According to Shelby’s account in The Cobra Story, after securing a body and chassis from AC and the new small-block V-8 engine from Ford, “a strange thing happened. One night I had a dream in which I saw the name ‘Cobra’ on the front of the new car. I woke up and jotted the name down on a pad which I kept by my bedside… Next morning, when I looked at the name ‘Cobra,’ I knew it was right.” Or maybe he’d seen this ad. The fact is, Shelby was notorious for his snake-oil salesmanship and bending facts to his benefit.
I’d never noticed this use of the “Cobra” in any Ford ads before. But the timing is right, as the Cobra project started in September of 1961. What say you: coincidence or inspiration?
In addition to the 300 hp “Thunderbird 390” version there was also the “Thunderbird Super 390”, which was a genuine high-performance engine with different heads, forerunners of ones that would also be used on the high-performance 406/427 engines to come. With a single four barrel carb, it was rated at 375 hp at 6000 (!) rpm; and 401 hp with optional triple carbs. It was the terror of NASCAR that year.
My full story on this factory hot rod is here:
It’s amazing how much hyperbole, exaggerations and outright lies that advertising copywriters got away with in the 1940’s thru 1960’s.
And as for the “performance” of the heavy, wide, under-achiever “Boat Anchor” FE 390 engine…..
This was very much not a “boat anchor FE”; this was the new high performance 390 with heads that were the prototype for the coming 406/427, and made 401 hp with triple carbs. It was the terror of NASCAR that year.
As to weight:
Chrysler B V8 weight: 620 lbs.
Ford FE V8 weight: 560 lbs.
The FE was not a “big block” engine; “medium block” would be the right description. It was also more compact in dimensions than the Chrysler B series.
Full story here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/auto-biography/curbside-classic-1961-ford-starliner/
Paul, that 560 lbs for a 390 is not correct, unless that is for a partially assembled engine. I did a google search and one of the early answers does show 560 lbs, so I am assuming that’s where you got it. The page below has relatively accurate engine weights, and it shows most FE’s at 650 lbs, which is definitely closer to reality.
https://www.gomog.com/allmorgan/engineweights2.html
Like accurate real world weight of old cars, accurate engine weights are sometimes hard to find due to variations in how its configured. Tim Meyer of TMeyer Inc actually weighted various V8’s (SBF, Cleveland, 400 and SBC) in various configurations. His results are accurate and the photo shows how much of the engines assembly is included. He has several configurations with aluminum parts, which shows how much weight they can save. Unfortunately, he did not weight an FE.
https://www.tmeyerinc.com/tech/engine-weights/
Also on the whole FE being a big block thing, dyed in the wool Ford enthusiasts tend to call the engine an “FE” and nothing more. The small block and big block terminology really came from Chevrolet and has since been applied to all engines, often incorrectly. In relative terms, the FE is a medium sized engine, based on bore spacing, size and weight, but few people use the “medium block” terminology. However, it was the biggest block offered on Ford passenger cars for most of the 1960’s, making it a “Big Block” in relative to the other Ford division engines (that is until the 385 was introduced in 1969 to the Ford division cars and there were a few years of overlap). That is probably why most refer to it as a big block.
This ad doesn’t contain any specific performance figures (0-60 acceleration time or top speed, for example), so it would likely pass muster even today from a legal standpoint.
“The men who gave it its Thunderbird thrust are the men who wrote the book on V-8’s”
So I guess there were no women involved, heh?
In those days in Powertrain Engineering? Probably not too many.
Any Mopar 383 “Golden Commando” V8 engine optioned car would had embarrassed this Ford driver.
Not so.
383 Golden Commando: 340 hp
390 High Performance: 401 hp
Go look up the NASCAR records for 1961 and see who was embarrassing whom.
I can easily see a memoir with this sort of hyperbole, but the ad is fascinating—I don’t remember seeing it at all at the time.
I sifted through the Henry Ford Museum “Cobra” images–plenty I’d never seen before–but nothing tantalizing preceding the earliest assembly photos dated February 1962.
Very interesting!!!
I’m sure these numbers were “nominal” given the cheating, I mean tuning, that NASCAR was famous for, but the 1961 Fords claimed 375 hp on the hoods, up to 385 in ‘62 and 410 in ‘63 and ‘64 which seemed to be the last year for those markings. I assume those last two years were 427’s.
NASCAR only allowed a single four barrel carb, hence the 375 rating on the ’61 390 with that setup.
The 406 came along in 1962. 385 hp with one 4 barrel; 405 hp with tri-power.
I think the 427 came in mid-year 1963. Yes, 410 hp with single carb; 425 hp with two four barrels.
FWIW, NASCAR engines back then were pretty tightly checked for being “stock”. Given that these were gross hp ratings, they actually would have been closer to reality (open exhausts, optimum spark advance) than when installed in a street car. FWIW.
I am not sure that the ad is necessarily specific to the super-high output version that was the basis for the NASCAR tracks, as there was also a basic 4 bbl 390 straight out of the 61 Thunderbird that was rated at 300 bhp (according to the 61 Ford brochure).
I suspect that the advertising folks would also heap such superlatives on the version with the “mere” 300 horses. Cubic inches were a big deal then, and Ford’s “Thunderbird 390 Special” V8 sounded far more impressive than Chevy’s 348 (who cares about those ugly Plymouths). 🙂
I wonder what the take rate was on the “normal” 390 in the 61 Fords. I would guess not that high.
It wouldn’t surprise me if a fairly high percentage of the 390 V-8s were installed in the station wagons.
Most of the 390s were lo-po applications. That high rpm version of the 390 must have had some really special internal parts. The Thunderbird name carried a lot of magic back in the ’50’s and early 60’s. In the early 70’s I used to do odd jobs for a Minister’s widow in the neighborhood. She proudly showed me her late husband’s pride and joy, a ’62 Ford Galaxie XL coupe. It was white with a red bucket seat and console interior. She was sure to point out the Thunderbird 390 call out on the front fenders.
Here’s a picture of a similar car.