|
Author
|
Topic: what about the boss 351 and 429???
|
kewljay223
Gearhead Posts: 263
From: Long Beach, California
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 01:58 AM
   
i rarely see anybody talking about those cars. its always about the 302's. are the 302's better or just easier to come by??also, the 302 has 351 heads on it, what does the 351 have on it and 429?? what makes them boss's?
IP: Logged |
Fastback68
Gearhead Posts: 1880
From: Sucat, Paranaque, Philippines
Registered: Jul 99
|
posted 01-08-2003 03:11 AM
I believe every single M&Mer - even Scoop and Alex, who love their '66s more than their women - would trade for a 429 at a drop of a hat, but since no one seems to have enough money ...  They really are a collector's item, not like your regular Stang.
And the 351 Bosses are just top-of-the-line '71s with Boss engines, so if anyone's hiding one, you wouldn't know it unless they have an engine problem.
IP: Logged |
mstngjoe
Journeyman Posts: 64
From: Oregon
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 07:21 AM
They are both rather rare cars. The Boss 351 was only made for 1 year. Production was just over 1800 units (1806?). Restored and correct ones are $20k+.The 429 just in 69 & 70. Not sure of total production. Seems to me about 500+ each year. These cars routinely bring $50K+. I had a chance to buy a very clean Boss 351 about 5 years ago for just under $12K, but I bought my 65 FB instead. Not sure I would do things any different today. My 65 is very solid and way too much fun.  ------------------
My Mustang
My next engine
IP: Logged |
Thud
Gearhead Posts: 1094
From: Cumming,Ga.,USofA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-08-2003 07:45 AM
There are lots more Boss 302's around to see and hear about. The Boss 302 engine is a beefier 302 block (4-bolt mains, screw-in freeze plugs, etc.) using 351 Cleveland-type heads, they're not exactly the same. The Boss 351 is a solid-lifter Cleveland built for higher performance duty. When I win the lottery, I'll own a Bright Blue/Argent Boss 351... ------------------
"My doctor says I have a malformed public duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fiber; and that I am, therefore, excused from saving universes." ... Ford Prefect Dwayne M&M Member #18
'94 Lightning #942 of 4007
'70 Mach1
2 '69 Cyclone Spoiler II's (that are for sale)
'65 Galaxie 500 + parts car
IP: Logged |
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 808
From: Kissimee, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 08:45 AM
The 71 BOSS 351 could have easily been the greatest and most collectible classic Mustang ever, but it was basically orphaned as soon as it was born. When H-II fired Bunkie Knudsen, there was a wholesale shift in the attitudes at FORD. Racing, high performance and anything or anybody else that had anything to do with Knudsen suddenly became 'pesona non grata' around Ford. Knudsen was basically the one who deciced the 71 style, and he did it without going thru the usual lengthy, process. One look at Gale Halderman's original styling clay, and it was approved right on the spot.
Larry Shinoda hated it, calling it 'The aircraft carrier-the one that looks like it hit the wall.' It did have a considrable GM influence though, from the flush door-handles to the full-length hood with hidden wipers, and the full width grill. The design had almost no supporters with the 'old gaurd' at Ford, and was given very little effort past the initial design. Hence the almost unchanged 72 and 73's. The only reason the 73's were a little different was because of government regs. Too bad, it was a great car.
The BOSS 429 was sold so FORD could homologate(qualify) the new NASCAR 429 engine for racing. It was basically a HEMI, with a slightly different chamber roof design. Since Chrysler basically owned the 'HEMI' moniker, FORD came up with a few different names for the engine: Shotgun 429, 429 HO, and of course, BOSS 429.
On the racetrack, the engine was phenomenal, but in street-trim it was so severely detuned that it was almost laughable when copared to other street-cars. The street BOSS 429 was very expensive, had a sedate appearance and was not to fast. The 428 CJ-equipped Mustangs were considerably less expensive, more durable and much faster.
The BOSS 429 is an exotic, never gonna' happen again, one of a kind collectors item. The fact that they were made at all shows just how crazy and bizarre the thinking in Detroit was at the time.I love em!
IP: Logged |
johnmustang
Gearhead Posts: 4727
From: British Columbia , Canada
Registered: Nov 2001
|
posted 01-08-2003 11:37 AM
quote:
Originally posted by kewljay223:
i rarely see anybody talking about those cars. its always about the 302's. are the 302's better or just easier to come by??also, the 302 has 351 heads on it, what does the 351 have on it and 429?? what makes them boss's?
Here is a sample of what you would have to spend to own one of these classic beauties
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6236&item=1876648149
JOHN
[This message has been edited by johnmustang (edited 01-08-2003).]
IP: Logged |
kewljay223
Gearhead Posts: 263
From: Long Beach, California
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 12:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by mstngjoe:
The 429 just in 69 & 70. Not sure of total production. Seems to me about 500+ each year. These cars routinely bring $50K+.[/B]
so there were just a little more than 1000 made?? how many do you think is out there now?
IP: Logged |
kewljay223
Gearhead Posts: 263
From: Long Beach, California
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 12:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by johnmustang:
Here is a sample of what you would have to spend to own one of these classic beauties[URL=http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6236&item=1876648149]http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6236&item=1876648149[/ URL]
JOHN
[This message has been edited by johnmustang (edited 01-08-2003).]
that sure is a ton of green!! 
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 34763
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-08-2003 01:19 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kewljay223:
so there were just a little more than 1000 made?? how many do you think is out there now?
There were 849 built in '69, 500 in '70. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 Please remember our sponsors,
Mustangs Plus, NPD, Osborn Reproductions, MyFordPerformance.com, and FordRamAir.com
IP: Logged |
Hell_Fish
Gearhead Posts: 680
From: Austin, TX.
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 01:36 PM
500 per year was the minium for NASCAR.
IP: Logged |
Jeff
Gearhead Posts: 280
From: Moore, OK USA
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 01-08-2003 01:45 PM
quote:
Originally posted by cobravenom71:
Too bad, it was a great car. I love em!
Great car? That statement is subject to debate! Not in my opinion they weren't...had a lot of problems typical of Detroit iron at the time...too big and clumsy and the engineering and assembly quality sucked! Lots of junky parts slapped together in one sleek ORCA sized body. I love em! Well, they do have cult appeal and they are Mustangs...I can admire them along with other cars of the day...Pontiacs, Buicks and Oldsmobiles... I think I like them about as much as other potential buyers of the day...I think I'll pass!
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 34763
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-08-2003 01:58 PM
Did you own one?------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 Please remember our sponsors,
Mustangs Plus, NPD, Osborn Reproductions, MyFordPerformance.com, and FordRamAir.com
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 34763
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-08-2003 02:13 PM
Incidently, the Boss 351 had the title of the fastest small block for quite a while. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 Please remember our sponsors,
Mustangs Plus, NPD, Osborn Reproductions, MyFordPerformance.com, and FordRamAir.com
IP: Logged |
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 808
From: Kissimee, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 02:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff:
Great car? That statement is subject to debate!Not in my opinion they weren't...had a lot of problems typical of Detroit iron at the time...too big and clumsy and the engineering and assembly quality sucked! Lots of junky parts slapped together in one sleek ORCA sized body. I love em! Well, they do have cult appeal and they are Mustangs...I can admire them along with other cars of the day...Pontiacs, Buicks and Oldsmobiles... I think I like them about as much as other potential buyers of the day...I think I'll pass!
Well, Jeff, all opinions are certainly open for debate. What is not open for debate however are the cold hard facts about the BOSS 351's performance. It was the fastest small block regular-production FORD ever up to that time, certainly in keeping with it's 'BOSS' character. It was also the best handling BOSS Mustang ever made, certainly not something to be ashamed of. By no ones definition can it be called 'clumsy' when compared to what the current offerings from Detroit were at the time.
It was the most comfortable driving Mustang body-style ever up to that time also.
I will agree that it was big. Probably too big considering what the Mustang started out as.However, it is certainly no larger than the other comparable cars coming out of Detroit at the time, and smaller than some. Chevelles,Camaros,Chargers, Cudas,Javelins...take your pick. They are all roughly the same size.
As far as engineering quality goes...it was also typical for american iron at the time.
Assembly quality I might have to give you. Not a stellar achievment by any stretch. The crap-ola sheet metal was the worst offender.
When the BOSS 351 is compared to other cars of its era, I see it as nothing short of phenomonal that it was even made. For roughly $4,000, this car was a screaming bargain.
It's styling was very controversial at the time, and I believe that is what kept it as an 'also-ran' for so many years in the collectors eyes.
It is just that styling that has allowed the 71-73 cars to still look somewhat 'fresh' today, when the older Mustangs have a definate '60's' look about them. Absolutely nothing against the older Mustangs, but to me the 65-69's look like classic 35 year old cars, but the 71-73 style could easily heve been made all the way into the late 70's and even the early 80's. It had a basic durable good look.
Look at the Camaro/Firebird. 2nd-gen F-bodys were made from 1970 all the way until 1981, and with very little changes they still looked fresh every year. The 71-73 'Stangs had this type of design. To me anyway.
As Steve asked you earlier, have you ever driven a BOSS 351? I had a BOSS 351 years ago and I will concur that if you haven't driven one, you don't 'get it'.
IP: Logged |
indyphil
Gearhead Posts: 1075
From: Lafayette, IN, USA
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 03:05 PM
Just my opinion, I like them all. The Boss cars are really great. Now I would pass on the other plain jane 71-73's but mainly because parts are a little harder to come by. I nearly bought a 73 when I was living in England because I love the styling. None of these cars are "high quality" by todays standards, but that doesnt bother me. I am a little confused about the 429 engine. The BOSS429 is a different engine to the plain 429 that comes in other passenger cars? The pictures of the 69 BOSS car on ebay shows an engine with some odd looking valve covers and labels on it. That engine looks very modern. Nothing like the 429 I saw in a Lincoln once (a guy I knew wanted it for his mustang) Is the BOSS429 engine similar to the plain 429 and 460 engine?
IP: Logged |
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 808
From: Kissimee, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 03:18 PM
The BOSS 429 is unique in many ways. I think it started life out from the same 385-series design, but is radically different from the regular production 429/460's.
The biggest difference is the aluminum heads. Giant semi-hemi shaped combustion chambers, 'canted'( poly-angle) valves, and centrally located spark-plugs right in the middle of the huge funky-shaped magnesium valve covers really make this engine look like something from another decade. All the hot internal go-faster goodies that Ford could come up with, plus a gasket-less head-sealing method. The ultra high cylinder pressures, and the different expansion rates of iron vs. aluminum prompted the use of 'Viton' o-rings and dry-decking for the head sealing. Great obsessivly-single purpose engine for it's time. Unfortunately, it made for a relatively lazy, uncooperative and needlessly expensive street motor.
For street racing, a terrible investment.
For collecting, one of the best investments ever.
Just like all BOSS's, I love 'em!
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4923
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-08-2003 03:34 PM
I had a '73 Q code fastback for awhile. It didnt have power brakes, but had power steering, and that was all it had for amenities. It was a 4 speed car, with a 3.91 posi. Bone stock, right down to the iron exhaust manifolds and iron intake. I did put a 3310 Holley on it as the spread bore factory carb had seen better days. With some decent radials on the back of it, I showed the tail lights of that car to more than one fox body mustang.  For a low compression "smog" cleveland, it ran good.And for a "big" car, I thought it handled pretty danged good. It wasn't a slalom racer by any means, but it wasn't a buckboard either. However, the car was a rust bucket and parts were hard to find. Then I needed money badly, and sold the car. I just wish I had kept the motor and trans. Those 2 things alone were probably worth almost as muchas I sold the whole car for.
IP: Logged |
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 808
From: Kissimee, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 04:05 PM
Kid Vishus, are you sure your 73 mach came with a 3.91 gear? In 1973, a 3.50 gear was the 'shortest' gear availible. The 3.50's were standard and the only gear availible on 351-4V, 4-speed cars, and a 3.25 gear was mandatory if equipped with air conditioning, which of course, yours was not. At any rate, a 3.50 gear was the highest performance gear availible for any engine-trans combination for 1973.
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4923
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-08-2003 08:35 PM
Maybe it wasnt, but it turned around 2800 rpm at 60 mph. I thought I had looked at the tag on the rearend, but maybe I didnt, or dont remember it correctly.  It was after all 6 years ago, and I only had the car for about 6 months.
IP: Logged |
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 808
From: Kissimee, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-08-2003 09:25 PM
Too bad you let it go, even if it was rusted badly.
When I was a teenager, one of my 'beater' cars was a 72 Hurst/Olds convertible. A real rusted, dented well-used car, to put it mildly! The drivetrain was as strong as steel, but the body was done in by the 'tin-worm'. At the time I wanted to get rid of it, a junk yard offered me $40.00. I parked it in my uncle's wharehouse garage for about 15 years, as I always wanted to restore it. As I got older, I realized the problems associated with restoring a rust-bucket, and started to shop it around in 'Hemmings'. In '91, I sold it for $12,000 to a guy from Washington, so I guess I got a good deal. Apparently, there were only about 50 or so made with the equipment on mine. Power windows, air conditioning and the best, optional Olds 455 engine. I think it was called a W-30 (It had an emblem on the fender).I've seen them restored and they are really sharp. I don't regret getting rid of it though, it was really far gone.
IP: Logged |
71RESTO
Gearhead Posts: 1293
From: Oregon, USA
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-08-2003 10:34 PM
Don't sell the Boss 351 short, it is one bad a$$ factory hot rod!! I had the opportunity to buy one in '97 for $11,000 and took a pass (boy, do I regret that!!). And as far as handling, the '71-'73's can carve a canyon with the best of them, if set up right. My '73 has a 1" drop with competition suspension and poly bushings and handles awesome, and easily keeps up with my buddies Boss 302. ------------------
Duane
71 Fastback (his) under resto (351C-4V C6 auto)
73 Mach 1 (hers) (351CJ 4 speed)
66 289/2V coupe (daughter Ashley's)
89 LX 2.3 convertible (daughter Amanda's)
M & M Member #730
IP: Logged |
mach72
Gearhead Posts: 122
From: Bixby, Ok. USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-09-2003 12:01 AM
Hey guys, the Boss 351 was not only the fastest Ford small block, but also the quickest 4 passenger small block powered car produced for many years (this includes all non-Ford vehicles). I don't think anything else ran mid 13's stock until the "just killed off" F-body Gm cars came along. The Boss 351 was also quicker than the Boss 429 or Boss 302. Tom
IP: Logged |
Rory McNeil
Gearhead Posts: 1258
From: Surrey, B.C. Canada
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 01-09-2003 02:45 AM
I think many of you guys are basing the Boss 351 being the fastest SB Ford or Boss car are a bit misguided. I still have the test drive results somewhere, from the Boss 351`s test results, & that car was not stock. It had been prepared by a well known Ford racing team, & had a pair of headers (possibly a bit more too!) Back in 1976, I bought a bone stock 70 Mustang fastback, non Mach 1, with a 351C 4v, auto, & 3.25 gears, & a Shaker hood. With 68,000 miles, I installed set of $79.00 Cyclone headers, hooked up to the original mufflers & pipes, & it ran 14.2 @ 99.4 mph, on bias ply tires & no posi. I raced a few stock Boss 351`s on the street & never lost to one. Even with the Boss 351 making a bit more power than my 70 engine, I don`t think it was enough to offset the added weight of the 71 body.------------------
78 Fairmont 428 4 speed 10.20@130mph
80 Fairmont 302 5 speed 12.8@105mph
85 Mustang NHRA Stocker under construction, 302 5 speed
59 Meteor (Canadian Ford) 2 dr sedan 332, auto
74 F350 ramp truck 390 4spd
IP: Logged |
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 808
From: Kissimee, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-09-2003 08:02 AM
RORY, The fact that your 351-4V may have beat a few(?) BOSS 351's in the past does not mean that the BOSS 351 doesn't deserve it's reputation.
I owned a BOSS 351 for a few years, and it was completely stock except for the radial tires. It even still had the rev limter.
I used to run thar car regularly at O.C.I.R. in Tustin, CA., and that car always ran mid 13's. A bad run was seldom as high as a low 14.
One thing I will say is that the ability of the driver to properly shift a manual in those days makes a huge difference in the times a car can post. I'm not an expert, but I can speed shift OK, and it has been the deciding factor for me in more than a few street races.
As a matter of fact, I owned a 90 Taurus SHO, and I used to beat Mustang GT 5-speeds in street brawls consistently. Ultimately, I know that the Taurus was not faster than the SHO, because my wifes car at the time was a stock 89 Mustang GT, and I beat almost every kid in a Mustang I raced, even the hopped-up ones.
I truly believe that most are poor at shifting, some are adequate, and a few are good. the difference is like night and day.
On a side note, I pulled the shifter right out of the console on a 1-2 upshift in that GT, and the two bolts that held the shifter handle were sheared right in two. They appeared to be a real low-grade bolt, so i replaced them with some good hardened bolts and never had that problem again.All the cars in our inventory at the time (I worked at a dealership)had the bolts replaced by the service dept. as part of a 'sport upgrade' package we made up. Mostly just replacing the weaker components, and fine tuning suspension a little.
Anyway, the 'warmed-up' Boss 351's from the old road tests are well known, but that doesn't mean that the bone-stockers are dogs!
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 4923
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-09-2003 08:44 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cobravenom71:
Too bad you let it go, even if it was rusted badly.
It was REAL rusty. I could deal with the rusty qrtr panels, that didnt bother me. The front fenders had a little rust behind each tire, but that could have been fixed fairly easily. The bottom of the passenger side door was in bad shape too. The car had sat for an unknown number of years, and the windshield and rear qrtr window leaked. That caused the floor boards on the drivers side to be almost non-existant. I put a piece of light guage steel over the hole in front of the driver's seat and fiberglassed both sides of it and did the same to the hole behind the drivers seat. They werent little holes either, the steel I used to cover the holes was probably around 14"x20" in size. Where the biggest problem was, the radiator support was almost rusted clear thru.
The car was a lot of fun to drive. But I didnt have the money to fix the car properly. Since I already had my '70 fastback, when it got so I needed some money, the '73 was expandable. Plus, with as hard as I was running it, I was sure to "break" something (probably the clutch). I would really like to have another one though. Someday I hope to have one again (71-73 fastback).
IP: Logged |
T5owner
Gearhead Posts: 635
From: Germany
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 01-10-2003 02:02 PM
Just for the records, when we recently found this BOSS 351, Kevin Marti looked it up and found out 150 out of 1806 BOSS 351 were indeed export cars.
Maybe I'll find more here.
IP: Logged |
73trials
Gearhead Posts: 882
From: New Orleans, La. M&M member # 1752
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-10-2003 09:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by T5owner:
this BOSS 351,
 ------------------
Erwin
'73 convertible 351c 2V C-6, hopefully will be done someday...
IP: Logged | |
Mustangsandmore Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
