Newbie question, what's the difference between a 68 XR7 GT and the GT-E
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Joined
·
11,000 Posts
Actually some 428CJ Cougars in 1968 were GT's and others like mine were not GT's. The 428CJ engine option included all the GT equipment as part of the package, the only component missing was the badging. To further complicate things a GTE with 428CJ was no different than the other cars with regard to equipment, only the moldings, badges and argent lower body were added.
So there were three possibilities in 1968 for a 428 CJ equipped Cougar:
428CJ engine option only.
428CJ with GT badging.
428CJ with GTE badging.
Any of these three combinations could be had as an XR-7 or standard Cougar so there were six possibilities in that respect.
So there were three possibilities in 1968 for a 428 CJ equipped Cougar:
428CJ engine option only.
428CJ with GT badging.
428CJ with GTE badging.
Any of these three combinations could be had as an XR-7 or standard Cougar so there were six possibilities in that respect.
Joined
·
179 Posts
It has been my understanding that the GT-Es were all (around 300 built) built with the 427, single 4bbl, hydrolic lifter engines. There was some special trim items, like shoulder belts in both the front and rear seats. Legend has it (not too sure how true it is) that the E in GT-E ment Eliminator
Mark
Mark
Joined
·
11,000 Posts
Actually 357 GTE's were built with the 427 - 4V and 37 were built with the 428CJ engine.
There were thus 4 varieties of GTE:
XR-7 with 427
XR-7 with 428CJ
Standard Cougar with 427
Standard Cougar with 428CJ
More info:
http://www.theclassiccougarnetwork.com/gte/
There were thus 4 varieties of GTE:
XR-7 with 427
XR-7 with 428CJ
Standard Cougar with 427
Standard Cougar with 428CJ
More info:
http://www.theclassiccougarnetwork.com/gte/
Joined
·
179 Posts
Hell either way I wouldn't mind having one! Did they put 428s in some as a result of difficultys getting 427s? I always heard that some big block Cobras had 428s cuz even Shelby had problems getting his hands on 427s. Again these are things ya hear over the years, that don't make it fact.
Mark
Mark
Joined
·
11,000 Posts
There is all sorts of confusion caused by scuttlebutt over the years concerning Shelby's, GTE's and 427 / 428CJ availability. Here are some facts:
Shelby didn't get any 427's after 1967 model year. The Cobras assembled that year got 428's after mid year, they were Police Interceptors, not Cobra Jets. The SAAC club has a record of which car got what. Some Cobras remained unsold at the end of 1967 and were in some cases titled as 1968 models when sold.
All the 1968 GT500's received 428PI engines from the factory as verified by Kevin Marti. Rumours of these cars getting 390's are false.
The 427 was installed in GTE's as late as June 1968. There were 427 and 428CJ cars being assembled during several months as a result. Any GTE is rare, those with 428CJ's are extra rare. We don't really know if there was a problem with 427 availability, only what the production statistics were. Remember, 1969 Cougar production started after the July 4th plant shutdown so it appears that 427's were available very late in the game.
Shelby didn't actually have control of the company after mid 1967. Production was under Ford direction for the 1968 model year. Shelby was only allowed to sit in on meetings as a board member which is the reason he quit in 1969. Shelby products were advertised as having the 427 available for 1968 but like all Ford products other than the GTE it never happened that year. A letter was sent to people who ordered Shelby Mustangs to let them know their orders could either be cancelled or filled with the 428CJ as a substitute.
Shelby didn't get any 427's after 1967 model year. The Cobras assembled that year got 428's after mid year, they were Police Interceptors, not Cobra Jets. The SAAC club has a record of which car got what. Some Cobras remained unsold at the end of 1967 and were in some cases titled as 1968 models when sold.
All the 1968 GT500's received 428PI engines from the factory as verified by Kevin Marti. Rumours of these cars getting 390's are false.
The 427 was installed in GTE's as late as June 1968. There were 427 and 428CJ cars being assembled during several months as a result. Any GTE is rare, those with 428CJ's are extra rare. We don't really know if there was a problem with 427 availability, only what the production statistics were. Remember, 1969 Cougar production started after the July 4th plant shutdown so it appears that 427's were available very late in the game.
Shelby didn't actually have control of the company after mid 1967. Production was under Ford direction for the 1968 model year. Shelby was only allowed to sit in on meetings as a board member which is the reason he quit in 1969. Shelby products were advertised as having the 427 available for 1968 but like all Ford products other than the GTE it never happened that year. A letter was sent to people who ordered Shelby Mustangs to let them know their orders could either be cancelled or filled with the 428CJ as a substitute.
GTE's Shelby's and the like
Hey Royce,
You mention that the 68 GT500 got the 428 PI from the factory. I had always thought that the 67 GT500 got the 428 PI and the 68 got the CJ. Was the CJ available only in the KR 500's for 68? The distinction between 428 PI and 428CJ and which cars did and did not get them has always been a gray area to me. I understand that the GTE started with the 427 and then ultimately ended up with the 428CJ. Do you know at what point during the 68 model year the 428CJ became available for the Cougars, and or Mustangs? I would love to hear more of what you know on this subject, and clear up some of the misinformation that is frequently tossed around.
Thanks,
Paul G.
Hey Royce,
You mention that the 68 GT500 got the 428 PI from the factory. I had always thought that the 67 GT500 got the 428 PI and the 68 got the CJ. Was the CJ available only in the KR 500's for 68? The distinction between 428 PI and 428CJ and which cars did and did not get them has always been a gray area to me. I understand that the GTE started with the 427 and then ultimately ended up with the 428CJ. Do you know at what point during the 68 model year the 428CJ became available for the Cougars, and or Mustangs? I would love to hear more of what you know on this subject, and clear up some of the misinformation that is frequently tossed around.
Thanks,
Paul G.
Joined
·
11,000 Posts
Paul,
The 1967 GT500 Shelby received the 428PI motor with dual 4V Holley carbs.
The 1968 GT500 received the same 428PI engine with a single 4V Holley carb. Around November 1967 there were prototype examples of Cougar and Mustang made with the new 428CJ engine, regular production of the 428CJ began in February 1968 for Mustang, Cougar and Shelby.
My 428CJ XR-7 is not a GTE. It is one of 101 1968 XR-7's that was produced with the 428CJ R code Ram Air engine. Most 1968 Cougars with the 428CJ are not GTE's.
The 428CJ became available in Shelby Mustangs around March 1968, those so equipped were called GT500KR. There was some overlap, both types being produced for a month or so.
Once again, the 427 and 428CJ GTE Cougars were being produced at the same time from November 1967 thru June 1968. July 1968 was the only month where only 428CJ GTE's were produced and I believe there were about ten made that month.
The 1967 GT500 Shelby received the 428PI motor with dual 4V Holley carbs.
The 1968 GT500 received the same 428PI engine with a single 4V Holley carb. Around November 1967 there were prototype examples of Cougar and Mustang made with the new 428CJ engine, regular production of the 428CJ began in February 1968 for Mustang, Cougar and Shelby.
My 428CJ XR-7 is not a GTE. It is one of 101 1968 XR-7's that was produced with the 428CJ R code Ram Air engine. Most 1968 Cougars with the 428CJ are not GTE's.
The 428CJ became available in Shelby Mustangs around March 1968, those so equipped were called GT500KR. There was some overlap, both types being produced for a month or so.
Once again, the 427 and 428CJ GTE Cougars were being produced at the same time from November 1967 thru June 1968. July 1968 was the only month where only 428CJ GTE's were produced and I believe there were about ten made that month.
Joined
·
75 Posts
I could read Royce's posts all day. So much information, so detailed - you are guaranteed to learn SOMETHING. Thanks Royce! Keep on postin'.
428's
Royce,
As always, thanks for the information. If I recall correctly, the 67 428PI motor came with C7AE heads. If so, the FE motor that I am building, with C7AE heads and a low rise 2x4 manifold and two holley 600's, is actually closer to the 67 428PI motor than any other ford factory combination. I know the 67 GT500 used a different intake (C7ZX ?) so it is not going to be identical. Were there any other 428 equipped cars that got 2x4 intakes? I wonder why they did not use the dual quads on the CJ. Would one of the 427 medium rise 2x4 intakes work well with the large port CJ heads? Also, I noticed that the 2x4 intake I have has different shape intake ports than the heads. The head's are wider than the intake's and the intake's ports are taller than the head's. How critical is it that I port match them. And is there a lot of metal that can sefely be removed from the C7AE heads before hitting water?
Thanks again,
Paul G.
69 XR7 Convertible
Royce,
As always, thanks for the information. If I recall correctly, the 67 428PI motor came with C7AE heads. If so, the FE motor that I am building, with C7AE heads and a low rise 2x4 manifold and two holley 600's, is actually closer to the 67 428PI motor than any other ford factory combination. I know the 67 GT500 used a different intake (C7ZX ?) so it is not going to be identical. Were there any other 428 equipped cars that got 2x4 intakes? I wonder why they did not use the dual quads on the CJ. Would one of the 427 medium rise 2x4 intakes work well with the large port CJ heads? Also, I noticed that the 2x4 intake I have has different shape intake ports than the heads. The head's are wider than the intake's and the intake's ports are taller than the head's. How critical is it that I port match them. And is there a lot of metal that can sefely be removed from the C7AE heads before hitting water?
Thanks again,
Paul G.
69 XR7 Convertible
Joined
·
11,000 Posts
Paul,
The C7AX 9425-A 8V intake manifold used on the 67 Shelby had Medium Riser ports, it was basically identical to the C7AF 9425-A intake used on the 1967 427 8V engines. It mismatched somewhat with the C7AE-A heads, the intake opening is slightly larger.
The 1967 Medium Riser intake is available in reproduction. It works well with C8AE 6090-J or C80E 6090-N Cobra Jet heads. The Medium Riser ports are not a perfect match for the CJ heads but they work well together without porting. Tony Branda sells them, also Perogie and Ford Power Parts.
The Shelby was the only 8V 428 Ford ever produced. The 428 CJ works well enough with a single 4V, it didn't need two fours.
You might be better off using a set of Edelbrock's aluminum FE heads. Lots of weight off the front end and at $1200 a bargain too. They flow better than a heavily ported set of C7AE-A's and they are more tolerant to modern gasoline.
The C7AX 9425-A 8V intake manifold used on the 67 Shelby had Medium Riser ports, it was basically identical to the C7AF 9425-A intake used on the 1967 427 8V engines. It mismatched somewhat with the C7AE-A heads, the intake opening is slightly larger.
The 1967 Medium Riser intake is available in reproduction. It works well with C8AE 6090-J or C80E 6090-N Cobra Jet heads. The Medium Riser ports are not a perfect match for the CJ heads but they work well together without porting. Tony Branda sells them, also Perogie and Ford Power Parts.
The Shelby was the only 8V 428 Ford ever produced. The 428 CJ works well enough with a single 4V, it didn't need two fours.
You might be better off using a set of Edelbrock's aluminum FE heads. Lots of weight off the front end and at $1200 a bargain too. They flow better than a heavily ported set of C7AE-A's and they are more tolerant to modern gasoline.
Joined
·
11,000 Posts
I have only used my set on a stroked 427 side oiler (448CI). They would be outstanding on any FE from 352 - 428. More opinions can be found at:
www.fordfe.com
www.fordfe.com
428 PI
Let me through some rocks in the gears. The 1967 ShelbyGT 500's had the 428 Thunderbird engines and not PI's. They came from the factory with the engine and they have an engine code of Q. the PI engine code is P. The engine code is in the Ford vin stamped in the fender and hidden by the Shelby tag. Shelby changed the dist., intake, crankshaft dampener,and may or may not have changed the cam.In the Shelby literature the engine is refered to as a special interceptor, and not a police interceptor. I have three 1967 GT500's and have been doing some extensive research.Until about three years ago I thought that the engine was a PI until I pulled the first one apart and found hydraulic lifters.That got me searching.
Let me through some rocks in the gears. The 1967 ShelbyGT 500's had the 428 Thunderbird engines and not PI's. They came from the factory with the engine and they have an engine code of Q. the PI engine code is P. The engine code is in the Ford vin stamped in the fender and hidden by the Shelby tag. Shelby changed the dist., intake, crankshaft dampener,and may or may not have changed the cam.In the Shelby literature the engine is refered to as a special interceptor, and not a police interceptor. I have three 1967 GT500's and have been doing some extensive research.Until about three years ago I thought that the engine was a PI until I pulled the first one apart and found hydraulic lifters.That got me searching.
Joined
·
11,000 Posts
Frank,
The 428 PI engines for 1967 were all hydraulic lifter engines. They were identified by Kevin Marti as PI engines by correlating the engine tag number from the original Fomoco records.
The only difference between 428 T-Bird engines and 428 Police engines in 1967 was the camshaft, intake and valve springs. The 428 Police version got the slightly better camshaft, same one used in the 1966 Fairlane 390 GT.
Once again, this is information from Kevin Marti's examination of Fomoco records, not hearsay or rumour.
The 428 PI engines for 1967 were all hydraulic lifter engines. They were identified by Kevin Marti as PI engines by correlating the engine tag number from the original Fomoco records.
The only difference between 428 T-Bird engines and 428 Police engines in 1967 was the camshaft, intake and valve springs. The 428 Police version got the slightly better camshaft, same one used in the 1966 Fairlane 390 GT.
Once again, this is information from Kevin Marti's examination of Fomoco records, not hearsay or rumour.
Engine tag
Royce
Sorry, but I will have to disagree. The engine code letter in the factory GT 500 Ford vin number is a Q. The code for a PI is a P. I have three of the cars here that I have removed the rivets on the Shelby vin tag to verify it. I have the Shelby
documentation listing the engines as "special interceptors" not Police interceptors. I have also researched this with the Shelby experts and the 428 Thunderbird engine was installed by Ford in the GT 500 before they were shipped to Shelby. There are also some 67 GT 500's that left ford with the door data tags installed with Q as the fifth diget.
Royce
Sorry, but I will have to disagree. The engine code letter in the factory GT 500 Ford vin number is a Q. The code for a PI is a P. I have three of the cars here that I have removed the rivets on the Shelby vin tag to verify it. I have the Shelby
documentation listing the engines as "special interceptors" not Police interceptors. I have also researched this with the Shelby experts and the 428 Thunderbird engine was installed by Ford in the GT 500 before they were shipped to Shelby. There are also some 67 GT 500's that left ford with the door data tags installed with Q as the fifth diget.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!