68 Ranchero 390

[ZiggyL78]

https://www.kijiji.ca/v-classic-cars...ationFlag=true

I think 11K US would buy this car.I can't remember the last time I saw one.

[Bill Pritchard]

Wow.....I never knew they made a Ranchero GT in 68! Very neat.

[Lee Stewart]

http://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/for...n/bilder/5.jpg

[Bill Pritchard]

68 Ranchero buyers didn't have much choice when it came to axle ratios, according to that brochure pictured above. And, if you ordered either of the 390 engines with a 3.25 axle ratio, you couldn't get a limited slip diff.....seems very odd

[442w30]

The HP is wrong too. I bet that brochure is not the final word on these cars.

And the Marti for this one proves it.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by 442w30

The HP is wrong too. I bet that brochure is not the final word on these cars.

And the Marti for this one proves it.

That Marti report says it has a 3.00 limited slip diff . . . that WAS available on the 1968 Rancheros as it says in the brochure. It was the 3.25 that was not available with a limited slip with either of the 390 engines. I also see that the Report lists a 289-2V (C-code). That engine option was replaced during the 1968 model year with the 302-2V (F-code). The brochure I posted is a revised edition that subs out the 289 for the 302

[442w30]

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

That Marti report says it has a 3.00 limited slip diff . . . that WAS available on the 1968 Rancheros as it says in the brochure. It was the 3.25 that was not available with a limited slip with either of the 390 engines.

Alright, you have a good point. But here is evidence to the contrary, attached.

I also see that the Report lists a 289-2V (C-code). That engine option was replaced during the 1968 model year with the 302-2V (F-code). The brochure I posted is a revised edition that subs out the 289 for the 302

Actually, the 302 replaced the 289 in 1968 but, due to a strike, Ford built 289 Fairlanes and Torinos. I know it sounds counter-intuitive but that's what happened according to the Ford folks I know.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by Bill Pritchard

68 Ranchero buyers didn't have much choice when it came to axle ratios, according to that brochure pictured above. And, if you ordered either of the 390 engines with a 3.25 axle ratio, you couldn't get a limited slip diff.....seems very odd

Ford was way behind GM and Chrysler when it came to showroom muscle cars at the beginning of the 1968 model year. The only high performance engine they had was the lame 390-4V. All that changed in April of 1968 when they introduced the 428 Cobra Jet in the 1968 Mustang GT. 1969 was Ford's "breakout" year for high performance cars. Better late then never right.

You could get the 428 CJ in the Ranchero series with either a 3.50 or 3.91 limited slip diff in 1969. And if you wanted, the 390-4V with a 3.25 limited slip rear:

http://www.lov2xlr8.no/brochures/for...n/bilder/5.jpg

[442w30]

Good write-up.

[Lee Stewart]

442W30:

I don't want to be argumentative but that Marti Report is for a Torino. You are moving the goal posts! Show us a Marti Report for a 1968 390 equipped Ranchero with a 3.25 locking rear. What may have been available on the Torino or the Mustang was not available on the Ranchero according to the brochure. THAT is the point!

Oh . . . . BTW . . .