Tire shredding Mustang on the dyno!

Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
8,286
Location
Michigan
Originally Posted by ARCOgraphite
Originally Posted by A_Harman
Originally Posted by ARCOgraphite
Originally Posted by ripcord
That's a Pinto, Baby!
No that's the garbage fox platform. The modified pinto platform of the Mustang II was a much better handler. I know, I had a King Cobra with a breathed on 302 and a 4 speed. Car was a blast!
But the Monza Spyder with 305 and 4 speed was much better.
Doubt it, and I'm not a Ford guy. Cant beat the front suspension on the Mustang II Its used today for almost all Resto rods. NO Garbage Struts. Plus, I made my own "Monza" I put a Don Hardy V8 kit in a '74 Vega GT, 300 HP 327, partial fender well headers and TH350 - all back in the late 70's. Fun but Big Mistake overall. Should have done a Turbo or breathed on Iron Duke 2.5 instead
Very ironic! My brother and I built a V8 Vega using the Hooker kit in '78-79. Put a '68 327 out of a station wagon into a '72 Vega GT. We didn't do it expecting a good handling car. We were only interested in straight line.
 
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
18,806
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
Originally Posted by A_Harman
..... Very ironic! My brother and I built a V8 Vega using the Hooker kit in '78-79. Put a '68 327 out of a station wagon into a '72 Vega GT. We didn't do it expecting a good handling car. We were only interested in straight line.
Too Funny! If I remember The Hardest parts of the job were: 1- Flipping the heater core in the heater box left-to-right to move the inlets and outlets out of the way of the right valve cover. 2- Cost of a new Vette radiator that went in front of the cross brace 3- Welding up a 4 link axle out of a 10 bolt posi 4- Getting a custom driveshaft made. Learned a LOT as a greenhorn mechanic, And NONE of this was done on a lift. The car had a 10 second 0-100mph that I stopwatched a few times. Pretty quick, and that engine just ran Fair. Also that car did donuts with the flick of the gas pedal. Which way do you want to head? Hit the gas till your pointing the correct way then let off a bit and away you go smile smile wink Fast for the late Seventies - though there were still a ton of late 60's Muscle cars out there.
 
Last edited:

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,007
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by ARCOgraphite
Like I said yesterday, my VW is quicker than a Ferrari 308GTB V8 and its and 85 cu-in "motorcycle" engine in a 3200 lb car. I'm sure the Ferrari is more fun to drive regardless. The VW handles pretty bad and lists like a double-decker bus
3200 lbs ... ?? My Z06 is 3200 lbs.
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
13,389
Location
Jupiter, Florida
My job, way back when, was to help Ford turbocharge that 2.3L. Our company helped develop and dyno test the roller camshaft and roller followers. One reason the normally aspirated 2.3L engine made such low power were the limitations of the flat tappet non roller emissions camshaft. We could not get more lift or area under the curve, without increasing duration and overlap and killing emissions compliance. The result of the initial design limitations were typical of the day, poor performance. The Japanese makers of the same time period did a much better job managing airflow. Ford put some effort into improving intake ports, even going as far as making them "D" shaped, and trying aluminum heads, with no real results. As you would guess, a simple camshaft swap to a "hot cam" along with opening up the exhaust increased HP to 150. Double the emissions engine's real world output. But turbocharging at fairly low boost (12-15PSI) and intercooling, brought HP up to 205. Low by today's standards for sure. However 300HP was just a few tweaks away, and could be done for very little money. Swap in a manual boost controller, crank the boost up, and open up the exhaust. A little computer reprogramming and that car became a very respectable performer. Due to relatively poor airflow, the way to manage boost on an SVO was to have the boost increase as RPM increased. This kept torque at good levels from 3500 to 6000. Greatly increasing peak HP. This guy forgot to blow air through the intercooler. That does help.
https://www.allfordmustangs.com/for...ions-performance-svo-engine-front-ii.jpg [img]https://preview.redd.it/d2oetz0r3f0...d4d975d4b42e6e38ee2dcdde13b5872e18c7db32[/img]
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
7,154
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted by ARCOgraphite
Cant beat the front suspension on the Mustang II Its used today for almost all Resto rods. NO Garbage Struts.
That's not 100% accurate....Aftermarket Mustang II suspensions use lower A-arm's, Not the Strut Rod style single beam style lower control arm found on stock Ford's. Sure, The M-II is a marked improvement over the spring-over upper control arm style found on earlier Mustangs/Falcon & for conversions...Better than a leaf sprung solid front axle. I don't see it being much if at all better than the Fox Body suspension, The "Strut" effectively makes the spindle very tall which helps the geometry in terms of bump steer & overall handling. The owners of the company I used to work for loved to sell FatMan M-II front suspensions, Some cars it made since....Others, Not so much.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
1,495
Location
Not here
My son has had several really nice muffstains on his dyno that went north of 770 hp. Not a lot of folks know what it's like to get in a light weight car such as this with crazy power. Not my cup of tea.
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
2,932
Location
New England, USA
Brings back memories. Parents had one in the same color. I learned how to drive on one of those except with the manual...was it even a 5 speed? I had almost no hands on knowledge about cars outside of what I read in R&T, C&D and all the other reading I could do, but I remember how awful the seats were (I just cold not get comfortable and they had no lateral support) and how cheap the interior felt. I think the only upside to the car was the 'sport' steering wheel, same as this car. I honestly think this car is what sent my tastes towards European... Dad's next car was a first year Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, which was actually a nice car all around. Fun to drive, good looking and comfortable.
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2003
Messages
12,674
Location
Illinois
I understood it to mean not using the McPherson struts used by the Fox Body platform.
Originally Posted by clinebarger
Originally Posted by ARCOgraphite
Cant beat the front suspension on the Mustang II Its used today for almost all Resto rods. NO Garbage Struts.
That's not 100% accurate....Aftermarket Mustang II suspensions use lower A-arm's, Not the Strut Rod style single beam style lower control arm found on stock Ford's. Sure, The M-II is a marked improvement over the spring-over upper control arm style found on earlier Mustangs/Falcon & for conversions...Better than a leaf sprung solid front axle. I don't see it being much if at all better than the Fox Body suspension, The "Strut" effectively makes the spindle very tall which helps the geometry in terms of bump steer & overall handling. The owners of the company I used to work for loved to sell FatMan M-II front suspensions, Some cars it made since....Others, Not so much.
 
Top