[Alvin]

The '69 Boss 429 and 302's are the tops in my book. Add Cougar(s) w same drivetrains for a real "Alternative" drive...

[428RA4]

Diego -

Though you bring up many valid points and everyone has a different perspective, I still feel that the styling along with the marketing stance of street machines with performance still outshines by Ford. But then again, it was Carol Shelby who really put the Mustang on the front page of covers. So there is some truth to your comments, but no company operates on an island as they say. I think because Ford was not as big as GM, they had an advantage with getting styling ques released easier then any division of GM is the point I was trying to make. Look what happened to the GTO tripower. Snuffed out in 1966. Ford was still creating dual quads for street cars and sales were running wild.

Just go look at production numbers between Chevy, Pontiac and Ford cars. The math does not lie.

[The Boss]

Originally Posted by Norwood

If your gonna "cheat" that's pretty close to Kate Upton.....

Thanks for that.

[MikeNoun]

Well, Ford definitely tried to target the GTO. They failed, but they at least tried.

[thunderguns71]

Well not to stray too far off topic, but unfortunately Ford left a lot to be desired on the street in the 60's. They had the parts and tools to make things happen, they just chose not to for several different reasons, just pick one.

On the other hand though while they were not out on the street in force, they were all over the world competing. Obviously on the drag strips in America/Canada. Along with Trans-Am, NASCAR, Pikes Peak. The Baja in Mexico. Road racing and hill climbs in Brazil/South America. East African Safari Rally in Africa. LeMans and various other tracks throughout Europe and the UK. Drag racing and Rallies in Australia/ New Zealand. I know there's more, this is just off the top of my head. This all started with their "Total Performance" program in 1960. Then they worked on the "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday." I guess it worked.

So yeah they could have built some of the fastest cars on the street, they had the parts, the experience, and the money, but chose go racing on an International and National level instead.

[428RA4]

I'm not toting Ford as a love lost guys, but the variety in motors was very attractive compared to what GM was producing. In defense of our love for Pontiac, Ford built the ****tiest bodies for automobiles next to AMC.

Feel better?

[thunderguns71]

Originally Posted by 428RA4

I'm not toting Ford as a love lost guys, but the variety in motors was very attractive compared to what GM was producing. In defense of our love for Pontiac, Ford built the ****tiest bodies for automobiles next to AMC.

Feel better?

And Pontiac can thank Ford for that lovely tunnel port head design....lol. Okay no one get defensive now, I'm just bored.

[428RA4]

Nice one~!

We needed another 5 to 7 years of research and development back in the 60's to fix all the issues with the experimentation stage of the automotive industry. Too bad the oil embargo ruined everything.

Blame the Arabs I say....

[Stuckinda60s]

Originally Posted by thunderguns71

And Pontiac can thank Ford for that lovely tunnel port head design....lol. Okay no one get defensive now, I'm just bored.

It's true, I've even read that a Ford Tunnel port manifold will fit. I assume it was modified, but I don't remember the article saying that it was.

I always felt that the many engine designs under the Ford marque was a problem. They would have been better served to have one small block and one big block and then worked with head designs to fit different performance applications.

[Diego]

Originally Posted by 428RA4

Just go look at production numbers between Chevy, Pontiac and Ford cars. The math does not lie.

Not sure which numbers you're talking about, as the GTO regularly outsold the competition until around 1969, when Chevy or Plymouth became the biggest seller of mid-sized muscle.

The only thing Ford had going for it was the Mustang, but it was saddled with the 390 until the 428 CJ came out in April, 1968. Ford didn't sell too many CJ Mustangs; in fact, I believe there were more CJ Shelbys built!

The 429 CJ was introduced in 1970 and it was a good motor - possibly great - but Six Pack Mopars gave them a hard time. Aside of the Torino Cobra with the CJ, the motor was quite rare on a Ford product. Pontiac built more Ram Air cars in 1970 than CJ Torinos.

Sorry, just not buyin' it. Pontiac and Mopar had much better marketing than Ford.

But it's all good.

[Stuckinda60s]

Originally Posted by 428RA4

Nice one~!

We needed another 5 to 7 years of research and development back in the 60's to fix all the issues with the experimentation stage of the automotive industry. Too bad the oil embargo ruined everything.

Blame the Arabs I say....

Actually, it started before that. The insurance companies started it, The EPA piled on and then the Embargo and more EPA restrictions drove the final nail.

[428RA4]

Well Chrysler was kicking everyone's ass in the engine department, but the style and design of their bodies for the most part made me throw up and often.

GM had great body designers and I feel are the best in the business. The motors could of been more wild for a dealership to sell.

And yes -

The Ford Tunnel Port intake is almost identical in port matching to what Pontiac developed because they had Ford engineers for that project.

[hada76]

Originally Posted by 66 Gas Tires Oil

he bought a 429 MACH I. he would take us all sumer to a future Industrial plant cul de sac and burn out and go through the gears. that car sure could haul a$$.
jim

long time ago but IIRC the machs got 351s with 428CJ as optional. the BOSS 429 was actually a GT fastback body. great cars

[thunderguns71]

Well in my experience a Mopar has got to be the worst put together car of the big 3, in the muscle car years. Tough drive trains, stuffed in poorly engineered cars. Especially E bodies. And their electrical systems have made me want to never touch one again.

Back to engines though, I believe the best Ford engine ever made back then, not counting the various 427's, was the Boss 351. Sure put the LT1 in it's place, even with a crappy Autolite 4300 on top. People always rag on a Cleveland for high RPM power, but every one I've driven had plenty down low, even the 4V ones and they just keep pulling. About like my 429 in my Mustang, it gets up and goes, but once you reach around 70mph, it comes on like a freight train and pulls til the valve springs give up.

[Diego]

Standard in the Mach I in 1969 was the 351-2, with the 351-4 (Windsor), 390, and 428 CJ optional.

In 1970, the 351-2 was standard (I think it was still a Windsor, but not sure), while the 351-4 was the new Cleveland. Optional was the 428 CJ.

In 1971, the 302-2 was standard, with the same 351s optional. New was the 429 CJ, which replaced the 428. I believe the 351 CJ was introduced mid-year but can't remember for sure.

The 429 CJ was also available in regular Mustangs, which are much rarer than the Mach versions.

[bluebird455]

I love most classic Stangs, found my sd455 while looking for a boss 351 like my old one. wish to get a 429 scj Torino or mach 1 or a boss 351 in the future. As far as Mopars, I also like them but I can tell you from prior experiences, they were not made with a lot of quality in mind.

[hada76]

Originally Posted by Diego

Standard in the Mach I in 1969 was the 351-2, with the 351-4 (Windsor), 390, and 428 CJ optional.

In 1970, the 351-2 was standard (I think it was still a Windsor, but not sure), while the 351-4 was the new Cleveland. Optional was the 428 CJ.

In 1971, the 302-2 was standard, with the same 351s optional. New was the 429 CJ, which replaced the 428. I believe the 351 CJ was introduced mid-year but can't remember for sure.

The 429 CJ was also available in regular Mustangs, which are much rarer than the Mach versions.

dont remember ever seeing a mach w/ 390, but as i said that was many yrs ago. a friend had a '69 sea mist mach that looked good but had the 351 2v auto and open rear, not fast.

[Diego]

The 390 is actually rarer than the 428.

[R68GTO]

Originally Posted by hada76

dont remember ever seeing a mach w/ 390, but as i said that was many yrs ago. a friend had a '69 sea mist mach that looked good but had the 351 2v auto and open rear, not fast.

A friend of mine is restoring a 69 Mach 1 right now that was an original 390 4 speed car with a shaker hood. I think some people may have ordered the 390 engine over the new 428 just because the 390 was a proven reliable engine. My father in law did that when he ordered a new 67 Impala convertible - ordered it with a 283 instead of the 327. I asked him why...he said the 283 had been a solid engine for 10 years and felt more comfortable with it.

Back on the OP luvin' on the Boss 9 Mustang.....I know a guy that has 4 of those in his barn along with 1/2 dozen Boss 302's, 2 Boss 351's, and a few CJ stangs. He doesn't have a pot to piss in, started gathering these back in the early 1970's. None are restored, some are driver quality, some projects. None have seen the light of day in the last 25-30 years. BTW - he knows what they're worth and he has no desire to sell. He just likes having them around. There will be one helluva feeding frenzy when he dies and the family goes to sell it all off.

[Formulabruce]

Originally Posted by MikeNoun

This car would be at the top of my list.

One of the very few cars (IMO) that rivals the tough look of a 70-73 Trans Am, and it had one of the nastiest engines to ever get stuffed between a pair of American-made fenders...

Only 8,064 original miles on this beast.

http://www.mecum.com/auctions/lot_de...gn=FL0113_S116

Got a friend with one, a 428 under the hood, and it has a QUADRAJET..... from the factory!!
his car may well be a 68, Im not sure