| FAQ |
| Members List |
| Social Groups |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
02-02-2013, 10:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Need a picture of a 1967 GTO intake no air filter
I am taking off my 66 tri power set up off of my 67 GTO. I am putting on a stock 4bbl carb and intake manifold.
I am setup for a front fuel filter and the tripower. I can't find a photo of a 400 top engine intake without an airfilter so I can reverse it back to stock and see what hardware I need. Can I get a few photos from different angles? Thanks Jack 1967 GTO |
|
#2
02-06-2013, 08:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jack,
hope this helps -Dominic |
|
#3
02-06-2013, 11:35 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Dominic, just a bit of constructive criticism. I'm not trying ridicule yours.... just trying help you out.
 Your PCV hoses up front are sitting too high. One goes into the intake and is preformed curved to lay low. The other should go to the front of the carb. They should both lay flat and not sit straight up like yours are, and hit the aircleaner base. Photo is from Old Goat 67s GTO. If I can find a better photo I'll post it. This is how they should be.....
__________________
 Gary Get in, ShuT Up, Hang On! Member of the Baltimore Built Brotherhood MY GTO built 4th Week of March 1966 "Crusin' Is Not A Crime" Keep yer stick on the ice. Last edited by GT182; 02-06-2013 at 11:45 AM. |
|
#4
02-06-2013, 12:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Dominic and Jack, this is how they should be connected so both lay flat on the intake and don't interfere with the air cleaner.
The hose on the left on mine connects to a 90° fitting in the intake. Or it could connect to the carb if you want to plug where it goes in the intake. I've seen them either way, and either way works. The hose on the right on mine isn't precurved like the originals but it does work.
__________________
Gary Get in, ShuT Up, Hang On! Member of the Baltimore Built Brotherhood MY GTO built 4th Week of March 1966 "Crusin' Is Not A Crime" Keep yer stick on the ice. |
|
#5
02-06-2013, 02:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Photos of 40,000 mile survivor.
Non AC car. Baltimore build. Early build with filter on top. Charles Last edited by Old Goat 67; 02-06-2013 at 02:12 PM. |
|
#6
02-06-2013, 02:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Mine, showing proper PCV hose setup.
July build with solid fuel line to carb. Charles |
|
#7
07-13-2026, 10:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pump is the later one with a return, it's new so we will run it for awhile. I like the filter up top with the return, it should help out if it vapor locks. Not sure if the bottom pulley should be blue or black, I just figured blue due to the way it's assembled. maybe they added the weight and pulleys after it was painted, but that seems like a extra step.
|
|
#8
02-06-2013, 12:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks Gary,
The problem with my car is that the 2 fittings on the intake for the PVC hoses are pressed in and not the right angle threaded type. I also have the 66 style fitting they both connect to. Everyone has told me this is the wrong set up but I had the car since 1982 and it was all original. The shop manual shows it that way too. If you have any info on this let me know. Thanks for the post. Criticism always welcome. |
|
#9
07-13-2026, 10:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here is a recent '67 I rebuilt going in a GTO, automatic trans, no A/C. The fuel line from Ames would not fit, the upper bend was too tight, and section from the carb was almost kinked, so bent new pieces following the Ames line as guide. This car had the one piece line with return off the pump. This car had sat for years and the threads at the carb inlet were rotted. I had to cut the carb back about .180" and thread the hole deeper, then add an extended reach fitting. All this didn't leave room for a filter so we swapped to the early fuel filter setup.
|
|
#10
02-06-2013, 02:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
timely thread, for I'm planning to replace the 68 intake on my car with a correct 67 unit. I have an intake with the same casting date that's on the engine block and another one that's a two weeks earlier...not sure which to use. Also not sure whether to run the filter on top--mine's a late March Baltimore build. I believe our host sells everything to make the set-up look correct--hoses, metal lines to the distributor and brake booster, pcv tee, etc.
Charles, I can't tell you how many times I referred to photos of that survivor when trying to straighten out details in mine...
__________________
"If the best Mustang is the Camaro, the best Camaro is actually the Firebird" David Zenlea |
|
#11
02-08-2013, 03:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Subscribing
|
|
#12
02-09-2013, 04:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Here's mine. I cheaped out and installed the generic fuel return filter, but all else is original and stock to the car...
__________________
Jeff 
|
|
#13
02-10-2013, 06:42 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, neccesity & invention you know.
Had that little roll around magnetic parts catcher thing, and thought, "Hey, what if I drilled a hole dead center and took off the wheels?" Bingo, carb top parts & tool holder! Charles |
|
#14
02-10-2013, 06:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
thanks all!
|
|
#15
02-21-2013, 12:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Fuel line differences on the 67
In looking at the pictures, I noticed some comments about differences in the fuel line set up based on the production date. Just starting to restore the fuel system on my 67 HO automatic. My car has a build date 02D. Fourth week of February 67. It appears that there was maybe a difference in fuel pump/fuel filter/fuel lines? Can I ask what the differences are and based on my build date what should my fuel line set up look like?
Thanks! |
|
#16
02-21-2013, 02:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I know that the early '67's used the filter return that my car has...(it was built in '66). Not sure when they went to the pump return....thought it was '68. Could very well be sometime in '67, though.
__________________
Jeff
|
|
#17
02-21-2013, 03:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
My 03C built GTO had the second design originally, with the vapor line from the fuel pump to the gas tank, and the single line from the fuel pump to the carb (no fuel filter on the intake). Not sure when the changeover from the filter return design occurred, but I'm nearly certain I've seen a Feb built survivor with the second design as well.
__________________
"If the best Mustang is the Camaro, the best Camaro is actually the Firebird" David Zenlea |
|
#18
02-22-2013, 12:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
2nd design
So let me get this straight. The second design has a hard line from the pump to the carb. The return line hooks straight to the pump. The only filter is a screen inside the carb fuel inlet port. Is that correct?
Obviously Pontiac thought the second design was better. How about the forum members? Is the second design the way to go? From reading the posts it looks like the danger of the second design is the risk of damaging the inlet threads on a filter change? |
|
#19
02-22-2013, 05:49 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Leave that filter in the carb for final protection, but add an inline one between the frame & fuel pump.
Mines been that way for a looooooong time. Charles |
|
#20
02-22-2013, 12:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What Charles said, run an aux. filter with your "newer" style system. The sintered bronze or paper filter in the carb will never get fouled up. You do not want to be replacing the in-carb filter on a q jet much, if at all. I don't know which system is "better"....I've heard the earlier one was due to the extra capacity and cooling of the large additional fuel filter, but the second system with the add on filter would/should be just as effective. I think it was a cost saving issue: the second design uses less plumbing and parts, plus less labor. It's a cleaner looking design, too, without all that stuff jammed up around the T-stat.
__________________
Jeff
|
| Reply |
|
|
The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.
Hybrid Mode
