1968 Not specifically CS related... X codes...

[dalorzo_f]

... anyone know if they came with a 9" rear, or an 8"?

 

[Ruppstang]

9 inch. Marty

 

[CougarCJ]

Yes, 9 inch, and the overwhelming majority of them were code 1 2.75:1.

 

[dalorzo_f]

Makes sense, all other FE's got the 9" and as a "economy" 2v the 2.75 rear fits the intent...

 

[NosAvrenim]

9 inch. Marty

Thanks for the answer! I'd been wondering about that for a while myself.

~Nate

 

[teamlo]

If the X-code car was ordered with the GT option, I believe the axle ratio would be 3.00, as opposed to 2.75 in the non-GT variety. At least this is what I have determined from the Marti reports I have seen.

Terry

 

[Ruppstang]

A -X code could not be a GT in 68 all GTs had to have a 4V engine. Marty

 

[DeadStang]

A -X code could not be a GT in 68 all GTs had to have a 4V engine. Marty

They did make at least one X-code CS with the GT Equipment Group... I'm thinking very seriously about buying it, actually. And as a previous poster notes, it does have the 3.0 standard axle ratio.

 

[obwan93001]

A -X code could not be a GT in 68 all GTs had to have a 4V engine. Marty

I'm curious now, w/the GT equipment package being an available option wouldn't that make a car w/it a GT car or just another car w/the optional GT package? For an X code (390-2v) w/the optional GT package see Barillarospeed's Marti for an example. I've always thought that a "true GT" came w/a 4v engine and was branded a GT to begin with, the optional GT package doesn't include a 4v engine (not sure if a GT badge is included or not), at least I assume it doesn't include a 4v engine seeing Barillarospeed's car, so I'd tend to venture that it isn't really a GT car but just one w/the optional GT package. Anyone that knows different please correct me if I'm wrong. Then you throw in the GT/CS and those not in the know think all CS's are GT cars!

Oscar

 

[dalorzo_f]

Ford '68 brochure says GT "can be added to any Mustang, provided it's equipped with a V-8 engine (except 289)" quite odd... but most references expand this to exclude the C code.

As, I think, the X code was a late addition to the options (as I have heard it came out at about the same time as the 428 as demand for the S code was expected to drop) one could assume as a 2V it could not get it ,simialr to the C code, or as a big block it was an option. I have seen X codes advertised as GT's but am not 100% sure...


As for "w/the GT equipment package being an available option wouldn't that make a car w/it a GT car or just another car w/the optional GT package?" Any car with the GT option is a GT. Nothing else makes it one. The "390GT" engine in '68 confuses the issue as does the GT/CS stripe on the Cal Specials, but not all S codes or Cal Specials were GT's.

 

[Ruppstang]

That is very interesting and the Marti report proves it. I now wonder if a F code 2V 302 could have been eligable for GT status. As said above the only way to be a GT is to have the GT option. Good to know about the X code thanks guys. Marty

 

[teamlo]

The X-code 390 was a late addition to the available powertrains on the '68 Mustang. It was essentially a Cougar engine, added to the Mustang lineup to gauge customer reception (obviously it wasn't all that well received, judging by the low number produced). As a previous poster noted (backed by an example of a Marti report), the GT option was indeed available with the engine, despite references to the contrary (Ford literature released prior to the availability of that engine). Conventional wisdom always held that the car had to have a 4V engine in order to have the GT option, which was in fact true in the BEGINNING of the model year.

From my research, the GT option included a higher numerical axle ratio as well, though there is no specific reference to it in any Ford literature I have seen. If you were to look at Marti reports for 390-4V cars, you would by and large see that the car had a 3.00 ratio on non-GT cars, or 3.25 with the GT option. The same can be seen on X-code cars (2.75 for non-GT vs. 3.00 for GT), as well as cars equipped with the J-code 302 4V (3.00 non-GT vs. 3.25 GT).

Furthermore, C-code (289-2V) cars largely came equipped with a 2.79 axle as standard, whereas the J-code (302-4V) got you the 3.00 axle as standard. On 302-4V cars, the GT option also got you a 9" axle rather than the 8". I guess that is part of what Ford meant when they said the GT came with "heavy duty suspension", in addition to heavier leafs, coils, shocks and sway bar.

To complicate matters, I owned a '68 GT coupe years ago with the J-code engine and it had a 3.00 axle, which was listed on the Marti report as "Optional Axle Ratio". It would have otherwise had a 3.25 from the factory because of the GT option.

The 68.5 428 CJ cars are another whole issue. Standard 3.50 axle, optional 3.91 or 4.30. All were GT equipped, save for the "135-series" cars which were meant for racing.

 

[teamlo]

That is very interesting and the Marti report proves it. I now wonder if a F code 2V 302 could have been eligable for GT status. As said above the only way to be a GT is to have the GT option. Good to know about the X code thanks guys. Marty

Marty,

Will you be at the Grand National in the DC area? That is where I grew up (Waldorf, MD). Danny Truitt (the show chairman) is my cousin. Would love to get together and have a beer or a soda with you at some point.

Terry

 

[NosAvrenim]

Marty,

Will you be at the Grand National in the DC area? That is where I grew up (Waldorf, MD). Danny Truitt (the show chairman) is my cousin. Would love to get together and have a beer or a soda with you at some point.

Terry

Not to hijack the thread, but I'm just across in the Potomac in VA and am on the fence about going. Any other forum members planning to attend? I'd love to see some of the great cars that I've only read about on this forum. PM me if you plan to go. Would love to meet up while you're in town.

~Nate

 

[teamlo]

Not to hijack the thread, but I'm just across in the Potomac in VA and am on the fence about going. Any other forum members planning to attend? I'd love to see some of the great cars that I've only read about on this forum. PM me if you plan to go. Would love to meet up while you're in town.

~Nate

I talked to the show chairman last evening and they are expecting a great turnout for the Grand National! I'm not sure about CS cars specifically, but they are expecting at least two "135-series" 68.5 Cobra Jets. Having grown up there and still having ties to the area, I know there are a lot of great cars in the area, and it's central east coast location will hopefully bring in cars from all over the eastern seaboard and even further!

Terry

 

[CougarCJ]

The X-code 390 was a late addition to the available powertrains on the '68 Mustang. It was essentially a Cougar engine, added to the Mustang lineup to gauge customer reception (obviously it wasn't all that well received, judging by the low number produced). As a previous poster noted (backed by an example of a Marti report), the GT option was indeed available with the engine, despite references to the contrary (Ford literature released prior to the availability of that engine). Conventional wisdom always held that the car had to have a 4V engine in order to have the GT option, which was in fact true in the BEGINNING of the model year.

From my research, the GT option included a higher numerical axle ratio as well, though there is no specific reference to it in any Ford literature I have seen. If you were to look at Marti reports for 390-4V cars, you would by and large see that the car had a 3.00 ratio on non-GT cars, or 3.25 with the GT option. The same can be seen on X-code cars (2.75 for non-GT vs. 3.00 for GT), as well as cars equipped with the J-code 302 4V (3.00 non-GT vs. 3.25 GT).

Furthermore, C-code (289-2V) cars largely came equipped with a 2.79 axle as standard, whereas the J-code (302-4V) got you the 3.00 axle as standard. On 302-4V cars, the GT option also got you a 9" axle rather than the 8". I guess that is part of what Ford meant when they said the GT came with "heavy duty suspension", in addition to heavier leafs, coils, shocks and sway bar.

To complicate matters, I owned a '68 GT coupe years ago with the J-code engine and it had a 3.00 axle, which was listed on the Marti report as "Optional Axle Ratio". It would have otherwise had a 3.25 from the factory because of the GT option.

The 68.5 428 CJ cars are another whole issue. Standard 3.50 axle, optional 3.91 or 4.30. All were GT equipped, save for the "135-series" cars which were meant for racing.

Great information Teamlo.
Did your J-code GT coupe have air conditioning? A/C typically moved the axle ratios back a notch.

 

[teamlo]

Great information Teamlo.
Did your J-code GT coupe have air conditioning? A/C typically moved the axle ratios back a notch.

No, it was not equipped with A/C. It was an early build GT coupe out of the Metuchen, NJ plant, built as a "Local Promotion" car. Sunlit Gold with black standard interior, black vinyl roof, black pinstripe in addition to the black C-stripe. J-code, C4, PS, PDB, AM radio, deluxe belts, remote LH mirror. I have managed to locate 2 other cars equipped exactly the same way, built on the same day. The 3 cars I know of all went to different dealers in the Metuchen, NJ area. I'm not sure why it was ordered with the 3.00 axle, but it is clearly listed on the Marti report as "Optional Axle Ratio".

 

[Ruppstang]

Marty,

Will you be at the Grand National in the DC area? That is where I grew up (Waldorf, MD). Danny Truitt (the show chairman) is my cousin. Would love to get together and have a beer or a soda with you at some point.

Terry

We will be there, my wife Tari is the MCA national show secretary. I will be judging and helping her in the tally room. I would like to meet you too. We are planning to fly so I won't have a car to worry about. I should have time for that soda. Marty

 

[obwan93001]

That is great info teamlo! I now remember the X code being a Cougar engine and until reading about Barillarospeed's car didn't know they tried using it in the Mustang too. It's amazing how many little twists, turns and tweaks there were across just the '68 Mustang model line alone. I'm sure most were done in hopes of selling more cars, then there were the things done for racing and/or racing inspired then some to satisfiy an exec's or engineer's personal take on something perhaps. Makes me wonder how many cool things were done in other years and w/other models. Thanks teamlo!

Judge Marty,

Question for you. When evidence of a previously unknown and forgotten rare option or model type resurfaces how are MCA judge's rules updated to reflect them? Or do they even go into that much detail? Or are all options ever available already documented?

Thanks

Oscar

 

[Ruppstang]

That is great info teamlo! I now remember the X code being a Cougar engine and until reading about Barillarospeed's car didn't know they tried using it in the Mustang too. It's amazing how many little twists, turns and tweaks there were across just the '68 Mustang model line alone. I'm sure most were done in hopes of selling more cars, then there were the things done for racing and/or racing inspired then some to satisfiy an exec's or engineer's personal take on something perhaps. Makes me wonder how many cool things were done in other years and w/other models. Thanks teamlo!

Judge Marty,

Question for you. When evidence of a previously unknown and forgotten rare option or model type resurfaces how are MCA judge's rules updated to reflect them? Or do they even go into that much detail? Or are all options ever available already documented?

Thanks

Oscar

Good question Oscar,
We have a judges meeting in the fall of each year where there is a discussion about rule changes and additions. Not every small detail is in the rules or as you can imagine they would fill volumes. When we judge a concours car the judge sheet is 12 pages totaling 700 points but that does not even begin to cover all the small details of each model year. On the judging sheet at the end of each section there is a place called (POINT DEDUCTIONS for items not proper or original and not previously deducted). In that section certified and gold card judges use their knowledge to fine tune the small points. I wish there was a data base that covered every detail. I guess we are lucky to have the MCA rules and Marti Auto Works for now.There is a site called concours mustang forum where alot of the judges hang out. It is a far more technical and less social site than this one but a great place to get questions answered. I really enjoy these discussions as they help me improve my judges knowledge. Marty