the difference between 68 and 68 gt
- Thread starter PsyCHoXXX
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
65ShelbyClone
Founding Member
There's this little button in the bar in the upper part of your screen that says User CP.......FAQ......Members List.......etc. Third from the right it says "Search". You'll find at least one answer there.
CochinoFilipino
Founding Member
65ShelbyClone said:
I hit the search button and a window popped up. But i didn't see any answers to the question.
But really, what search criteria would you suggest? I need to hone my search skills. 68 GT = no results, 68GT = no results, 68 Clone and 68 replica come back with Shelby info.
LMan
Founding Member
I tried over a dozen searches just now and found nothing. Perhaps it is broken? Biggest problem with the search function is that the term "GT" is too short and not allowed as a querey.
Anyhow, the GT equipment package consisted of a few doo-dads (fog lights special wheels), and some graphics (badges/stripes), that's about it. Usually they were ordered with upgraded drivetrain/brake/suspension packages but these were not required.
I don't think 600rwhp is a good idea in a stock bodied classic hardtop, IMO not even SFCs and a rollbar are enough to take that for long. I'm a little worried about my 67 vert having 410fwhp and I have SFCs and a 4-point welded in. If you want that kind of power you should be looking into a 10-point or better. I say if you are thinking along those lines go get a full race tube-chassis and put a fiberglass body on it.
Anyhow, the GT equipment package consisted of a few doo-dads (fog lights special wheels), and some graphics (badges/stripes), that's about it. Usually they were ordered with upgraded drivetrain/brake/suspension packages but these were not required.
I don't think 600rwhp is a good idea in a stock bodied classic hardtop, IMO not even SFCs and a rollbar are enough to take that for long. I'm a little worried about my 67 vert having 410fwhp and I have SFCs and a 4-point welded in. If you want that kind of power you should be looking into a 10-point or better. I say if you are thinking along those lines go get a full race tube-chassis and put a fiberglass body on it.
chepsk8
Founding Member
In terms of the "GT" difference, no basic structural differences, as the 67-68 GT package was mostly cosmetic, such things as fog lights, stripes, etc. It was when combined with the better suspension, brakes, and engine options did the cars run better.
That's alot of HP for these cars, but do-able. As the posts above all say, that much HP will require a serious chassis, suspension, and tires, and your car will twist. My old 428 SCJ DP Mach had some permanent twist, and that was only with 428's and years of pounding.
I would recommend a re-think, less HP, and a chassis that works.
That's alot of HP for these cars, but do-able. As the posts above all say, that much HP will require a serious chassis, suspension, and tires, and your car will twist. My old 428 SCJ DP Mach had some permanent twist, and that was only with 428's and years of pounding.
I would recommend a re-think, less HP, and a chassis that works.
MadonnaRioRedGT
New Member
So...
The GT package was only cosmetic and did not necessarily mean that the car was running a 390?
- Brian
The GT package was only cosmetic and did not necessarily mean that the car was running a 390?
- Brian
CochinoFilipino
Founding Member
chepsk8
Founding Member
Only the Cougars got the 427's.
You could also order the Competition suspension, disc brakes, and other options to make it quite a tourer. That's why the 390 GT's with all the options are big $$ cars, no one spent the money when ordering!
You could also order the Competition suspension, disc brakes, and other options to make it quite a tourer. That's why the 390 GT's with all the options are big $$ cars, no one spent the money when ordering!
CochinoFilipino
Founding Member
Chepsk8, Three books in my office mention a 390hp 427 (W-code).
A yahoo search on '1968 mustang 427' yields many results.
ex. http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/timeline/67-68/68/
A yahoo search on '1968 mustang 427' yields many results.
ex. http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/timeline/67-68/68/
chepsk8
Founding Member
Could well be!
I may be mistaken, but do remember seeing the "W" option, but have never seen one in reality.
thanks for keeping an eye on me!
I may be mistaken, but do remember seeing the "W" option, but have never seen one in reality.
thanks for keeping an eye on me!
krash kendall
Active Member
5.0StangRacer
New Member
CochinoFilipino
Founding Member
KK, Very cool info on the W-code.
Chepsk8, notice that I did not say you were wrong. Only that i had reference to it. I feel like writing the authors of those books,,,
Chepsk8, notice that I did not say you were wrong. Only that i had reference to it. I feel like writing the authors of those books,,,
chepsk8
Founding Member
Cochino,,
No problem at all. I was complimenting you for your accuracy. Good to know my old, feeble brain still works on occasion!
No problem at all. I was complimenting you for your accuracy. Good to know my old, feeble brain still works on occasion!
Lord knows I've written down a few debatable tid-bits over the years, we gotta try to keep each other in line and corrected. Primary example that is not a direct hijack of this thread is that for ~20 years the "official" word was that the 65-67 C-code was not eleigible for the GT/GTA packages, but since about the year 2000 I keep hearing they were. Not very common since the upgrade from a C to an A was less than $100, but a C-code GT is not necessarily incorrect.
I want to back off from one statement, the GT package was not ENTIRELY cosmetic, for axample you had to have a V8 and you had to have a 4-speed manual or the C4/C6. It may well be that the latter is similar to the C/A discussion, nobody ordered the GT package and put a 3-speed manual in them but I've never seen a "real" GT with the 3-speed manual in it.
Since the GT package was a separate option package I'd say there were 428s in SOME 68 GTs. Although when the CJs came out mid model year and swept the Winternationals they were selling the CobraJet package fairly easily.
I love those FE's, a buddy of mine has one and just yesterday was complaining about the lack of an active aftermarket industry for them...sigh...all good things eventually end I guess.
I want to back off from one statement, the GT package was not ENTIRELY cosmetic, for axample you had to have a V8 and you had to have a 4-speed manual or the C4/C6. It may well be that the latter is similar to the C/A discussion, nobody ordered the GT package and put a 3-speed manual in them but I've never seen a "real" GT with the 3-speed manual in it.
Since the GT package was a separate option package I'd say there were 428s in SOME 68 GTs. Although when the CJs came out mid model year and swept the Winternationals they were selling the CobraJet package fairly easily.
I love those FE's, a buddy of mine has one and just yesterday was complaining about the lack of an active aftermarket industry for them...sigh...all good things eventually end I guess.
LMan
Founding Member
MadonnaRioRedGT
New Member
CochinoFilipino
Founding Member
The same crap book that references a w-code says a GT had to have a 4-barrel V8. And in 68 the 289 was only available as a 2-barrel. So the answer is, no (if that crap book is correct).
That book would be Illustrated's Mustang Buyers Guide, Second Edition, BTW.
That book would be Illustrated's Mustang Buyers Guide, Second Edition, BTW.
