1968 Original "X" code california special w/ Tach?

[dalorzo_f]

Poked around a bit and found this on the S code forum site. Looks like it may be S code only.

"All S-Code Mustangs that were built with 4 speed transmissions included the tachometer as standard equipment. It would therefore not be listed as an option on these cars on the Marti reports listed on this site."

If S code only, wondering if it rolled over to the 428's when they came out, or was phased out as a cost cutting...???

 

[Ruppstang]

Thanks for your efforts and research. You understand for the MCA rules there must be some kind of documentation. We meet once a year to make rule changes as more information comes available. Keep looking and let me know if you find anything and I will do the same. One last thing, Ford liked to brag up its package stuff I am suprised I have not run across this before if it is true.

Tim, I am not sure it will ever be complete. But as I said earlier, we work on it all the time. It is a daunting job when you consider the number of years, models and assembly plant differances. Your are correct in your statement that with the right incentive you could order almost anything. We know that and all we ask is when you show a car that has something that is out side of our rules that you bring documentation or other evidence to back it up. That can be a difficult task if you are the 5-6 owner. The Marti reports have been a great help in clearing up a lot of this. This stuff is fun for me I love to solve a good mystery. Marty

 

[dalorzo_f]

I'd think if a pattern int eh Marti's could be shown that all known original '68 4 speed S codes had an 8k tach, nad none of the Marti's showed this as an option then its pretty clear this is the case.

The fact that many S code C6's how the tach as an option aslo supports this theory.

Would be interested in other info, looked at quite a few Marti reports and the above seems to be consistent. But I did not see enough to confrim or refute tha it was S code only, fee small block 4 speeds with enought related pics to see any pattern.

 

[Ruppstang]

I did a little more looking found the statement that the tach was avaible with all V-8s (0-6000) and a (0-8000) on the K code 289.
The only thing I found unique with the 390-428 was that disc brakes were required at additional cost. I'll keep digging.

 

[admin]

I'm not sure what literature you found Marty, but here's a sales brochure also saying the tach was available on any V8 engine. Of course sales literature doesn't always relate perfectly to what actually rolled off the assembly line.

Here's the blurb in case you can't read the attached text:

Tachometer and Reset Odometer (1) Rallying or street driving, here's an option that's sure to bring out the buff in you. The tach pod is located at easy seeing level on the instrument panel, next to the speedometer. The Trip Odometer is built in as part of the speedometer pod. A push button resets the mileage to "0" so you can accurately record the mileage between points. Available with any V-8 engine.​

 

[robert campbell]

The 8k tach should be paired with the 140 MPH speedometer. The 6k tach with the 120 MPH speedo. I have an 8k with the 120 mph in Val's Fastback. Spacing between the numbers is way different and looks a bit funky nassau!

Rob

 

[Midnight Special]

The 8k tach should be paired with the 140 MPH speedometer. The 6k tach with the 120 MPH speedo. I have an 8k with the 120 mph in Val's Fastback. Spacing between the numbers is way different and looks a bit funky nassau!

Rob

...That's somewhat been my point for some time, Rob. Who can say for certain that "funky nassau" wasn't an option when it comes to the entire '60's Mustang line? ....A "secretary's car" that also became a racer (and everything in between) thanks to Iaccoca, Shelby, the factory and ultimately, the dealers with incentives and literature saying "build your own car" as a sales technique to compete with other automakers.

I have been in discussion lately with a gal who swears she rode with her father while delivering a brand new '68 S-code (390) 4-spd GT/CS convertible complete with scoops, scripts, stripes, non-Shelby front end, but with roll bar! Her dad worked at a bay area dealership and the car came from the SJ factory to be special- ordered & configured by the dealer.... Seeming as passionate and knowledgeable as we are, who am I (or anyone) to say this car was a fake? Of course, there was no VIN recollection or Marti-verification, but I also wouldn't want to act as "correct and proper police" in this situation.

I can truly understand Marty's position (MCA) as well, but this is why I'm not a fan of being told what is "absolute" when it comes to this particular marque. 'Not trying to be difficult, rather to broaden the understanding and discussion.....

 

[hookedtrout]

I agree with Tim, lucky for me I have no interest in playing the perfection game. Heck I'd be tickled to get it painted and looking nice and shiney before I pass on, just hasn't hit the top of my priority list yet, maybe someday.

I find it hard to believe that a car could be docked in judging for something that very well could have been on the car when purchased brand new from a legit Ford dealership. Correct and accurate should include anything that could have been done prior to being sold new for the fist time. No way to dispute that the original purchaser didn't buy it that way brand new. What harm could it possibly cause in judging? ;-) OK, forget I asked that!

 

[CougarCJ]

I hate to thread drift this thread to a judging thread, ... but.:wink:

I don't belong to the MCA, and only have experience with the CCOA (Cougar Club of America).

Judging standards on my side of the aisle have been based on how the cars were supposed to have been built at the factory. i.e. information from assembly manuals, and verified unmolested low mileage cars. We have also borrowed from the MCA guidelines where applicable.

I worked in manufacturing for 24 years, and I can tell you that improvising, or substitutions go on more than you would think. I once scrapped a 1970 Cougar 351-2V, that was factory assembled with an N case rear end. All original with 3.00 open gears and 28 splined axles, tag and all dated for the car. It should not have been assembled that way, but somehow it fell through the cracks.

Manufacturing anomalies abound, but where do you draw the line?

In strictly judged shows (at CCOA events), it has been the car's owner that has to show documented proof for claimed 'original equipment' that is inconsistent or unusual. I can't tell you how many times we have had owners of 1969 cars that have original 351 Cleveland engines.

 

[hookedtrout]

I understand, it's like two kids throwing rocks at a bottle in a pond, at first it's all in fun, then it's a competition to see who can hit it first and then one kid grabs a handfull of rocks and throws them and the other kids is mad because he cheated? Or was it that he just thought faster? Rules? We had rules? We must NOW have rules! Or, simply avoid all the hassles and just play without competition. I chose the latter, but I understand the competative types, work with some of them every day and they are great people, without them I'd sink.

 

[csgt428]

Interesting topic. I have an S code 4-speed GT/CS and a Marti... It has the GT option listed, but no tach is listed. It has an 8,000 rpm tach with a 120 mph speedo and trip meter. I bought the car in 1976. I always wondered about the tach....and yes, all the idiot lights work. Why would a big block have an 8k tach? 6k seems more realistic.

 

[Midnight Special]

Interesting topic. I have an S code 4-speed GT/CS and a Marti... It has the GT option listed, but no tach is listed. It has an 8,000 rpm tach with a 120 mph speedo and trip meter. I bought the car in 1976. I always wondered about the tach....and yes, all the idiot lights work. Why would a big block have an 8k tach? 6k seems more realistic.

...Same here... S-code, 4-spd, GT option, 8K tach w/ working idiots (lights;-) non-itemized on the Marti.

Also have S-code, C6, GT option, no tach ...

 

[Ruppstang]

I hate to thread drift this thread to a judging thread, ... but.:wink:

I don't belong to the MCA, and only have experience with the CCOA (Cougar Club of America).

Judging standards on my side of the aisle have been based on how the cars were supposed to have been built at the factory. i.e. information from assembly manuals, and verified unmolested low mileage cars. We have also borrowed from the MCA guidelines where applicable.

I worked in manufacturing for 24 years, and I can tell you that improvising, or substitutions go on more than you would think. I once scrapped a 1970 Cougar 351-2V, that was factory assembled with an N case rear end. All original with 3.00 open gears and 28 splined axles, tag and all dated for the car. It should not have been assembled that way, but somehow it fell through the cracks.

Manufacturing anomalies abound, but where do you draw the line?

In strictly judged shows (at CCOA events), it has been the car's owner that has to show documented proof for claimed 'original equipment' that is inconsistent or unusual. I can't tell you how many times we have had owners of 1969 cars that have original 351 Cleveland engines.

+ 1 well said

 

[Ruppstang]

...Same here... S-code, 4-spd, GT option, 8K tach w/ working idiots (lights;-) non-itemized on the Marti.

Also have S-code, C6, GT option, no tach ...

Seems to be a pattern developing. I hope some one will find some documentation.
As far as the MCA judging we do not require a Marti report so we have no way of knowing if the options are factory or not unless the car has a buck tag that lists options. 68 San Jose cars did not get buck tags.
My thoughts are they are your cars build them/drive them as you wish but do not represent things added as factory. Our HCS had many options added when I got it and I am adding a couple more making them as factory perfect as I can. Because that is how I want it. I like Jon's garage feature because it seperates factory options from those added which will be very helpful in developing correct data. Marty

 

[Karenjackson]

We also have a 390, 4 speed, GT car and a 8K tach/120 speedo, pattern.....

Rob (Brisket man) , it is fun as heck going 120 MPH with the close ratio 4 speed at 8K RPMs. Well, sounds good any way, there would be chunks of my 390 all over the road if I tried to do 8K RPMs with it....

Now I am curious, Marty, what is MCAs rule on 390 cars regarding disc brakes? Did all 390 cars have disc brakes or only the 390 - GT cars?

 

[Ruppstang]

We also have a 390, 4 speed, GT car and a 8K tach/120 speedo, pattern.....

Rob (Brisket man) , it is fun as heck going 120 MPH with the close ratio 4 speed at 8K RPMs. Well, sounds good any way, there would be chunks of my 390 all over the road if I tried to do 8K RPMs with it....

Now I am curious, Marty, what is MCAs rule on 390 cars regarding disc brakes? Did all 390 cars have disc brakes or only the 390 - GT cars?

Thanks for the post. I belive that all 68 390's got disc brakes. Now tha I have said that I suppose someone is going to say theirs does not have disc brakes. Marty

 

[franklinair]

My understanding is that big block cars got disc brakes.

Neil

 

[dalorzo_f]

Nope. Drums were available on big blocks. My '68 S convertible was a Basic Off Standard Order, Ford line filler, and had front drums.

I've heard many who bought them to drag race didn't want the extra weight of discs...

I think the GT package in 67 and 69 included power discs, but they were a separate option in '68. My '68 S GT coupe's Marti has both GT and discs as options...

Non GT big block cars could get drums or discs at the owners discretion, not sure if all discs were all power or not. Think the drums were manual and discs power (at least in 67-69), but not 100% sure.

 

[Ruppstang]

Nope. Drums were available on big blocks. My '68 S convertible was a Basic Off Standard Order, Ford line filler, and had front drums.

I've heard many who bought them to drag race didn't want the extra weight of discs...

I think the GT package in 67 and 69 included power discs, but they were a separate option in '68. My '68 S GT coupe's Marti has both GT and discs as options...

Non GT big block cars could get drums or discs at the owners discretion, not sure if all discs were all power or not. Think the drums were manual and discs power (at least in 67-69), but not 100% sure.

Thanks Dalorzo_f, The Ford lit. says that the disc brakes were required on 390 and 428's but that statement was at the end of the GT equipment section. It get confusing because Ford included power discs on all engines in 67 that ordered the GT option but made it a seprate option in 68 but required it at addational cost on the big block cars. I was not certain about the non GT cars. The collective knowlage here on this stuff is greater than one. That is the reason that the MCA tries to have three man judge teams. Marty

 

[NosAvrenim]

Thanks Dalorzo_f, The Ford lit. says that the disc brakes were required on 390 and 428's but that statement was at the end of the GT equipment section. It get confusing because Ford included power discs on all engines in 67 that ordered the GT option but made it a seprate option in 68 but required it at addational cost on the big block cars.

@Marty
My "X" code has drum brakes all around (if my memory serves me). Is it possible that the 390 "S" codes required the disc brakes and that the lit assumes 390 = "S" or = GT (since the "X"s were such a rarity)?