Jump to content

AMT '67 Mustang Fastback-Stance Corrections-08/25


Recommended Posts

Yes it is true that I've got another Maverick (Hubert Platt's car) build in the works but I just couldn't help myself when I saw AMT/ Round 2 come out with their newest re-pop of an old fave of mine. After this whole 262 build I've just about made my mind up that the next kit I'll be taking on will be the latest release of AMT's '67 Mustang by Round 2. The kit has alot going for it in the fact that there's updated decals, cleaner molds and pad printed tires.

 

spacer.png

 

and I managed to pick up a small PE fret for it as well. 

 

spacer.png

 

I've been wanting to build one of these anyhow since I owned 3 different '67's . My last one was my favorite as it had a 351W with a 4spd and 3.55 gears and it just so happened to be the same Acapulco Blue that the fastback on the box top is. Fun car and I had a LOT of fun driving it through the years. I still love the look of the wider rear tires and the much smaller ones but I'll be building this kit using the stock wheels and tires.

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

 

This is the only picture I can find of the engine as of right now and this is in car #2. A 351W from a '69 Mach 1 with 4 barrel heads, Comp Cams 280H cam, MSD Unilite Ignition and a Holley 650 Double Pumper. It also had 11:1 compression. Note to everybody out there that knows anything about cars. NEVER do that on the street. You're guaranteed to be plagued with detonation problems unless you run HIGH octane fuel all the time. (98 or better). This engine did make this car haul like a scaled assed ape though.  

spacer.png

Edited by mustang1989
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your warning is valid to a point but things can be tried. I ran easily on 93 octane pump at 10.85:1 with 38 degrees total advance. Backing off 2 degrees gave a comfortable cushion but the response was slightly soft. On leaded 110 octane race gas, I could run 40 degrees but best ET's were at 38. Aluminum heads were a great help to pushing the advance/octane envelope.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Codger said:

Your warning is valid to a point but things can be tried. I ran easily on 93 octane pump at 10.85:1 with 38 degrees total advance. Backing off 2 degrees gave a comfortable cushion but the response was slightly soft. On leaded 110 octane race gas, I could run 40 degrees but best ET's were at 38. Aluminum heads were a great help to pushing the advance/octane envelope.

 

Definitely hear what you're saying about aluminum heads Codger. I'm in a similar situation now with my truck. I've got a set of Vortec iron heads on it (which is the BEST production ever put out by Chevrolet) but wanted a set of E-Tec or AFR aluminum heads for it. Those my good friend.......go for around $1700 for the pair. Way too much for me to dole out right now so I'm building power to 5200 rpm with the Vortecs which aint gonna be bad considering they'll be going on a small block 406. 525 + ft lbs of torque outta get that truck of mine hauling. lol

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well.....the stance was just what I expected. I have a spare AMT GT-350 in the stash so I cut the necessary sprues from the trees and mocked everything up just to check. Man.....there's gonna need to be some fancy footwork to straighten this out if I'm going to get this thing to look like 1.) the box top (which is severely misleading if a builder thinks that this kit will build up just like the picture) and 2.) look like I want it to look personally. 

 

On a couple of other notes.....

 

1.) Pay attention to the attachment wheel retainers (that I have marked "R" for rear and "F" for front. They are different sizes meaning the rear retainer has a larger hole for the axle then the front does for the spindle.

 

2.) The box top shows Firestone Wide Oval Tires and the kit has these Super Sports instead. Not a game changer but hey.....put what's ON the box IN the box. C'mon!!! Same goes for the stance. Just sayin' spacer.png

 

The OOB stance:

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, mustang1989 said:

 

Definitely hear what you're saying about aluminum heads Codger. I'm in a similar situation now with my truck. I've got a set of Vortec iron heads on it (which is the BEST production ever put out by Chevrolet) but wanted a set of E-Tec or AFR aluminum heads for it. Those my good friend.......go for around $1700 for the pair. Way too much for me to dole out right now so I'm building power to 5200 rpm with the Vortecs which aint gonna be bad considering they'll be going on a small block 406. 525 + ft lbs of torque outta get that truck of mine hauling. lol

 

 

Stock Vortec's an excellent choice for budget power. For a 406, bowl porting is even better. If yours have (or can afford mod) screw-in rocker studs, consider a hydraulic roller cam swap (around a 113 LSA for torque) and 1:6 rockers. Should be cheaper than that $1700 head change. Obviously you have dyno access.

 

Virtually all kit models get ride height wrong. Judging by Dyno's Maverick, you know how to make this one right. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Codger said:

Stock Vortec's an excellent choice for budget power. For a 406, bowl porting is even better. If yours have (or can afford mod) screw-in rocker studs, consider a hydraulic roller cam swap (around a 113 LSA for torque) and 1:6 rockers. Should be cheaper than that $1700 head change. Obviously you have dyno access.

 

Virtually all kit models get ride height wrong. Judging by Dyno's Maverick, you know how to make this one right. B)

 Thanks for the feedback bro. You're right about that alright and I've already got the bowl porting complete and screw in studs are already done and the roller conversion is a MUST. Going with a Howards cam. 108 LSA with .495/ .500 lift and some 1.6 roller rockers are already in the picture.  New lift after 1.6 will be .528/ .533" and that's about as far as you can push a Vortec head. 

 

Thanks for the vote of confidence on the ride height as well. If you'll remember I used this same chassis on that build. lol 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a caution, 108 LSA may not help your torque for truck application. I had .613/.633 at 108 but in 2600 pound Cobra...:nono:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Codger said:

Just a caution, 108 LSA may not help your torque for truck application. I had .613/.633 at 108 but in 2600 pound Cobra...:nono:

 

Yikes!!! Believe it or not the ol' truck only clocks in at 3800 lbs. That sounds heavy but when you factor in that its an extended cab truck it aint bad....especially when most cars these days are clocking in at well over that figure. lol 

 

btw....those stupid Hankooks got traded out for Some BFG Radial T/A's a few months back.

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Codger said:

Forgot to mention that Vortecs can tolerate up around .050 cut if you can tolerate more compression..

 

That right there is a true statement for sure. I may be able to go in the 9.5-9.8 range.  With 400 SBC/ Vortec combo you've gotta be careful with the compression. Vortecs are 64cc heads and with flat top pistons you're sporting 11.8:1 compression. NOT ideal for the street. With a -28cc dished piston it takes 'er down to a streetable 9.1 ish:1 compression ratio. 

4 minutes ago, Codger said:

Sorry - you can't be a 'Mr Mustang' with a Bowtie truck that nice...:nono:

 

LOLOLOLOLOL!!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Codger said:

Sorry - you can't be a 'Mr Mustang' with a Bowtie truck that nice...:nono:

 

Oh yeah.....I've owned four Mustangs over the years and only one Chevy.....I'm still a "Mr. Mustang" . spacer.png

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Haven't posted anything on this build here as I forgot I had a build thread out in the open for this. I've been posting all of my progress on the Mustang GB thread so I apologize for not posting here. Any hoo.....here we go....

 

Made some changes to get the stance where I wanted it. The front got some re-positioning of the front spindles, a little sanding here and a little drilling there. All the rear springs needed was a slight re-arching. Now it's starting to look more like I want it to with a slight forward rake.
 

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • mustang1989 changed the title to AMT '67 Mustang Fastback-Stance Corrections-08/25

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...