeis RUG-M2 Ford Toploader Transmission.
7-A 310 J
The transmission codeis RUG-M2 Ford Toploader Transmission.
4th Gear Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,494
From:
RE: WHAT IS IT WORTH
Hey, anything is possible! Heck, my 67 coupe was originally a 69 Boss429 Fastback with the factoryJamesBond machine-gun-in-the-head-lights option! Lemme tell ya, that made the quad turbo setup a reallllllllly tight squeeze....
