Stompin' Merc Pic - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Ford Forum Ford Forum

» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
ยป Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Fordforums Community > USENET NewsGroups > alt.hi-po.big-block-ford-mercury
Register Home Forum Active Topics Photo Gallery Auto Loans Garage Mark Forums Read Auto Escrow

FordForums.com is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-24-2005, 02:01   #1 (permalink)
MM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Stompin' Merc Pic


http://www.network54.com/Forum/threa...eid=1111634783

Don't know anything about it though.

Trev.
TS#42


  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-24-2005, 20:01   #2 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

Since all the other 'Snakes seem to be too busy with the grim reaper
thread to reply, I'll point out the car in the picture is a '67 Cougar
and the guy's username is "427GT," which suggests two things: (1) that
the car is a GT-E, the "E" designating the Cougar-only 427 side-oiler
option, available in '67 and '68 until the advent of the Cobra Jet, and
(2) that somebody else in that forum beat the guy to the "427GT-E"
handle.

180 Out

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2005, 20:01   #3 (permalink)
CobraJet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

In article <1111717410.837652.114240@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
<one80out@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Since all the other 'Snakes seem to be too busy with the grim reaper
> thread to reply, I'll point out the car in the picture is a '67 Cougar
> and the guy's username is "427GT," which suggests two things: (1) that
> the car is a GT-E, the "E" designating the Cougar-only 427 side-oiler
> option, available in '67 and '68 until the advent of the Cobra Jet, and
> (2) that somebody else in that forum beat the guy to the "427GT-E"
> handle.
>
> 180 Out
>


Let's try something that actually makes sense. Neither the 427 nor
the GT-E were available in 1967. If you knew anything about Cougars,
you would see the 6.5 liter badge behind the front wheel well, and
figure out that this is a 390 GT with a 427 transplant.

You are WAY out of your league here. '67 427's. BWAHAHA!!

CobraJet

--
ThunderSnake #1
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2005, 00:01   #4 (permalink)
Wound Up
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

CobraJet wrote:
> In article <1111717410.837652.114240@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> <one80out@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Since all the other 'Snakes seem to be too busy with the grim reaper
>>thread to reply, I'll point out the car in the picture is a '67 Cougar
>>and the guy's username is "427GT," which suggests two things: (1) that
>>the car is a GT-E, the "E" designating the Cougar-only 427 side-oiler
>>option, available in '67 and '68 until the advent of the Cobra Jet, and
>>(2) that somebody else in that forum beat the guy to the "427GT-E"
>>handle.
>>
>>180 Out
>>

>
>
> Let's try something that actually makes sense. Neither the 427 nor
> the GT-E were available in 1967. If you knew anything about Cougars,
> you would see the 6.5 liter badge behind the front wheel well, and
> figure out that this is a 390 GT with a 427 transplant.
>
> You are WAY out of your league here. '67 427's. BWAHAHA!!
>
> CobraJet


"Poor Willy. How can one man be SO wrong about
everything?"

It's amazing, isn't it? Nothing but bullshit and meaningless conjecture.



--
Wound Up
ThunderSnake #65

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2005, 06:01   #5 (permalink)
John
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

"CobraJet" <slither@fang.ford> wrote in message
news:240320052045433023%slither@fang.ford...
> In article <1111717410.837652.114240@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> <one80out@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Since all the other 'Snakes seem to be too busy with the grim reaper
>> thread to reply, I'll point out the car in the picture is a '67 Cougar
>> and the guy's username is "427GT," which suggests two things: (1) that
>> the car is a GT-E, the "E" designating the Cougar-only 427 side-oiler
>> option, available in '67 and '68 until the advent of the Cobra Jet, and
>> (2) that somebody else in that forum beat the guy to the "427GT-E"
>> handle.
>>

> Let's try something that actually makes sense. Neither the 427 nor
> the GT-E were available in 1967. If you knew anything about Cougars,
> you would see the 6.5 liter badge behind the front wheel well, and
> figure out that this is a 390 GT with a 427 transplant.
>
> You are WAY out of your league here. '67 427's. BWAHAHA!!


In '68 Ford must have toyed with the idea of putting the 427 in the Mustang.
Someone we know and love even saw a yellow coupe with a 427 in it way back
then. Even the VIN Code Converters today list W Code as an engine option in
'68 Mustangs. Personally, I think Ford wanted to do it, but figured out
they would not be able to keep up with demand because of some production
difficulties associated with the 427 back then, plus they knew the 428 was
on the way. So far, no verifiable proof has been found, sorry Bill, so most
people keep this alive as an urban legend. Later, in the model year, they
did put the 428 in the Mustang.

Ford did produce the '68 Cougar with a 427 engine option though, only in
'68.

--
John
ThunderSnake #59


  Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2005, 11:01   #6 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

Cobra Jet

> Let's try something that actually makes sense. Neither the 427 nor
> the GT-E were available in 1967. If you knew anything about Cougars,
> you would see the 6.5 liter badge behind the front wheel well, and
> figure out that this is a 390 GT with a 427 transplant.

..
> You are WAY out of your league here. '67 427's. BWAHAHA!!


Thank you for the correction.

In my defense, at least I commented on the photo, and that led to a
more likely explanation of what the car is about. That's what the
Usenet is for. It's not a good thing for false information to go
uncorrected. In this example, withhout your correction readers might
think that there were '67 427 Cougars. Now they won't. And that's a
good thing.

It doesn't bother me, that I can't recite chapter and verse regarding
options and model years about cars built 35-40 years ago. It's too bad
you have to phrase the correction is such childish terms, but I can
understand that too.

And how do you know "427GT" doesn't own a '68 GT-E as well, and that
the photo car is not still a 390? You don't know.

180 Out
TS 2

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2005, 11:01   #7 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

Pound Pup wrote:

> Poor Willy . . . Nothing but bullshit and meaningless conjecture.


Is that true, Pound Pup? I have never written anything but "bullshit
and meaningless conjecture"? I don't think it's true. I think you know
it's not true. So are you a liar, or not?

180 Out
TS 2

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2005, 11:01   #8 (permalink)
one80out@hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

John wrote:

Something I hope Limp Rick and Pound Pup might recognize as a
reasonable way for adults to discuss old cars.

180 Out
TS 2

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2005, 12:01   #9 (permalink)
CobraJet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

In article <1111774893.535447.251840@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
<one80out@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Since all the other 'Snakes seem to be too busy with the grim reaper
> >thread to reply, I'll point out the car in the picture is a '67 Cougar
> > and the guy's username is "427GT," which suggests two things: (1) that
> > the car is a GT-E, the "E" designating the Cougar-only 427 side-oiler
> > option, available in '67 and '68 until the advent of the Cobra Jet, and
> > (2) that somebody else in that forum beat the guy to the "427GT-E"
> >handle.

>
> >180 Out

>


> Cobra Jet corrected me shitless by saying:
>
> > Let's try something that actually makes sense. Neither the 427 nor
> > the GT-E were available in 1967. If you knew anything about Cougars,
> > you would see the 6.5 liter badge behind the front wheel well, and
> > figure out that this is a 390 GT with a 427 transplant.

> .
> > You are WAY out of your league here. '67 427's. BWAHAHA!!

>
> Thank you for the correction.
>
> In my defense, at least I commented on the photo, and that led to a
> more likely explanation of what the car is about. That's what the
> Usenet is for. It's not a good thing for false information to go
> uncorrected. In this example, withhout your correction readers might
> think that there were '67 427 Cougars. Now they won't. And that's a
> good thing.


This is lame beyond belief, Wack Willy. With this "logic", jerks
like you could pound a group with BS facts and sit back waiting for
other people to rush in for damage control. What the hell is wrong with
you?

>
> It doesn't bother me, that I can't recite chapter and verse regarding
> options and model years about cars built 35-40 years ago.


Man, you are ****ed up.

> It's too bad
> you have to phrase the correction is such childish terms, but I can
> understand that too.


Don't take the high road with me; you've got too many recent
comments involving homosexual oral copulation and posterior romance for
that crap to wash.

>
> And how do you know "427GT" doesn't own a '68 GT-E as well, and that
> the photo car is not still a 390? You don't know.


I have a serious question for you. What are you on? No, seriously.
How do we know he doesn't fly a P-51 to work every day? You are the one
who opined about what his nym means, and now you're coming up with
psychotic crap for screwing up info about a car model that *you* own.

You are one very sick person. And from what I can see, getting worse
by the day.

Go suck on your 352-inch Shelbys, Mr. Correct.

CobraJet

--
ThunderSnake #1
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2005, 12:01   #10 (permalink)
CobraJet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Stompin' Merc Pic

In article <1111775042.711848.196020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
<one80out@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Pound Pup wrote:
>
> > Poor Willy . . . Nothing but bullshit and meaningless conjecture.

>
> Is that true, Pound Pup? I have never written anything but "bullshit
> and meaningless conjecture"? I don't think it's true. I think you know
> it's not true. So are you a liar, or not?
>
> 180 Out
> TS 2
>


Lookie at Wacko Willy. Still trying to ASSert himself as Thunder
Snake number 2, after calling everyone in that group an ASSortment of
childish names. Guess expulsion isn't sitting too well with you.

CobraJet

--
ThunderSnake #1
  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Fordforums Community > USENET NewsGroups > alt.hi-po.big-block-ford-mercury



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 23:57.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.