Michael Johnson wrote in news:F8GdnaOG6_msfHzYnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:
That's exactly why I like the Dak. It's certainly not a hot rod, but the 345 ft lb of torque is nice to have, especially with the 3.92 rear.
I would probably go with no more than 1". Maybe even 1/2".
The trouble is that in today's world 340 hp isn't excessive. Many new cars would more than hang with a Fox Mustang sporting 340 hp at the flywheel. I guess that is to be expected as technology marches on.
340 is more than the new Mustang puts out, and in a lighter body would be that much faster. "Many new cars"? Uhhhh.... doubt it.
dwight
A bone stock 5.0L would do 0-60 with a manual tranny in about six seconds flat and with an automatic maybe seven seconds flat, at best. With a 340 hp crate engine you might shave a full second off those times at best. I can manage 4.6 seconds in my 89 LX with about 500 hp at the flywheel. That would probably put Joe's LX (with automatic and crate motor) at 5.5-6.0 seconds for a 0-60 run. There are many cars that can match that time today. Here are a few:
Camry - V6 0-60 in 5.8 seconds
Anyone wanting to dominate the overwhelming majority of vehicles these days with a vintage Mustang had better bring 400-500 hp to the table and/or one trick rear suspension. There are some four wheel drive rockets that my car couldn't take even in a straight line. All you need to do is look at where the Vette/Cobra, and even the Mustang GT, have to be from a horsepower perspective to be considered high performance cars. The bar is set high nowadays.
Amen.
"My Name Is Nobody" wrote in news:DyvEh.1596$aO6.314@trndny06:
Granted, 340hp is fairly commonplace these days, but not in a lightweight RWD platform like the Fox Mustang.
A few other things that might set the LX apart would be that it already has an Auburn along with 3.73s, and a LenTech (or comparable) can be had with a variety of ratios.
At any rate, which would be the more desirable to drive - a freshened up Fox Mustang or a stock Camry? Not a difficult choice... ;)
"dwight" wrote in news:VqmdnUWZsqdrmH_YnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
How'd you like the Konis? I ended up going with Tokicos, and now that I'm almost in the AARP, they are a bit too firm for my taste.
I wonder what flows better - the Cobra intake or the GT40...
Yup.
Yes. I recall not liking the '94 body style at all. I definitely wanted the Fox car.
I hope to save a few $$ by reusing some of my existing stuff. Rear, body stuff (subframes, upper/lower bracing, motor stuff, etc.). However, I should probably replace the mundane stuff like the A/C, PS pump, etc. Those things are destined to fail soon.
I wasn't accounting for style. I'll take a nice, strong Fox Mustang any day over most new cars. I've quit trying to get my LX into the position of domination from a hp perspective. I can't keep up with the current power levels and keep the car safe for the street. I would need to be thinking of 600+ rwhp/rwtq and that is just a silly amount of power for that car. IMO, 500 is the jagged edge limit. Its next incarnation will be geared toward an all around fun, dependable ride and not a take no prisoners build up.
You're doing the right thing with the crate motor. Just install whatever makes you happy and satisfied. Any more than that is a waste of time, money and sanity.
The GT40 upper flows better than the Cobra. It has smoother bends but is also more expensive. It looks cool as hell too.
Long view? 5000 years is less than the blink of an eye in geo time. Cultural and Physical Anthropologists dig up the bones of hominids around the world that are far far older than 5000 years and wonder at the lives they led. Archeologists dig through the refuse piles of past civilizations to discover what drove the society. I doubt it is too far beyond the imagination to believe that in 5000 or 500,000 years they will be digging through county dumps and cemetaries in a pursuit of better understanding of how they got to where they are.
I expect there will be people still living that far in the future. After all, when the great extinctions have taken place, there have always been specie which survived and continued on. Some dinos survived even to the present time... just in modified forms...
Throughout the history of man (and woman :0) there have been man made disasters and natural disasters which have greatly reduced the population levels. Wars. Plagues. Tsunamis. Etc. It's nature balancing out. Too many people and disease spreads quickly. Wars kill off the males and thus reduce the rate of population growth. We are long overdue for either man made or nature made.
Is the earth warming? Of course. Is it caused by man? Good question. If it is, then how do we explain the ice ages and warm periods between ice ages? How do we explain the air quality being worse during various periods BEFORE industrialization? Al Gore and his side have no more idea of what drives the weather than those who argue that it's all a chicken little scenario. Man has not existed near long enough to see and understand the dynamics od earth's cycles.
Like the man said.... follow the money. And the money is in the billions to those who can keep the global warming fears alive and promote their ideas on how to fix it.
So, I'll continue to use dino fuel until something better comes along, just as I feel fairly certain you do if you drive, ride public transportation, use electricity, heat or cool your abode, and even feed and cloth yourself.
:0) This public service announcement brought to you by High Desert Septic... "We're #1 in the #2 business."
As the standard of living improves for the world's population the rate of population growth will decrease substantially. It has happened in the developing countries of Europe and Asia. Japan is in a population free fall as is much of western Europe. The same will happen in India and China as they develop. Our population in the USA would be in decline if it weren't for immigration. I think the global population will peak sometime in the future and then start a steady decline to an equilibrium point. That is, if we don't kill ourselves off before then.
I always chuckle when I see someone say it hasn't been this warm for and I immediately want to ask them what caused it to be that warm way back then. They can't tell us but they believe they do know absolutely what is causing it today. The fear mongering we are hearing today about global warming was being said 25-30 years ago about GLOBAL COOLING!!!
You are dead-on with the above comment. This is more a money, and vote, grab than legitimate, accurate science. There has been an environmental doomsday scenario coming from the rabid environmentalists for the last
40-50 years. It amazes me how fast they can switch direction depending on the most recent snip it of data gathered. They definitely aren't long term thinkers. Anyone that believes we can control the global climate has been watching too much Star Trek. I give the whole global warming frenzy another 5-10 years before it is tossed overboard for the next environmental catastrophe.The only thing that will stop the use of oil is economics. It will either be too expensive to use and/or a cheaper substitute will come to market. I don't see this happening for another 50 years, at least.
Michael Johnson wrote in news:kvqdnRu9-aCjen_YnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:
That's prolly a good thing. ;)
Michael, we've always been pretty much on the same page there.
Very good point. At that level you're competing with OEM engineering not to mention budgets.
Indeed. I think that's prolly the best balance in the real world. OTOH, my Bucket-T will need definitely need wheelie bars... ;)
"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news:Gv6dnYVT_PXtb3 _YnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:
Well, I guess I could sell the Cobra and add a few more $$ into the budget for the GT40. I guess I'd better spring for the 65mm TB as well.
The increase over a Cobra intake isn't substantial. The Cobra is actually a little better from a torque perspective while the GT40 delivers more peak hp. Definitely stay with a 65mm throttle body/spacer. It is the sweet spot for a N/A 302. Any larger and you'll give up too much low/mid range torque. You might want to have the upper and lower intakes port matched and smoothed. If you want to get fancy maybe even get them extrude honed.
In combination with the bracing and the lowering springs, the Konis were TIGHT. But keep in mind that they are adjustable, too. I usually run with them tightened up max, but one or two 360-degree turns on both loosen up the ride well enough for most passengers.
That's why I bought TFrog. Waited to see the '94s on the lot, then scrambled to find a leftover '93.
Air pump. That one threw me. Air pump? I'll continue to have the accessories replaced as they fail, rather than plan on failure. That's part of the price for holding onto a car this long.
Might be time to start touring the junkyards in Philadelphia, too...
:()
Couple of points here, if I may...
1) I won't question the figures you threw out, but I find it weird. I don't have much of a problem with those cars now, even with my lousy 205hp.2) I admit that I don't go looking for races, especially with a Camry or Mazda 3. Hell, I don't go looking for races, period. (They do find ME on occasion, though.) The reason I'm looking forward to an increase in power is when I come out of a tight turn looking at an open road ahead of me. Burning rubber from one red light to the next, just to prove that my car is faster than some stranger's, is not my idea of fun.
dwight
The 302 makes very good low/mid range torque which allows for good performance without bouncing off the rev limiter. My guess is the garden variety Camry/Mazda owner can't drive worth a $hit and is unwilling to wind the engine out to redline to get the best acceleration. In a contest where both drivers won't go north of
4,000-5,000 rpm the low/mid range torque of a 302 is a big advantage. This is just a guess on my part as to why you don't have trouble.We have the same taste. I love the torque the KB puts out across the rpm range. Coming out of a corner in third gear at 2,500-3,000 rpm and rolling into the throttle is a rush with 460 ft-lbs of torque at the wheels. The acceleration just gets stronger the closer I get to redline. It also doesn't suck that I can be rolling along in third gear at 2,500 rpm, mash the throttle and send the tires up in smoke for as long as I want as the a$$ end of the car drifts sideways leaving two solid black stripes on the pavement. :)
seconds
seconds
seconds
seconds
Mike,
Dwight was talking faster. You're talking quickness. Trap speed vs E.T. As we all know our nose-heavy, fairly torquey, Fox Mustangs suffer horribly from a lack of traction -- the reason why these newer sedans are a threat on a quick dash, even for a Fox Mustang with added fire power. (Ever notice that the turner Foxes -- Saleen, Roush, etc. dispite lots of horsepower would still have a hard time breaking into the 12s on street tires?) So going back to the point I think Dwight was trying to make, a 340 HP Fox would mow down many new performance cars in a rolling start where the traction issue would be mostly nullified and its relatively lightweight (especially compared to most newer cars) would be a big advantage.
Patrick
seconds
seconds
seconds
seconds
I think you are making a somewhat valid point but three of the four cars I listed are trapping 99 mph with low 14 second ETs in the 1/4 mile. These are CD numbers so there is probably more to be had with a good, aggressive driver. The average driver of a stock Fox Mustang with a manual transmission will do the 1/4 in the low 14 second range at just under 100 mph. These new grocery getters are doing the same. Plus they are doing these times with an automatic transmission. Run one of them against a bone stock automatic 5.0L Mustang and it wouldn't even be a close race. They would beat it by well over a full second in the 1/4 mile. It would take a 340 hp crate motor in the Mustang just to make it a close race. Heck, the cars I listed are within 1/2 a second of the new Mustangs setting in Ford's showrooms.
seconds
seconds
Then along with a crate engine comes the modifications necessary to make use of all that power where the rubber meets the road. Otherwise, us poor Foxes would just sit and spin.
:()
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.