Question on K66/MK 69 Convertible

[Norris W.]

I have a friend with a '69 400/4sp fact air convertible. He's owned the car for 23 years and I've been around it a lot over the years and consider it very nice. When he bought it in 1990 the build sheet was still on the tank and it has a Protecto Plate also. The tank shows K66 ignition. He said the Protecto Plate shows LQ. The engine is stamped LQ. I do not believe it was a restamp and don't believe the state of the restamp art prior to 1990 was sufficient to not be easily detectible.

My OLD NCRS '53 to '72 Spec Guide shows the L68 with K66 as being MK. I don't for a minute think that someone would have gone to a lot of trouble to fake a K66 on a build sheet, which looked orignal in every way when removed from the tank since it is a fairly insignificant option value wise and faking the build sheet would seem to contradict the Protecto AND the engine stamping.

The car is for sale, but my friend has hit a roadblock with a potential buyer over the discrepency.

I'm stumped. Any ideas?

[Joe L.]

Re: Question on K66/MK 69 Convertible

I have a friend with a '69 400/4sp fact air convertible. He's owned the car for 23 years and I've been around it a lot over the years and consider it very nice. When he bought it in 1990 the build sheet was still on the tank and it has a Protecto Plate also. The tank shows K66 ignition. He said the Protecto Plate shows LQ. The engine is stamped LQ. I do not believe it was a restamp and don't believe the state of the restamp art prior to 1990 was sufficient to not be easily detectible.

My OLD NCRS '53 to '72 Spec Guide shows the L68 with K66 as being MK. I don't for a minute think that someone would have gone to a lot of trouble to fake a K66 on a build sheet, which looked orignal in every way when removed from the tank since it is a fairly insignificant option value wise and faking the build sheet would seem to contradict the Protecto AND the engine stamping.

The car is for sale, but my friend has hit a roadblock with a potential buyer over the discrepency.

I'm stumped. Any ideas?

Norris-----


I believe that earlier in the model year engines to be equipped with K-66 were converted at St. Louis by removing the standard points-type distributor and replacing it with the transistor ignition distributor. This is how K-66 was accomplished for the 1966-68 model years, too. So, earlier in the model year, "LQ" engines would have been so-converted. I don't know just when the practice ended and K-66 engines supplied from the engine plants with the transistor ignition distributor installed as part of the engine assembly (with specific suffix codes like "MK" to indicate such) but I'll bet the car you mention was one of the earlier ones with the converted distributors. The converted K-66 might well have continued quite awhile into the model year, maybe even most of the year.

[Norris W.]

Re: Question on K66/MK 69 Convertible

Thanks Joe. I thought there must be some similar explanation because it just didn't make sense that somebody would go to that much trouble to add what I'd consider an insignificant option, especially if it would contradict paperwork and engine stamping.

[Dick W.]

Re: Question on K66/MK 69 Convertible

MK code is not as prevalent as LQ, but many exist. As far as the accuracy of the old spec book, there are many discrepancies in in as it relates to '69 cars. Rates right up there with "Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs"

[Norris W.]

Re: Question on K66/MK 69 Convertible

Thanks Dick,
So the story goes............. my friend's car is on E Bay. An interested buyer supposedly went and got certified funds preparing to come and buy it. His "expert" friend advised him against it, saying the car was obviously bogus. In my opinion, the car, condition, options and colors are SPECTACULAR and I've come close to buying it several times over the years myself.