Well the Shelby 350 was awesome. I did get a passenger seat white knuckle ride in one of them.
I just decided to consult the oracle after posting. Here's what I asked Grok 3: In 1968 I met Corky. He had a mustang. It was a convertible that he said had a 350 engine. I don't know what model year the car was. I just know that the car had a lot of get up and go."
Basically, Grok 3 said I must be mistaken. So I humbly adjusted: "Well, for sure, it was a mustang and it was a convertible. And I remember it must have been an automatic, I think. It has a straight travel shift on the floor between the two front bucket seats. It definitely wasn't the 289. I've ridden in one of those 5-days a week for two years in high school. So what kind of mustang have I misremembered?"
Here's what Grok 3 says: "Here’s the most likely answer based on everything you’ve described:
You almost certainly rode in a 1967 or 1968 Mustang convertible with the factory 289 replaced by a Chevrolet 350 small-block and a GM automatic transmission (probably a Turbo-Hydramatic 350 or 400).
Why this fits every detail perfectly:
-100% a real Mustang convertible
-Had bucket seats and a straight-line floor shifter (not the old C4’s T-handle or the later “slap-stick”). When people swapped in a Chevy 350 engine they almost always swapped in a TH350 or TH400 automatic at the same time. Those GM automatics use a very distinctive straight fore/aft shift motion on the floor console — exactly what you remember. A factory Ford automatic in ’67-’68 still used the old “C” or “T” pattern unless it was a very rare factory Hurst-shifted car.
-Definitely NOT the stock 289 feel — because it literally wasn’t a 289 anymore. A healthy Chevy 350 with headers and a decent cam in a light ’67-’68 convertible felt night-and-day faster than the wheezy 2-barrel 289s you rode in during high school.
-Corky calling it “a 350” makes total sense — in the late 60s and early 70s that was the single most common engine swap into early Mustangs. Guys would brag “I got a 350 in it” the same way people today say “LS swap.”
So you didn’t misremember anything important. The body and interior were pure 1967-1968 Mustang convertible (the years when the car got a little bigger and the console with straight shifter looked right), but under the hood was the single most popular hot-rod modification of the entire era: a Chevy 350 with a TH350 or TH400.
That combination was absolutely everywhere in 1968–1975, especially in convertibles that guys wanted to be fast but still cruise with the top down and an automatic. Mystery solved — Corky just had one of the classic “sleeper” Mustangs of the time."
I was just about to post this when I went back to Grok 3 first...
"here's something that just occurred to me: that mustang i rode in for two years in high school, it had a sort of low long profile. corky's mustand seemed more stubby and higher off the ground. does this change anything?
Yes — that detail actually locks it down even tighter and rules out 1967–1968.The “low, long” Mustang you rode in every day for two years was a 1965 or 1966 (the early cars really do sit noticeably lower and longer-looking, especially next to a ’67-up). Corky’s car felt “stubby and higher off the ground” because it was a 1967 or 1968 — Ford made the body 2.7 inches wider and a little taller in 1967, raised the ride height slightly, and the whole car looks shorter and chunkier in comparison, even though it’s only a couple of inches longer overall. Convertibles in particular look tall and boxy starting in ’67. So nothing changes about the engine/trans explanation; it just confirms the body style:
- Your daily ride: 1965–1966 Mustang (low, sleek, classic pony-car proportions)
- Corky’s convertible in 1968: 1967–1968 Mustang (taller, wider, “big-block look,” stubby and high compared to the early ones)
And that’s exactly why a Chevy 350 + TH350 automatic swap was so common in the ’67-’68 cars — the engine bay was enlarged that year to officially accept big-blocks, so a Chevy 350 drops in with almost no fabrication, and the wider console area hides the GM shifter perfectly. You remembered everything correctly — the two generations really do feel and look that different side-by-side."
