MustangWorks.com : Ford Forums - View Single Post

Unit 5302 · 08-06-2001, 01:18 AM

Actually, for the rice lovin 1975 Civic drivin folks posting here.

Shifting the Mustang GT at 4k would be comparable to shifting the shitbox Honda at 5500. Shifting at 4k the Mustang would probably pull off 8sec 0-60 times. 1/4 would still be in the 15s easy.

Go jump off the deep end if you think a Clutch is going to handle an 8000 SLIP OUT. You don't even have a car 65 GTO. Go back to riding your trike.

As far as the quotes about Honda's being reliable at 8k so they should be reliable at 9k, why aren't their bikes seeing 100,000 miles? Their early 90's bikes see 30,000 miles have the same power to displacement ratios, and similar powerbands. You can only take it so far. Furthermore, how many conservative owners redline their Civic's and Integra's around? Not too many, I'll clue you in on that. Most Honda's are babied around by grocery toting tree huggers. Also, 65 GTO, quit babbling about piston speed you idiot. That's to determine critical mass, not engine wear. The 302 or 5.0 like I said before has a very short stroke. 4" bore, 3" stroke. 101.6x76.2mm if you want to look at it in metric terms. Does that make it last longer than say a 351 with the same bore, but a 3.5" stroke 88.2mm? Nope. The 351 also lasts a long *** time. Short strokes are good for high revving engines because they allow engines to rev higher without reaching critical mass. Which is usually of no concern anyway since most engines would have to rev to well over 8000rpms+ to approach that.

The times I quoted out of a magazine were good, for the way they shifted. Look again. Shifting at 8300rpms, not 8900 they managed a low 14 out of a car that is good for high 13's with a great driver. If you can get the S2000 to better that performance shifting short by 600rpms, you're welcome to try.

I got the same flak on that shithole known as Honda-Tech. No reasoning with them. No amount of physics matters. All they know is in 1980 a lot of the domestics were junky, and their shitbox Honda did okay.

Again, the bottom line is an engine that has no power below 6000rpms, redlines at 8900rpms, drives down the road at 4500rpms, and N/A makes 120hp/liter is NOT built with a long life in mind. The import power scene hasn't been around long enough to prove **** IMHO. The cars that have been spoken about produce 20hp/liter less than an S2000. The ones that do that are also babied by most people, and haven't been around more than a few years in most cases. 20hp/liter... That's literally the difference between a Mustang II's 302 making 139hp and the Fox 5.0HO making 225hp from the 302. Do you think those engines compare to each other? **** no! And that's the same damn engine.

I'm tired of duking it out with the import boys on this board. It's called WWW.MustangWorks.com. It's a Mustang site. Obviously all are welcome, but don't expect to float import bullshit here. Our car/manufacturer has been racing at the track and building race engines with the technology most coveted by the import scene high revving SOHC and DOHC setups for 40 years, longer than your little high hp/liter car companies have even been in business here. When I roll down the street with 150,000 miles on my Mustang GT kickin the **** out of Type R's, Si's, 3000GT's, Eclipses, old Supra's, RX7's and the like, I feel little remorse. They've been blinded by ricers who think that Japanese quality will win the race for them. I've got news for you. Stock for stock my car costing about $12000 new, and now having 150,000 hard *** , beat down, redline hitting miles on it will still mop up all but the very highest performing imports on the scene. Let alone the imports with equal mileage as mine.

Lets see what I've replaced in my car. I've owned it for 30000 miles. The tranny was already replaced with a junkyard unit, it failed, I have no idea how long it had been rolling, it was a 1986 model. Ummm.... fuel pump. Radiator. Wow. That's a pretty long list isn't it? Guess the Mustang's 5 star reliability record from 1987-1993 with the exception of 2-4star years is a fluke. Yeah, these domestics just don't last. My friend only has 260,000 miles on his stang. But to it's credit, the engine was rebuilt only 120,000 miles ago by a monkey who didn't know what he was doing. He's had to replace the control arms and the power rack. Damn these cars. Just junk. No longevity here. My other friend only has 120,000 on his. I seem to remember a member of this board posting a kill a while back of a Typhoon. He pulled his 88 5.0 out of the back yard having been sitting there for something like 1 or 2 years with mileage around 150k. He went out, and with only 3.73's kicked some bowtie *** . Or maybe our 1977 Mustang II that still ran without a tick at 178k on it was a fluke. Course there is always our POS 78 Towncar that had a starter go out and got hauled away with 164k on it. The 1985 Mark VII we had, that my mom bought with 145k on the clock went another 55k miles before we got rid of it. It's last trip I took it to Oklahoma and Texas, Mustang shopping as a disposable car. It made it there, and when I didn't find what I was looking for, it made it back, getting an average of 24mpg at 80mph along the way. For a 4000lb car that was smashed up in the front from hitting a deer, that's not to fricken bad. Course on that 2000 mile driving adventure it did burn almost 1/2 a quart of oil. A hose blew outside Dallas too. Overheated the car till it wouldn't even run, getting it off the freeway and out of the way. Air temp was 117*. My uncle came out, we went to look at a car, came back, slapped a new hose on, added some water, and drove it away, running great. A shitty *** Honda would have blown a head gasket and been sitting there waiting for the 2500 repair bill at the garage for the next 2 weeks. Course my mom's 79 Merc Capri with the 2.8L only made it about 240k before it was hauled off. To it's credit it survived my mom. When the engine began to overheat, she'd have my dad check the oil. Guess what? It didn't have any at all. But it kept going, 1000s of more miles and multiple more out of oil experiances.

I could look at my Mazda built 1991 Ford Escort GT. It had a Mazda drivetrain, and almost everything else. The Tranny exploded at 84k, the computer went out, it ticked, got bad fuel economy compared to my previous Mustang GT, fuel pump, electrical system had a gremlin I never could figure out in the fuel pump circuit, had problems with the VAF sensor, the engine and tranny were composed of **** . Cheapass japanese strip-o-matic nuts and bolts. After taking it apart and putting it back together I was totally amazed at it even going 80k. It used the same chinsy construction as my Kawasaki 125cc dirt bike's powertrain. My friend has a Celica that just quits running every once and a while. That's a nice feature. I spent umteen hours one winter trying to get an Eagle Talon Tsi to fricken start in the ice cold temps. So I guess my PERSONAL experiance with 10's of cars of which the Ford Mustang certainly has not had problems and the upper class Lincoln's as well has me seeing red when people talk about domestic reliability.

08-06-2001, 01:18 AM	#39
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	Actually, for the rice lovin 1975 Civic drivin folks posting here. Shifting the Mustang GT at 4k would be comparable to shifting the shitbox Honda at 5500. Shifting at 4k the Mustang would probably pull off 8sec 0-60 times. 1/4 would still be in the 15s easy. Go jump off the deep end if you think a Clutch is going to handle an 8000 SLIP OUT. You don't even have a car 65 GTO. Go back to riding your trike. As far as the quotes about Honda's being reliable at 8k so they should be reliable at 9k, why aren't their bikes seeing 100,000 miles? Their early 90's bikes see 30,000 miles have the same power to displacement ratios, and similar powerbands. You can only take it so far. Furthermore, how many conservative owners redline their Civic's and Integra's around? Not too many, I'll clue you in on that. Most Honda's are babied around by grocery toting tree huggers. Also, 65 GTO, quit babbling about piston speed you idiot. That's to determine critical mass, not engine wear. The 302 or 5.0 like I said before has a very short stroke. 4" bore, 3" stroke. 101.6x76.2mm if you want to look at it in metric terms. Does that make it last longer than say a 351 with the same bore, but a 3.5" stroke 88.2mm? Nope. The 351 also lasts a long * time. Short strokes are good for high revving engines because they allow engines to rev higher without reaching critical mass. Which is usually of no concern anyway since most engines would have to rev to well over 8000rpms+ to approach that. The times I quoted out of a magazine were good, for the way they shifted. Look again. Shifting at 8300rpms, not 8900 they managed a low 14 out of a car that is good for high 13's with a great driver. If you can get the S2000 to better that performance shifting short by 600rpms, you're welcome to try. I got the same flak on that shithole known as Honda-Tech. No reasoning with them. No amount of physics matters. All they know is in 1980 a lot of the domestics were junky, and their shitbox Honda did okay. Again, the bottom line is an engine that has no power below 6000rpms, redlines at 8900rpms, drives down the road at 4500rpms, and N/A makes 120hp/liter is NOT built with a long life in mind. The import power scene hasn't been around long enough to prove IMHO. The cars that have been spoken about produce 20hp/liter less than an S2000. The ones that do that are also babied by most people, and haven't been around more than a few years in most cases. 20hp/liter... That's literally the difference between a Mustang II's 302 making 139hp and the Fox 5.0HO making 225hp from the 302. Do you think those engines compare to each other? no! And that's the same damn engine. I'm tired of duking it out with the import boys on this board. It's called WWW.MustangWorks.com. It's a Mustang site. Obviously all are welcome, but don't expect to float import bullshit here. Our car/manufacturer has been racing at the track and building race engines with the technology most coveted by the import scene high revving SOHC and DOHC setups for 40 years, longer than your little high hp/liter car companies have even been in business here. When I roll down the street with 150,000 miles on my Mustang GT kickin the out of Type R's, Si's, 3000GT's, Eclipses, old Supra's, RX7's and the like, I feel little remorse. They've been blinded by ricers who think that Japanese quality will win the race for them. I've got news for you. Stock for stock my car costing about $12000 new, and now having 150,000 hard * , beat down, redline hitting miles on it will still mop up all but the very highest performing imports on the scene. Let alone the imports with equal mileage as mine. Lets see what I've replaced in my car. I've owned it for 30000 miles. The tranny was already replaced with a junkyard unit, it failed, I have no idea how long it had been rolling, it was a 1986 model. Ummm.... fuel pump. Radiator. Wow. That's a pretty long list isn't it? Guess the Mustang's 5 star reliability record from 1987-1993 with the exception of 2-4star years is a fluke. Yeah, these domestics just don't last. My friend only has 260,000 miles on his stang. But to it's credit, the engine was rebuilt only 120,000 miles ago by a monkey who didn't know what he was doing. He's had to replace the control arms and the power rack. Damn these cars. Just junk. No longevity here. My other friend only has 120,000 on his. I seem to remember a member of this board posting a kill a while back of a Typhoon. He pulled his 88 5.0 out of the back yard having been sitting there for something like 1 or 2 years with mileage around 150k. He went out, and with only 3.73's kicked some bowtie *** . Or maybe our 1977 Mustang II that still ran without a tick at 178k on it was a fluke. Course there is always our POS 78 Towncar that had a starter go out and got hauled away with 164k on it. The 1985 Mark VII we had, that my mom bought with 145k on the clock went another 55k miles before we got rid of it. It's last trip I took it to Oklahoma and Texas, Mustang shopping as a disposable car. It made it there, and when I didn't find what I was looking for, it made it back, getting an average of 24mpg at 80mph along the way. For a 4000lb car that was smashed up in the front from hitting a deer, that's not to fricken bad. Course on that 2000 mile driving adventure it did burn almost 1/2 a quart of oil. A hose blew outside Dallas too. Overheated the car till it wouldn't even run, getting it off the freeway and out of the way. Air temp was 117. My uncle came out, we went to look at a car, came back, slapped a new hose on, added some water, and drove it away, running great. A shitty Honda would have blown a head gasket and been sitting there waiting for the 2500 repair bill at the garage for the next 2 weeks. Course my mom's 79 Merc Capri with the 2.8L only made it about 240k before it was hauled off. To it's credit it survived my mom. When the engine began to overheat, she'd have my dad check the oil. Guess what? It didn't have any at all. But it kept going, 1000s of more miles and multiple more out of oil experiances. I could look at my Mazda built 1991 Ford Escort GT. It had a Mazda drivetrain, and almost everything else. The Tranny exploded at 84k, the computer went out, it ticked, got bad fuel economy compared to my previous Mustang GT, fuel pump, electrical system had a gremlin I never could figure out in the fuel pump circuit, had problems with the VAF sensor, the engine and tranny were composed of ** . Cheapass japanese strip-o-matic nuts and bolts. After taking it apart and putting it back together I was totally amazed at it even going 80k. It used the same chinsy construction as my Kawasaki 125cc dirt bike's powertrain. My friend has a Celica that just quits running every once and a while. That's a nice feature. I spent umteen hours one winter trying to get an Eagle Talon Tsi to fricken start in the ice cold temps. So I guess my PERSONAL experiance with 10's of cars of which the Ford Mustang certainly has not had problems and the upper class Lincoln's as well has me seeing red when people talk about domestic reliability.