Vintage Mustang Forums banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I ran across a guy with an aluminum intake he claims is for a '68 Shelby GT350. I looked at the numbers and it looks like either C90X or C8OX 9424B - (the second letter is worn and hard to read) does this seem correct for a 302 '68 Shelby??? One more general question, does a '68 GT350 manifold give better performance than a '68 J-code manifold? Thanks!

----------------------------
My car '68 Sunlit Gold J-code vert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
This intake was thru the Shelby parts catalog. It will fit but is not correct for a 68 GT 350. The correct intake should say COBRA and have an S7MS number. Yes the Cobra or Shelby manifold will give better performance and reduce weight.

Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks Chris for the information! Did the '68 GT350 use a carb spacer on its manifold like the J-code manifold? You guys are great!
---------------------

My car: '68 sunlit gold J-code vert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Yes they came with a 3/8" spacer that is no longer offered. The 1" you are currently running is too big. Use a Boss 302 spacer and cut elbow off the PCV tube in the back so it is straight. When the hose is connected, no one will know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,832 Posts
Actually the early 68's did start out with cast iron j code manifolds and Autolite carbs and were later called back to the dealers for refitting of the Cobra manifold. I believe it was because at time of release the Cobra setup was not compliant to the new 68 emmision specs. I know of a car that never went back for the recall and still has the cast iron manifold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks guys! Interesting about the early GT-350 manifolds. If I were to modify my motor like a GT350, I would assume finding a Boss 302 carb spacer is like finding Atantis - therefore could I mill my present J-Code spacer down or is that a bad idea? Thanks again everyone. Your help and knowledge is incredible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
The C9OX-9424-B intake is a Ford "Muscle Parts" piece, available in the late 60's over the counter at Ford. Originally it was designed to be used in conjunction with the (then new) 351 Windsor heads on a 289/302 block. Overall, it’s a good performing intake but definitely not a factory Shelby intake.
Todd.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,832 Posts
A lot of the big block spacers measured .28 thick and there are versions w or w/o pcv nipple on back. They are pretty readily available as repros.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Wow, that is a great link - thanks so much!

---------------------------
My Car: '68 Sunlit Gold J-Code vert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,617 Posts
They come up on eBay all the time.

I bought one last year for $35 from a place called Cutco in Chicago.
 
G

·
That's right, they didn't get through emissions compliance at the beginning of the year.

There are several configurations after they started putting the intakes on. Most all the automatics I've seen kept the 4300 carb. Kinda sad, '68 GT350's aren't really much more than a GT with fiberglass and a few other goodies. Performance-wise, it had to be the weakest Shelby made then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
Kinda sad, '68 GT350's aren't really much more than a GT with fiberglass and a few other goodies. Performance-wise, it had to be the weakest Shelby made then.
Ouch! That hurt! The poor '68's have been saddled with a bum rap! The funny thing is that the magazine test runs back in the day showed the '68 GT350's were actually quicker than the '67 GT350's. This is a little recognized fact. If you don't believe me check it out! As with any car, if they were equipped right they ran good. Mine is a factory 4-speed with a factory 3.89:1 rear gear and runs very strong. Automatics with the Autolite carb might be a different animal. As far as "not being much more than a GT with fiberglass and a few other goodies", you could say that about most 66 through 70's Shelbys also. ::
 
G

·
I've driven both automatics and 4 speed '68 GT350's. With a 3.89 gear it would make it a little better, but you have to admit they leave much to be desired in the performance area. They are great riding, driving and super looking cars though. It's no coincidence that '68 GT350 fastbacks have been at the lower end of Shelby values. Or that a KR convertible is worth 1.5-2 times more than a 350 vert.

Don't take this the wrong way, I think they are great cars, but when compared to the other Shelbys they leave a little to be desired.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top