 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / October 2007Hey PATRICK - got the '93 Cobra
Two words: Holy. sh.t. There is no way this car is stock. But I'm not sure. Tell me what you think. First off, it'll rip my stock 5.0 a new one. It is f-a-s-t! After 2,000, 2,500 for sure, in any gear, it pulls like a train to 6,000. The tires break loose in the 1-2 shift at WOT and the car slides out to the right. It's impossible to steer at this point. 235 horse? LOL! 280lbs tq? LMAO! 275 and 320 is much more believable. But, it has some weird parts on it. Mine has a fuel pressure indicator in the engine bay (WTH?). And it has a C&L air intake - I'm not even sure what the advantage of that is. And a K&N. That baby is coming off pronto! And someone cut the hood blanket out around the Cobra intake.... any thoughts on that?!?! Weird. And what do the stock valve covers look like? My Mustang book says stock was just plain black. Mine are black with red writing. Those gotta go. And the stock exhaust is gone. :( This car is loud. Good, but loud. Wonder how much the stock Ford mufflers would cost? Think you can still get them? Hard to believe the car has 3.08s. Again, my Mustang book says a stock Cobra cruises at 1750rpm at 60mph. I noticed today I was doing 1600 at 50. Sounds right. Can't imagine any more gear in this car. It can't grip as is. Oh, one last thing, there is a very slight electronic whine coming from the car. I have no idea why. It's not the stereo or the heater. Thoughts? Oh oh, one more last thing... one of the dash lights is burned out. How do you get at those things? Well, sooo much to do to this car it's scary: a good clean to start and change all the fluids. Except, it's supposed to snow here tomorrow. LOL. Thanks man. Talk soon. Brad > Two words: Holy. sh.t. > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Brad Pay much for it ? >> Two words: Holy. sh.t. >> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > Pay much for it ? Probably. $14,000. But it only has 40,000 miles on it. Wheels need to be redone though as they are peeling and the tire sidewalls are blistering. Brad >> Two words: Holy. sh.t. >> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > >Pay much for it ? > Two words: Holy. sh.t. > There is no way this car is stock. But I'm not sure. Tell me what you think. > First off, it'll rip my stock 5.0 a new one. It is f-a-s-t! After 2,000, > 2,500 for sure, in any gear, it pulls like a train to 6,000. The tires > break loose in the 1-2 shift at WOT and the car slides out to the right. > It's impossible to steer at this point. Mine pulls pretty good, but doesn't feel/or run any stronger than my previous 5.0 LX. My LX ran 14.2 @ 98, my Cobra 14.1 @ 99. Both my Mustangs break loose in second, but don't step out to the right. > 235 horse? LOL! 280lbs tq? LMAO! 275 and 320 is much more believable. Mine dyno'd at, IIRC, 227. > But, it has some weird parts on it. Mine has a fuel pressure indicator in > the engine bay (WTH?). And it has a C&L air intake - I'm not even sure what > the advantage of that is. Less restriction. I'm also using a C&L. It's a 73mm and has a much larger opening than the stock 70mm. > And a K&N. That baby is coming off pronto! And > someone cut the hood blanket out around the Cobra intake.... any thoughts on > that?!?! Weird. Maybe at some point it was fitted with a taller intake. ? > And what do the stock valve covers look like? My Mustang > book says stock was just plain black. Mine are black with red writing. > Those gotta go. Yep, stock is just black painted steel. They didn't use the stock aluminum 5.0 covers because of the roller rockers. > And the stock exhaust is gone. :( This car is loud. Good, but loud. > Wonder how much the stock Ford mufflers would cost? Think you can still get > them? I don't know if you could get them or not. My stockers are still going strong. > Hard to believe the car has 3.08s. Again, my Mustang book says a stock > Cobra cruises at 1750rpm at 60mph. I noticed today I was doing 1600 at 50. > Sounds right. I'll check mine number against these tomorrow. I'll let you know. > Can't imagine any more gear in this car. It can't grip as is. What kind of tires are you running? Bad tires could be the traction issue. > Oh, one last thing, there is a very slight electronic whine coming from the > car. I have no idea why. It's not the stereo or the heater. Thoughts? Fuel pump. ? > Oh oh, one more last thing... one of the dash lights is burned out. How do > you get at those things? Never had that problem. > Well, sooo much to do to this car it's scary: a good clean to start and > change all the fluids. Except, it's supposed to snow here tomorrow. LOL. SNOW?!? Where are you at? The South Pole? Patrick >> Two words: Holy. sh.t. > [quoted text clipped - 77 lines] > > Patrick Lol. Calgary, AB. North pole is a lot closer. I think you are right on the tires. They are old Kuhmo 711s. Not exactly sticky. But I don't think this car is stock. I've had an LX and GT and this thing will crucify them. The non stock valve covers, the no cats, the fuel pressure gauge tell me something more is going on here. Oh, and there is a hole in the dash, right where one might mount an tach is one is so inclined. Just another thing to repair. It's an interesting car to be sure. You are right about it being less skittish around bad pavement. A little too much body roll for me though - might have to do something about that. And the black trim needs some work, and some of the weather stripping. And the headlights, taillights, wheels.... there is a lot of work here to make it a pristine car, but, I love it. B Here are my RPMs. 5th gear 60 mph -- 1950 50 mph -- 1600 4th gear 50 mph -- 2300 Reminder: I'm spinning 3.55s, stock wheels and factory-spec tires. BTW, I'm jealous. You have cloth seats. Now please don't tell me you don't have a factory sunroof. Patrick > Here are my RPMs. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Patrick LOL. All of the above. I can't compare though I took the car out for 5 minutes tonite and never got it out of 3rd at 80mph with room left to go. One thing no one has is cruise. Exactly what was the point behind that? Something symbolic that you don't cruise at 60 in these cars? I gotta get some traction in this car. I was looking at Nitto drag radials last nite. I'm sure they hook but do you know how they are in the rain, and how they corner? Gotta say, it's a fun car. I really never get tired of looking at the little cobra on the fender - don't see many Foxes with those. :) Brad >> Here are my RPMs. >> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Brad <cough> I have cruise control. My LX is loaded with I think every possible option for 89.  Signature"Wow, I want a billion Dollars and a pet monkey!" - Dale Jarrett "Paul's vocabulary is rather large, but most of the words have no meaning in English" - Joe Canuck "Too bad it wasn't "personality theft"...you'd be immune." - Herb Tarlek >>> Here are my RPMs. >>> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > <cough> I have cruise control. My LX is loaded with I think every > possible option for 89. Does it have the anniversary rocker panel decals? I believe it was in Roman numerals if I am not mistaken. >>>> Here are my RPMs. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > Does it have the anniversary rocker panel decals? I believe it was in Roman > numerals if I am not mistaken. It has the "25 YEARS" emblem on the dash, nothing outside. AFAIK it was all dealer made anyway, no official package from Ford, so I'm sure there's tons of different combos out there. Signature"Wow, I want a billion Dollars and a pet monkey!" - Dale Jarrett "Paul's vocabulary is rather large, but most of the words have no meaning in English" - Joe Canuck "Too bad it wasn't "personality theft"...you'd be immune." - Herb Tarlek > <NoOptio...@aol.com> wrote in message > One thing no one has is cruise. Exactly what was the point behind that? Probably the Cobra-only electronics/processor. > Something symbolic that you don't cruise at 60 in these cars? > I gotta get some traction in this car. I was looking at Nitto drag radials > last nite. I'm sure they hook but do you know how they are in the rain, and > how they corner? You give up some of both to get the added traction. Personally, if I was going to mount Nittos again (I had them before) I'd get an extra set of wheels. > Gotta say, it's a fun car. I really never get tired of looking at the > little cobra on the fender - don't see many Foxes with those. :) After driving my car for nearly 10 years, I happily trade those littles Cobras for another 100 horsepower. 235 just isn't cutting it anymore especially when it seems everything on the road now days is packing at least 250 and the heavy hitters are 350+. Patrick > Brad >> <NoOptio...@aol.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > >> Brad Well, yes, and no. 235 cannot be right. My Mustang book "The Official Ford Mustang 5.0" says independent tests of the Cobra parts on a GT yield 275hp. That is much more believable. Now, add headers, exhaust, air intake, pulleys, like I apparently have, and you're at 300. I dunno, maybe this car isn't stock cause it just goes! Unlike my 5.0, 3,000 rpm is fun, 4,000 is where the power really builds and by 5,000 you'd think the world is coming to an end and it pulls like crazy to about 6,000! It's nuts! (You should hear the exhaust at 5,000 - it's almost unholy... animals run in fear, women shield their faces, children cry and the sun refuses to shine. I love it! LOL!) It's a completely different car than any 5.0 I've owned. Granted, I haven't driven many cars but I'm pretty sure this 15 year old will outrun 99% of what is put out there today. Case in point, I had it in 3rd on the freeway today at 50mph. I just floored it so see what it would do in 3rd. Took about 4.5 "one thousand and ones" to hit 80 and was pulling hard. If I had the balls I'd ride it to 6,000. I'm really tempted to dyno it before the snow flies in it's totally untuned state just to see. I'll bet next year with a tune 13.3 or so will be the mark. Yes, I know that's about 290 RWHP with my fat a.s driving, but I believe it in this car. The Mustang book says the best magazine test they got was 13.75 at 98 in a stock Cobra. The book also says other testers who got low 14s used shift points too high for the best performance. That's not bad at all even today. Either way, Ford made 4,993 of these babies and that's it. By comparison, Ford made 800,000+ F-series trucks last year. I'll never sell this thing. ;) Brad >>> <NoOptio...@aol.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > Brad You forgot to include the 1993 Ford Mustang Cobra R's. There was I believe 107 or so made? Nick :) > Either way, Ford made 4,993 of these babies and that's it. By comparison, > Ford made 800,000+ F-series trucks last year. I'll never sell this thing. > ;) > > Brad And that's why most people who were lucky enough to get one new left them 100% stock. Signature"Wow, I want a billion Dollars and a pet monkey!" - Dale Jarrett "Paul's vocabulary is rather large, but most of the words have no meaning in English" - Joe Canuck "Too bad it wasn't "personality theft"...you'd be immune." - Herb Tarlek Do you know anyone with a G-Tech? I'm really curious to see what you car will run. > Well, yes, and no. 235 cannot be right. My Mustang book "The Official Ford > Mustang 5.0" says independent tests of the Cobra parts on a GT yield 275hp. > That is much more believable. Now, add headers, exhaust, air intake, > pulleys, like I apparently have, and you're at 300. All Cobras came with UD pullies. > I dunno, maybe this car isn't stock cause it just goes! Unlike my 5.0, 3,000 > rpm is fun, 4,000 is where the power really builds and by 5,000 you'd think [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > stock Cobra. The book also says other testers who got low 14s used shift > points too high for the best performance. That's not bad at all even today. I'm trying to recall. IIRC, mine ran a best of 13.5 and a 103 trap. That was with a short belt, skinnies and sticky street tires. > Either way, Ford made 4,993 of these babies and that's it. By comparison, > Ford made 800,000+ F-series trucks last year. I'll never sell this thing. > ;) Like Windsor Fox stated, that's why most didn't modify them. Patrick Hey guys... no, I don't know anyone with a G-Tech. In two weeks it'll be time to put the car away. :( I agree, stock rox. On *any* car, stock is best. Especially a low run Cobra, and Cobra-R, as Nick pointed out. But I think only the water pump pulley was under-driven on the stock Cobra? I dunno. I get the car back tomorrow - having an immobilizer put in it - and then it's a few more weeks of fun before the snow flies. Today I emailed my friend a camera phone pic of the little cobra with the words underneath it, "Feed me..." lol... He wrote back, "sushi, weiner schnitzel or hamburger?" lol... Mustangs are just plain fun! Brad > Do you know anyone with a G-Tech? I'm really curious to see what you > car will run. [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > Patrick >> <NoOptio...@aol.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Patrick Pat you are so right. I have a 2004 Maxima SL with 265hp and it is faster then my 88 Mustang 5L with a Powerdyne 6lb S/C on it. But hey it took how long for these cars to catch up? Not to mention that the 300tq is still very high by today's standards. Now if only Ford would place their 3.5L 6 cylinder in the base Mustang, hmmm...... Here I go again off on a rant. IMO the Mustang needs to offer a few different styling appearances with their different nameplates (such as Mach I, Boss, Bullitt, etc...) with a few more engine options producing as many as they can sell not limited editions which isn't how they became successful in the first place, especially with a new Pony War coming. First get out of the way something for those concerned with economy or gas mileage that still has some performance or find a replacement like they had with the EXP and Probe market. Then a base 6 cylinder, a Hi performance 6 perhaps twin turbo like the Lincoln may debut with (reborn SVO?). A base 4.6 with a tweaked 5.0 stroked, as well as a base 5.4 with a tweaked 5.8 stroked hi performance. Then aftermarket the s/c, single, or twin turbos/ Maybe bring back a big block to embarrass the Vette or once again another platform like the Pantera was since they exhausted the GT40? Ok going back to sleep lol... Nick :) On Oct 4, 3:26 am, "Nicholas Anthony" <nospamfo...@soptonline.net> wrote: > > After driving my car for nearly 10 years, I happily trade those > > littles Cobras for another 100 horsepower. 235 just isn't cutting it > > anymore especially when it seems everything on the road now days is > > packing at least 250 and the heavy hitters are 350+. > Pat you are so right. I have a 2004 Maxima SL with 265hp and it is faster > then my 88 Mustang 5L with a Powerdyne 6lb S/C on it. You're kidding? Your 5.0 with a 6lb puffer should be making an easy 300. > But hey it took how > long for these cars to catch up? Not to mention that the 300tq is still very > high by today's standards. > Now if only Ford would place their 3.5L 6 > cylinder in the base Mustang, hmmm...... Rest easy. It's coming. Soon. > Here I go again off on a rant. IMO the Mustang needs to offer a few > different styling appearances with their different nameplates (such as Mach > I, Boss, Bullitt, etc...) They are also coming. Ford has stated they'll produce a "specialty model" every year. > with a few more engine options producing as many > as they can sell not limited editions which isn't how they became successful > in the first place, especially with a new Pony War coming. I agree 100%. That's the way it should always be. > First get out of > the way something for those concerned with economy or gas mileage that still > has some performance or find a replacement like they had with the EXP and > Probe market. Then a base 6 cylinder, a Hi performance 6 perhaps twin turbo > like the Lincoln may debut with (reborn SVO?). Again, I agree. I think a modern SVO would be cool! > A base 4.6 with a tweaked 5.0 > stroked, as well as a base 5.4 with a tweaked 5.8 stroked hi performance. Hey, we already have a blown 5.4 in 500, 550 and 600-750 HP versions. > Then aftermarket the s/c, single, or twin turbos/ Maybe bring back a big > block to embarrass the Vette FYI -- the term "big block" is undefined. > or once again another platform like the Pantera > was since they exhausted the GT40? Ok going back to sleep lol... I think Ford's high-end stuff is gone for quite a long time. They need to get the basics/low-end of the market right before they can play with high-dollar toys again. Patrick > On Oct 4, 3:26 am, "Nicholas Anthony" <nospamfo...@soptonline.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > You're kidding? Your 5.0 with a 6lb puffer should be making an easy > 300. 300hp? I only wish. With the speed density, full Bassani exhaust with cats, and pulleys I was at a healthy 198hp at the wheels. After the Cobra MAF conversion with 24lb injectors I took off the pulleys and dyno'd at 188hp. Added the Powerdyne s/c to obtain the 238hp that's a 27% gain which is weak, car needs tweaking. Situation is my car is pretty rare too being an ASC McLaren. I really wanted to leave it stock, then I got the Mustang itch to do some mods but conscious tells me to keep it simple improvements and bolt ons that can easily be reversed. Furthest I would go now with mine is minor changes in appearance, vastly improve the brakes, make it handle incredible, with some decent power so I can enjoy it like it was meant to be. In order to justify modifying my car I plan to get a low mileage mint ASC McLaren as a "trailer queen" someday. >> But hey it took how >> long for these cars to catch up? Not to mention that the 300tq is still [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > They are also coming. Ford has stated they'll produce a "specialty > model" every year. Yes I am aware of that, Let me start over so I can try to better convey my thoughts, bare with me please. I feel Ford isnt doing it right. The way I see it is they are milking sales on old legendary icons we love with nothing to back it up other then 3m tape. It's pretty cheesey to release one specialty model a year that people can not afford to get consumers into the showrooms hoping they buy the less expensive models. To top it off there is little distinguishing one theme from another whether they share the same drivetrain, ground effects, wheels, brakes, etc... Back in the day these specialty cars had their own image and a purpose, nobody had a clue what these specialty cars were cause they were just evolving to the needs of the people. Today we anticipate and wait for our "flavor" Mustang to become available and you know what happens when you sit and wait for something you always wanted? It never lives up to your expectations. Now add this point. Remember back when the aero fox's came out? They were selling like hot cakes. After a few years people were sick of seeing them (at least were I live). I remember hearing, "so what kind of car do you have?" I have a me2, "whats a me2? You drive a Mustang, me2. Point I am trying to make is we are going on the 4th model year of the latest Mustang and they already had sales slumps without any competition! Ford needs to launch these specialty cars more then one at a time with out any limitations. Make Henry Ford smile again from the grave. >> with a few more engine options producing as many >> as they can sell not limited editions which isn't how they became [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Again, I agree. I think a modern SVO would be cool! Just hope they learned from their mistakes. It wasnt that people didnt want a high tech Mustang or even a more exclusive costly one for that matter. What they did want was to feel they got their monies worth. Best way for that was to make sure it outperforms every thing in it's class and especially under it. Granted price wise it was on par if not maybe cheaper then the high tech Starions and Conquest TSi's of the day however in the same showroom you had a much cheaper Mustang GT that had some serious balls. If only they produced the Mustang SVO with the 16valve 2.3L Turbo, twin overhead cam they were going to do before getting axed. :( I believe that lil 2.3L Turbo 4v was supposed to have 275hp back in 1987!!! Can you say SHAZAAM!!! >> A base 4.6 with a tweaked 5.0 >> stroked, as well as a base 5.4 with a tweaked 5.8 stroked hi performance. > > Hey, we already have a blown 5.4 in 500, 550 and 600-750 HP > versions. IMO having different engines is an excellent way to distinguish the various specialty cars. It allows individuality and makes things more interesting and fun for the competition rather then everyone racing with the same motor, same mods. >> Then aftermarket the s/c, single, or twin turbos/ Maybe bring back a big >> block to embarrass the Vette > > FYI -- the term "big block" is undefined. I understand your point you are right however there are some acceptable standards. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_block >> or once again another platform like the Pantera >> was since they exhausted the GT40? Ok going back to sleep lol... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Patrick Although I respectfully disagree I think you are right with the decision for different reasons. Just wanted to mention first that this reminds me of the high end luxury cars of the late 80's when GM had the Allante and Chrysler had the TC Maserati. Ford had a concept car called the Vignale but didnt want to go into production cause they felt the market was deminishing for such cars right around the recession and it had. I have more faith this time around for a Ford high performance car for a few reasons: economy is still booming, demand is high, we are dealing with a smaller market segment bearing less impact on the companies future, it would be a flagship car that attracts more buyers attention to the company, and once again Ford is void in this area cause they really shouldnt be using the Mustang to compete with the Corvette. It's totally apples and oranges. Wow I hope I made sense in what I wrote, I have to stop responding so late at night, I am half asleep and fell asleep a few times, should I hit send? The heck with it lol... Nick :) >> On Oct 4, 3:26 am, "Nicholas Anthony" <nospamfo...@soptonline.net> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I understand your point you are right however there are some acceptable > standards. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_block In this day and age with 7+ liter small block V-8 engines, the chances that we will ever see a new "factory" big block V-8 engine are slim to none. > Wow I hope I made sense in what I wrote, I have to stop responding so late > at night, I am half asleep and fell asleep a few times, should I hit send? > The heck with it lol... > > Nick :) > >>> Then aftermarket the s/c, single, or twin turbos/ Maybe bring back a big > >>> block to embarrass the Vette > >> FYI -- the term "big block" is undefined. > > I understand your point you are right however there are some acceptable > > standards.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_block > In this day and age with 7+ liter small block V-8 engines, the chances that > we will ever see a new "factory" big block V-8 engine are slim to none. Like I wrote, the term is undefinable. So it doesn't matter. What matters is HP. Patrick >>>>> Then aftermarket the s/c, single, or twin turbos/ Maybe bring back a big >>>>> block to embarrass the Vette [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Patrick I'd say the definition would be similar to the answer to "What's the difference between a 351W and a 352FE block?" Signature"Are you da poe-lice?" "No ma'am, we're musicians." "So round, so firm, so fully packed, so easy on the draw" - Daffy Duck "Too bad it wasn't "personality theft"...you'd be immune." - Herb Tarlek On Oct 7, 12:31 am, WindsorFox > >>>>> Then aftermarket the s/c, single, or twin turbos/ Maybe bring back a big > >>>>> block to embarrass the Vette > >>>> FYI -- the term "big block" is undefined. > >>> I understand your point you are right however there are some acceptable > >>> standards.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_block > >> In this day and age with 7+ liter small block V-8 engines, the chances that > >> we will ever see a new "factory" big block V-8 engine are slim to none. > > Like I wrote, the term is undefinable. So it doesn't matter. What > > matters is HP. > I'd say the definition would be similar to the answer to "What's the > difference between a 351W and a 352FE block?" But you can't take that 352FE, compare it to other [brand of] engines and say to be a "big block" it must meet these dimensions. Patrick On Oct 6, 2:37 am, "Nicholas Anthony" < > >> Pat you are so right. I have a 2004 Maxima SL with 265hp and it is faster > >> then my 88 Mustang 5L with a Powerdyne 6lb S/C on it. > > You're kidding? Your 5.0 with a 6lb puffer should be making an easy > > 300. > 300hp? I only wish. With the speed density, full Bassani exhaust with cats, > and pulleys I was at a healthy 198hp at the wheels. Stock 5-ohs dyno in the 190s rw. My Cobra did 220-230 something. After the Cobra MAF > conversion with 24lb injectors I took off the pulleys and dyno'd at 188hp. The bigger injectors likely had it running too fat (too rich). The stock 19s are good up to around 300. > Added the Powerdyne s/c to obtain the 238hp that's a 27% gain which is weak, > car needs tweaking. Again, your car should be making about 300. > Situation is my car is pretty rare too being an ASC > McLaren. I really wanted to leave it stock, then I got the Mustang itch to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to justify modifying my car I plan to get a low mileage mint ASC McLaren as > a "trailer queen" someday. If it was mine, I'd definitely sort of your lack of power and maybe, maybe upgrade the brakes. I'd leave its appearance dead stock. Why alter something that's already rare and different? > >> But hey it took how > >> long for these cars to catch up? Not to mention that the 300tq is still > >> very > >> high by today's standards. > >> Now if only Ford would place their 3.5L 6 > >> cylinder in the base Mustang, hmmm...... > > Rest easy. It's coming. Soon. > >> Here I go again off on a rant. IMO the Mustang needs to offer a few > >> different styling appearances with their different nameplates (such as > >> Mach > >> I, Boss, Bullitt, etc...) > > They are also coming. Ford has stated they'll produce a "specialty > > model" every year. > Yes I am aware of that, Let me start over so I can try to better convey my > thoughts, bare with me please. I feel Ford isnt doing it right. The way I > see it is they are milking sales on old legendary icons we love with nothing > to back it up other then 3m tape. No, Mustang IIs had tape & badge upgrades. These new versions are better in every way compared to their "legendary" fore bearers. IMO, they enhance the legend. > It's pretty cheesey to release one > specialty model a year that people can not afford to get consumers into the > showrooms hoping they buy the less expensive models. No, it's not. It's about keeping the Ford brand alive. > To top it off there is > little distinguishing one theme from another whether they share the same > drivetrain, ground effects, wheels, brakes, etc... I think the GT500 stands out pretty good. Same can be said the Mach Is, Bullitts, Cobras, and R models. > Back in the day these > specialty cars had their own image and a purpose, nobody had a clue what > these specialty cars were cause they were just evolving to the needs of the > people. Trust me. The good ol' days weren't that great. > Today we anticipate and wait for our "flavor" Mustang to become > available and you know what happens when you sit and wait for something you > always wanted? It never lives up to your expectations. Try this. Go buy a old one then drive it (and only it) day in and day out every single day. It won't take long for you to miss a modern car. > Now add this point. Remember back when the aero fox's came out? They were > selling like hot cakes. After a few years people were sick of seeing them > (at least were I live). I remember hearing, "so what kind of car do you > have?" I have a me2, "whats a me2? You drive a Mustang, me2. When you have a good thing that happens. > Point I am > trying to make is we are going on the 4th model year of the latest Mustang > and they already had sales slumps without any competition! And gas prices have shot up to 3 bucks a gallon too. Seen truck sates lately? > Ford needs to > launch these specialty cars more then one at a time with out any > limitations. Make Henry Ford smile again from the grave. I'm all for more too, but I think Ford is doing pretty good. Just Since the new car was released they've come up with a 'vert, Hertz GT, Shelby GT, GT500, GT500KR, the pink breast cancer car, California Special, and now a GT500KR S/S. I say we should be counting our blessings. > >> with a few more engine options producing as many > >> as they can sell not limited editions which isn't how they became > >> successful > >> in the first place, especially with a new Pony War coming. > > I agree 100%. That's the way it should always be. > >> First get out of > >> the way something for those concerned with economy or gas mileage that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >> turbo > >> like the Lincoln may debut with (reborn SVO?). > > Again, I agree. I think a modern SVO would be cool! > Just hope they learned from their mistakes. It wasnt that people didnt want > a high tech Mustang or even a more exclusive costly one for that matter. > What they did want was to feel they got their monies worth. The SVO died because the 5-oh GT out performed it for thousands less. Best way for > that was to make sure it outperforms every thing in it's class and > especially under it. Granted price wise it was on par if not maybe cheaper [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > lil 2.3L Turbo 4v was supposed to have 275hp back in 1987!!! Can you say > SHAZAAM!!! But it's history now. Yes, it would be nice to see a modern version. > >> A base 4.6 with a tweaked 5.0 > >> stroked, as well as a base 5.4 with a tweaked 5.8 stroked hi performance. > > Hey, we already have a blown 5.4 in 500, 550 and 600-750 HP > > versions. > IMO having different engines is an excellent way to distinguish the various > specialty cars. It allows individuality and makes things more interesting > and fun for the competition rather then everyone racing with the same motor, > same mods. I agree 100%. But emission standards make it hard these days to offer lots of engines. > >> Then aftermarket the s/c, single, or twin turbos/ Maybe bring back a big > >> block to embarrass the Vette > > FYI -- the term "big block" is undefined. > I understand your point you are right however there are some acceptable > standards.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_block Yes, within a brand, but not from brand to brand. > >> or once again another platform like the Pantera > >> was since they exhausted the GT40? Ok going back to sleep lol... > > I think Ford's high-end stuff is gone for quite a long time. They > > need to get the basics/low-end of the market right before they can > > play with high-dollar toys again. > Although I respectfully disagree I think you are right with the decision for > different reasons. Just wanted to mention first that this reminds me of the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > in this area cause they really shouldnt be using the Mustang to compete with > the Corvette. It's totally apples and oranges. I agree. But at least we [still] have the Mustang. Patrick > Here are my RPMs. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Patrick Oh, one more Q. I'd like to get some 17 by 9 Cobra wheels... (put on the repos and keep the real ones) but I can't find them and I've tried everywhere. Got a line on Cobra repos for a Cobra? Thanks! B > Oh, one more Q. I'd like to get some 17 by 9 Cobra wheels... (put on the > repos and keep the real ones) but I can't find them and I've tried > everywhere. Got a line on Cobra repos for a Cobra? B, This link used to work. Maybe e-mail the allfordmustangs site and see if they can provide the source. http://www.allfordmustangs.com/pp-classifieds/showproduct.php?product... Patrick >> Oh, one more Q. I'd like to get some 17 by 9 Cobra wheels... (put on the >> repos and keep the real ones) but I can't find them and I've tried [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Patrick Thanks Pat! B >> Two words: Holy. sh.t. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Both my Mustangs break loose in second, but don't step out to the > right. Pat what year was your LX? Was it a coupe or hatch? Auto or manual? 2.73's or 3.08's? Any of the basics done to either car like bump the timing, remove the silencer in fender? >> 235 horse? LOL! 280lbs tq? LMAO! 275 and 320 is much more believable. > > Mine dyno'd at, IIRC, 227. Thats 227hp at the rear wheels right? What would that be at the engine? Thanks. Nick :) > Two words: Holy. sh.t. > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Brad Congrats on the car!!! What color combo is it? If you ever get a chance post some pics on Cardomain with a link here so we can see her. Always loved the fox Mustangs, hope to someday add a 1993 Cobra. Still dropping money into my '88 ASC McLaren, one of my favorites of all time. Nick :) >> Two words: Holy. sh.t. >> [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > Nick :) Thanks Nick. It's red and grey cloth. Talked to the past owner tonite who swears as far as he knows (he's the second owner) the car is stock. I don't think so. It'll rip my old GT a new one. That's not 30 extra horse. So I think the $ will go to the body next spring. And some new tires. lol Brad >>> Two words: Holy. sh.t. >>> [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Brad Brad, did you check for pulleys? Removing the silencer in the fender and adding better breathing to the intake helps allot. Maybe your timing was advanced too? Nick :) >>> Two words: Holy. sh.t. >>> [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > Brad It's certainly not stock with a C&L throttlebody or MAFS on it. Signature"Wow, I want a billion Dollars and a pet monkey!" - Dale Jarrett "Paul's vocabulary is rather large, but most of the words have no meaning in English" - Joe Canuck "Too bad it wasn't "personality theft"...you'd be immune." - Herb Tarlek On Oct 1, 8:13 pm, "Nicholas Anthony" <nospamfo...@soptonline.net> wrote: > Still dropping money into my '88 ASC McLaren, one of my favorites of all time. Nick, It has been such a long time since I've seen a McLaren. Tell us about your car. Patrick |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.