Hello;
I noticed the recent postings about Jeeps and thought I’d pose
a couple of questions. Is there a Jeep FAQ? My wife and I were thinking
about getting one. I would like to know what options your Jeep came
with and which options you wished you would have gotten now that you’ve
owned the Jeep for a while.
I would also be interested to know how hard it would be to take
off and put on the hard top.
One last question is there a Jeep owners club of some form?
Thanks for your response
Scott Abbe
a…@asu.edu
In article <CuBt1A….@ennews.eas.asu.edu>,
Scott Abbe <a…@enuxsa.eas.asu.edu> wrote:
> I noticed the recent postings about Jeeps and thought I’d pose
>a couple of questions. Is there a Jeep FAQ? My wife and I were thinking
>about getting one. I would like to know what options your Jeep came
>with and which options you wished you would have gotten now that you’ve
>owned the Jeep for a while.
> One last question is there a Jeep owners club of some form?
One very good source of information is the offroad mailing list which
also has a good FAQ which covers Jeeps and many other offroad vehicles.
To subscribe, send a subscribe message to:
offroad-requ…@ai.gtri.gatech.edu
There are also various Jeep owner clubs, etc., but I am not familiar
with them since I don’t own a Jeep. You can get information about
them through the mailing list, though.
John Eric Voltin
The University of Texas at Austin
bf…@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Mechanical Engineering Department
Home: (512) 835-6693 Work: (512) 835-3081
James Bo Begole (bego…@csgrad.cs.vt.edu) wrote:
: Get whichever is cheaper from your dealer (94, I suspect, in a month or
: two). The 95 is not dramatically different. A more powerful engine is
: rumored for the ’96, if you really want to waait.
I know my comments don’t really answer the original question, but I had
.
to comment on the ’96 Mustang. It WILL have a more powerful engine (the
top of the line Ford engine that will be built in the Romeo, MI plant
with the Mark VIII engines). It’s not just a rumor. I can’t wait to see
it in action
Amal
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Amal A. Abbasi Disco is to music what
aabb…@vela.acs.oakland.edu Etch-a-Sketch is to art.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
advice on such a purchase.
Some questions:
1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
2) Should I buy a "94" or "95" model? (I am planning to drive
this car for quite a while, so resale value is less of a factor.)
3) The dealer is offering two kinds of security systems:
one is keypad based, the other is some kind of chip (looks like
those small batteries) that you touch to a sensor mounted near
the steering wheel. Any thoughs or things I should look out
for in particular?
4) There is an optional axle ratio which sacrifices top speed
for acceleration. Since I’m not planning to go at warp speed
anyway, is this a good idea? Does anyone know what the effect
of this is on fuel economy?
5) Finally, since I will be getting A/C, I think tinted windows
are a good idea. The dealer said he would do it, but warned me that
ANY tint is illegal except on vans (Mtl, Canada): the police simply
tolerate it. Has anyone had a bad experience with that?
Thanks for your help,
Carim.
—
In article <328otq$…@homer.cs.mcgill.ca>, Carim <ca…@cs.mcgill.ca> wrote:
> I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
>truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
>the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
>advice on such a purchase.
> 1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
>considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
I bought a black Mustang GT hardtop and I love it. However, for pure
bang for the buck power, you should consider the Camaro Z28 (see the
recent Road&Track for comparisons). I like the Mustang better,
personally, but the Camaro is faster. You won’t find the same power for
the same price in a foreign car. Nevertheless, check out the Mazda
Miata and Toyota MR-2, which are not TOO much more. Dodge Stealth is a
lot more, as are Toyota Celica, Mazda RX-7. Of course there are a ton
of cars I haven’t mentioned. Get you one of them "Buyers Guides" on the
newsstand and compare.
> 2) Should I buy a "94" or "95" model? (I am planning to drive
>this car for quite a while, so resale value is less of a factor.)
Get whichever is cheaper from your dealer (94, I suspect, in a month or
two). The 95 is not dramatically different. A more powerful engine is
rumored for the ’96, if you really want to waait.
I have no opinions about your other questions. Don’t let your dealer
sell you too much crap, is all.
-Bo jbeg…@melpar.esys.com
—
–James "Bo" Begole jbeg…@melpar.esys.com
: I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
: truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
: the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
: advice on such a purchase.
: Some questions:
: 1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
: considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
The Firebird is a much better handler. Personally, I like the 87-93
Mustangs much better. The new ones are ugly from the rear (the view those
Jetta / import drivers will see), and they weight about 100-200 lbs more than
the old ones. I have a slightly modified ’92 LX coupe. With 50,000 miles
it runs 14.0s and pulls slightly better than 1g cornering. This is with
less than $600 in mods. The coupe is the lightest & most rigid of the old
models.
: 4) There is an optional axle ratio which sacrifices top speed
: for acceleration. Since I’m not planning to go at warp speed
: anyway, is this a good idea? Does anyone know what the effect
: of this is on fuel economy?
Get the optional ratio. Fuel economy won’t suffer, but acceleration will
improve significantly. My car gets 22-24 mpg consistently in mixed driving.
It’ll get up to 28+ on the highway at 70-75 mph. Top speed is not sacrificed
by the 3.08 gears. Cruising RPM will go up slightly, but 2000 RPM at 70 mph
is still pretty low.
ca…@cs.mcgill.ca (Carim) writes:
> I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
>truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
>the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
>advice on such a purchase.
> Some questions:
> 1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
>considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
Take a look at the Camaro Z28. It is the most direct competition that
the Mustang has and is cheaper and faster. I am a liitle biased since
I have one.
Daveyd
In article <32b1lu$…@oak.oakland.edu>, aabb…@vela.acs.oakland.edu (A A Abbasi) writes…
>I know my comments don’t really answer the original question, but I had
.
>to comment on the ’96 Mustang. It WILL have a more powerful engine (the
>top of the line Ford engine that will be built in the Romeo, MI plant
>with the Mark VIII engines). It’s not just a rumor. I can’t wait to see
>it in action
According to a Ford engineer (yes Ford is on the net). There is discussion
about a new Cobra-R mustang – with huge corvette style brakes and with the
351 power plant! Will Ford go for it? Don’t know. The 4.6 modular V-8 is
supposidly undergoing final tweaks as we speak – trying to get the HP /
Torque curves just right. I wonder what transmission they’ll use.
Dirk
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
In article <incodeCuByGK….@netcom.com> inc…@netcom.com (Laszlo Zeke) writes:
>From: inc…@netcom.com (Laszlo Zeke)
>Subject: Re: New Mustang GT advice.
>Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 17:41:07 GMT
>: I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
>: truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
>: the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
>: advice on such a purchase.
>: Some questions:
>: 4) There is an optional axle ratio which sacrifices top speed
>: for acceleration. Since I’m not planning to go at warp speed
>: anyway, is this a good idea? Does anyone know what the effect
>: of this is on fuel economy?
> Get the optional ratio. Fuel economy won’t suffer, but acceleration will
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>improve significantly. My car gets 22-24 mpg consistently in mixed driving.
>It’ll get up to 28+ on the highway at 70-75 mph.
> Top speed is not sacrificed by thee 3.08 gears. Cruising RPM will go up
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>slightly, but 2000 RPM at 70 mph is still pretty low.
Both gas mileage and top speed will drop as the ring and pinion gear ratios
increase numerically. Increasing RPM / MPH necessarily requires more gasoline
per mile. Unfortunately, there is no free power. And top speed will decrease
because the rev limiter will work at the same RPM regardless of what axle
ratio is used (Or if there were no limiter the engine would disintegrate at
the same RPM, but at a lower speed).
This is a classic example of the dilemma that street/strip car owners face:
"Hmm…should I run 3.55 gears so I can reach 65 mph on the highway,
or use 4.56 gears and stay off the freeway (i.e. make a trailer queen)" :-)
Regards,
Eric Webb
In article <328otq$…@homer.cs.mcgill.ca>, ca…@cs.mcgill.ca (Carim) writes…
> I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
>truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
>the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
>advice on such a purchase.
> Some questions:
> 1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
>considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
Camaro / Firebird – cheaper, faster, much better suspension – all around a
much better car. When buying a performance car why settle for second best
(in the price range)?
> 2) Should I buy a "94" or "95" model? (I am planning to drive
>this car for quite a while, so resale value is less of a factor.)
For price – get the ’94 model – of course you’ll have to pick one off the
lot. For options look for the ‘Cobra’ cars.
> 3) The dealer is offering two kinds of security systems:
>one is keypad based, the other is some kind of chip (looks like
>those small batteries) that you touch to a sensor mounted near
>the steering wheel. Any thoughs or things I should look out
>for in particular?
Go for an aftermarket system – if the crook can get into the car without
the siren going off – you’ve already lost. Look to spend about $400 with a
full featured remote – installed.
> 4) There is an optional axle ratio which sacrifices top speed
>for acceleration. Since I’m not planning to go at warp speed
>anyway, is this a good idea? Does anyone know what the effect
>of this is on fuel economy?
Traditionally ford offered the 3.26 ratio at least with the cobra. You
might have to search through ordering book.
> 5) Finally, since I will be getting A/C, I think tinted windows
>are a good idea. The dealer said he would do it, but warned me that
>ANY tint is illegal except on vans (Mtl, Canada): the police simply
>tolerate it. Has anyone had a bad experience with that?
Depends on how dark the tint is and what the mood of the officer is. Worst
case the cop can give you a ticket AND not let you drive home – you’ll
either have to tow it or remve the tint. At the wrong time of night and or
the wrong place an obvious equipement violation is a good excuss for the
cop to pull you over….
Dirk
: I don’t know if the 95 model will have the 4.6 l ‘Modular’ engine, but
: if they do, by all means wait for the ’95!!!
Nope. The ’95 model will NOT have the 4.6 in it. You’ll have to wait
until ’96 for that one.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Amal A. Abbasi Disco is to music what
aabb…@vela.acs.oakland.edu Etch-a-Sketch is to art.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
[text about "what should I get" deleted]
>Both gas mileage and top speed will drop as the ring and pinion gear ratios
>increase numerically. Increasing RPM / MPH necessarily requires more gasoline
>per mile. Unfortunately, there is no free power. And top speed will decrease
>because the rev limiter will work at the same RPM regardless of what axle
>ratio is used (Or if there were no limiter the engine would disintegrate at
>the same RPM, but at a lower speed).
>This is a classic example of the dilemma that street/strip car owners face:
>"Hmm…should I run 3.55 gears so I can reach 65 mph on the highway,
>or use 4.56 gears and stay off the freeway (i.e. make a trailer queen)" :-)
3.55s will net you a 1.5mpg loss at cruising speeds, 3.73s will net a 2mpg
loss – not really significant all thins considered: you’ll get .6s less on
the 0-60—if you can keep the rear on the ground. Top speed with 3.55s
should be about 125-130mph (I haven’t done the calculation in a while).
-Cougar
+—————————-+———————————————–+
| Dan Neuwirth | Does anybody really read these stupid |
| Symantec Peter Norton Group| disclaimers anyway? I speak for myself. |
| Engineering Department +———————————————–+
| 2500 Broadway Suite 200 | 91 Ford Mustang 5.0 LX Hatchback |
| Santa Monica, CA 90404 USA | 94 Saturn SL2, Everything but the Sunroof |
+—————————-+———————————————–+
| GCS -d+ H++ s+ g+ p? au+ a23 w v C++ N++ K- W++ M– po+ t+ 5 j tv b- D+ |
| B– e -u h— f+ r+++ n+ x+++ < GC 2.1 > |
+—————————————————————————-+
Eric M. Webb (E…@NCCIBM1.RTPNC.EPA.GOV) wrote:
: >: 4) There is an optional axle ratio which sacrifices top speed
: >: for acceleration. Since I’m not planning to go at warp speed
: >: anyway, is this a good idea? Does anyone know what the effect
: >: of this is on fuel economy?
: > Get the optional ratio. Fuel economy won’t suffer, but acceleration will
: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: > Top speed is not sacrificed by thee 3.08 gears. Cruising RPM will go up
: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >slightly, but 2000 RPM at 70 mph is still pretty low.
: Both gas mileage and top speed will drop as the ring and pinion gear ratios
: increase numerically. Increasing RPM / MPH necessarily requires more gasoline
: per mile. Unfortunately, there is no free power. And top speed will decrease
: because the rev limiter will work at the same RPM regardless of what axle
: ratio is used (Or if there were no limiter the engine would disintegrate at
: the same RPM, but at a lower speed).
Increasing RPM/MPH does not necessarily require more gas per mile. A lower
gear gets more torque multiplication and allows a lower throttle setting,
which reduces fuel consumption. This may allow the engine to cruise in a
more efficient RPM range, and improve mileage. Sure it’s more likely to go
down slightly, but I can tell you from experience that the Mustang mileage
is not affected by the change from 2.73 (stock) to 3.08 gears.
There certainly is free power. Dyno results show a 10hp increase at the rear
wheels of an automatic mustang with synthetic fluids everywhere. This will
not hurt fuel economy, but it does cost money. So in that sense, you’re
correct.
Top speed only decreases if the new gears place the engine speed on the
falling part of the torque curve. Mustangs do not hit redline in fifth gear.
If they did, they’d run 200+, and your reasoning would be valid.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
In article <328otq$…@homer.cs.mcgill.ca> ca…@cs.mcgill.ca (Carim) writes:
> I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
>truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
>the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
>advice on such a purchase.
> Some questions:
> 1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
>considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
> 2) Should I buy a "94" or "95" model? (I am planning to drive
>this car for quite a while, so resale value is less of a factor.)
> 3) The dealer is offering two kinds of security systems:
>one is keypad based, the other is some kind of chip (looks like
>those small batteries) that you touch to a sensor mounted near
>the steering wheel. Any thoughs or things I should look out
>for in particular?
> 4) There is an optional axle ratio which sacrifices top speed
>for acceleration. Since I’m not planning to go at warp speed
>anyway, is this a good idea? Does anyone know what the effect
>of this is on fuel economy?
> 5) Finally, since I will be getting A/C, I think tinted windows
>are a good idea. The dealer said he would do it, but warned me that
>ANY tint is illegal except on vans (Mtl, Canada): the police simply
>tolerate it. Has anyone had a bad experience with that?
> Thanks for your help,
> Carim.
>—
I don’t know if the 95 model will have the 4.6 l ‘Modular’ engine, but
if they do, by all means wait for the ’95!!!
Bernardus
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
In article <incodeCuE5qs….@netcom.com> inc…@netcom.com (Laszlo Zeke) writes:
>From: inc…@netcom.com (Laszlo Zeke)
>Subject: Re: New Mustang GT advice.
>Date: Thu, 11 Aug 1994 22:13:40 GMT
>Eric M. Webb (E…@NCCIBM1.RTPNC.EPA.GOV) wrote:
>: >: 4) There is an optional axle ratio which sacrifices top speed
>: >: for acceleration. Since I’m not planning to go at warp speed
>: >: anyway, is this a good idea? Does anyone know what the effect
>: >: of this is on fuel economy?
>: > Get the optional ratio. Fuel economy won’t suffer, but acceleration will
>: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>: > Top speed is not sacrificed by thee 3.08 gears. Cruising RPM will go up
>: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>: >slightly, but 2000 RPM at 70 mph is still pretty low.
>: Both gas mileage and top speed will drop as the ring and pinion gear ratios
>: increase numerically. Increasing RPM / MPH necessarily requires more gasoline
>: per mile. Unfortunately, there is no free power. And top speed will decrease
>: because the rev limiter will work at the same RPM regardless of what axle
>: ratio is used (Or if there were no limiter the engine would disintegrate at
>: the same RPM, but at a lower speed).
>Increasing RPM/MPH does not necessarily require more gas per mile. A lower
>gear gets more torque multiplication and allows a lower throttle setting,
>which reduces fuel consumption. This may allow the engine to cruise in a
>more efficient RPM range, and improve mileage. Sure it’s more likely to go
>down slightly, but I can tell you from experience that the Mustang mileage
>is not affected by the change from 2.73 (stock) to 3.08 gears.
I agree that a switch from 2.73 to 3.08 will not cause MPG to drop greatly
But it will
unless you play a lot with the extra mechanical advantage
decrease some. I believe the most advantage gained from torque multiplication
would have to occur on automatic transmission cars; they have a torque
converter which functions both as a fluid coupling between the engine
crankshaft and the transmission input shaft and as a torque multiplier between
these two shafts.
But you make a reasonable point.
>There certainly is free power. Dyno results show a 10hp increase at the rear
>wheels of an automatic mustang with synthetic fluids everywhere. This will
>not hurt fuel economy, but it does cost money. So in that sense, you’re
>correct.
Another good point. Never say never
>Top speed only decreases if the new gears place the engine speed on the
>falling part of the torque curve. Mustangs do not hit redline in fifth gear.
>If they did, they’d run 200+, and your reasoning would be valid.
My reasoning remains valid
See my posting named MPH and RPM. Redline has
nothing to do with the mechanical relationship between MPH and RPM. RPM is a
function of tire size, transmission ratio, and axle ratio. Changing the axle
ratio affects MPH at each and every RPM point between 1 and SomeNumber.
Regards,
Eric Webb
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
In article <dneuwirth.26…@symantec.com> dneuwi…@symantec.com (Cougar) writes:
>From: dneuwi…@symantec.com (Cougar)
>Subject: Re: New Mustang GT advice.
>Date: 11 Aug 1994 21:12:50 GMT
>[text about "what should I get" deleted]
>>Both gas mileage and top speed will drop as the ring and pinion gear ratios
>>increase numerically. Increasing RPM / MPH necessarily requires more gasoline
>>per mile. Unfortunately, there is no free power. And top speed will decrease
>>because the rev limiter will work at the same RPM regardless of what axle
>>ratio is used (Or if there were no limiter the engine would disintegrate at
>>the same RPM, but at a lower speed).
>>This is a classic example of the dilemma that street/strip car owners face:
>>"Hmm…should I run 3.55 gears so I can reach 65 mph on the highway,
>>or use 4.56 gears and stay off the freeway (i.e. make a trailer queen)" :-)
>3.55s will net you a 1.5mpg loss at cruising speeds, 3.73s will net a 2mpg
To what tire height, transmission ratio, and axle ratio are you comparing the
change to 3.55s and 3.73s? Would it be the values of the stock Mustang with
the standard axle ratio? If so, and the rear axle ratio is the only change,
then we have real anecdotal evidence.
>loss – not really significant all thins considered: you’ll get .6s less on
I never suggested avoiding the performance axle ratio
I want to switch the 
3.07 gears to 3.73 gears on my Corvette. I know that I’ll lose some top end
speed and MPG. However, I don’t drive at top speed and the 0.70 fourth gear
of the TH700-R4 transmission is very economical on the highway with the 3.07.
Just pointing to the issues
Regards,
Eric Webb
In article <328otq$…@homer.cs.mcgill.ca> ca…@cs.mcgill.ca (Carim) writes:
I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
advice on such a purchase.
Some questions:
1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
If you haven’t decided yet, take a look at the Camaro/Firebird. They
have bigger engines and a 6 sp. tranny. I don’t like them as much, but
its a personal preference. As far as other cars, it depends on whether or not
you want an 8cyl or less (6 or 4). I personally didn’t want another
high-winding, whiny sounding 4 (I used to own a CRX-Si).
2) Should I buy a "94" or "95" model? (I am planning to drive
this car for quite a while, so resale value is less of a factor.)
There probably are many diffs coming down from Dearborn on the ’95s.
96 is ‘supposed’ to have the modular 4.6L V8 if you want to wait.
3) The dealer is offering two kinds of security systems:
one is keypad based, the other is some kind of chip (looks like
those small batteries) that you touch to a sensor mounted near
the steering wheel. Any thoughs or things I should look out
for in particular?
Well, from looking over the security systems offered, I saw 3 from my dealer:
1) a simple ingition lockout – these a typically a small circuit board type
plug in device that when removed disables the ignition (i don’t think
Ford makes this – its provided by the dealers by 3rd parties)
2) 400 series security system
uses the standard keyless entry remote control.
provides your typical motion sensor, entry sensor, ignition lockout, etc
3) 600 series security system
comes w/ its own remote – has 1 or 2 more features that the 400 series
didn’t – it was about $40 more than the 400 series (mid-$500′s at my dealer)
5) Finally, since I will be getting A/C, I think tinted windows
are a good idea. The dealer said he would do it, but warned me that
ANY tint is illegal except on vans (Mtl, Canada): the police simply
tolerate it. Has anyone had a bad experience with that?
its not true that tinted windows are illegal – it depends on the opacity
you apply. If the police think it too much tint, they might use a light meter
and ticket you over a certain amount. Check with you local police/DMV about
the window opacity requirements in your area.
-art
’94 Cobra
In article <ABSTINE.94Aug14233…@hummer.visix.com> abst…@visix.com (Art Stine) writes:
>From: abst…@visix.com (Art Stine)
>Subject: Re: New Mustang GT advice.
>Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 03:37:48 GMT
>In article <328otq$…@homer.cs.mcgill.ca> ca…@cs.mcgill.ca (Carim) writes:
>its not true that tinted windows are illegal – it depends on the opacity
>you apply. If the police think it too much tint, they might use a light meter
>and ticket you over a certain amount. Check with you local police/DMV about
>the window opacity requirements in your area.
It is true if you live in the police state of Virginia.
Regards,
————————————————————
Eric Webb / Martin Marietta / RTP, N.C. 27711
1992 Corvette Coupe / 1986 Mazda 626 Turbo / 1968 Camaro Rat
In article 1…@msus1.msus.edu, cs270…@eeyore.stcloud.msus.edu (cs270 user 003) writes:
>I don’t know if the 95 model will have the 4.6 l ‘Modular’ engine, but
>if they do, by all means wait for the ’95!!!
I’m not sure if the Modular V8 will make the 95 release of the Mustang (Ford IS playing around with the 351W in some prototype R-model Cobras,) but I’m not sure I would opt for the 4.6L V8.
True, it IS a more powerful engine than the 5.0L Windsor V8, but
from what I’ve heard from Ford’s engineers, that engine is pretty much
maxed out as far as torque and power are concerned. The Windsor V8 has
much more power potential than the 4.6, plus it has the support over 30
years worth of modifications by the aftermarket industry. If I wanted
a fast Mustang, I’d stick with the good old Winsor 5.0L HO.
Now ask me the same question in five years when the 4.6L has been around
long enough to attract the attentions of the performance industry…
—
+———————————————————————–+
| Robert A. King | |
| Systems Software Engineer | |
| Kodak Health Imaging Systems | "I drank WHAT?!?" — Socrates |
| | |
| k…@khan.khis.com | |
+———————————————————————–+
| The opinions expressed here arn’t even mine, much less my employer’s! |
+———————————————————————–+
In <1994Aug15.161222.10…@khis.com> k…@khis.com (Robert King) writes:
>In article 1…@msus1.msus.edu, cs270…@eeyore.stcloud.msus.edu (cs270 user 003) writes:
>>I don’t know if the 95 model will have the 4.6 l ‘Modular’ engine, but
>>if they do, by all means wait for the ’95!!!
>I’m not sure if the Modular V8 will make the 95 release of the Mustang (Ford IS playing around with the 351W in some prototype R-model Cobras,) but I’m not sure I would opt for the 4.6L V8.
> True, it IS a more powerful engine than the 5.0L Windsor V8, but
>from what I’ve heard from Ford’s engineers, that engine is pretty much
>maxed out as far as torque and power are concerned. The Windsor V8 has
>much more power potential than the 4.6, plus it has the support over 30
>years worth of modifications by the aftermarket industry. If I wanted
>a fast Mustang, I’d stick with the good old Winsor 5.0L HO.
The problem I have with the 302 is that you shouldn’t have to modify your
new Mustang to keep it from getting eaten alive by Z28/Firebirds on the
street. I’m not sure the 5.0 has that much more potential than the DOHC
4.6. After all, with the 4.6 you’re only giving up 18 cubes and you get
*much* better breathing in return. Heck the 32 valve modular
makes _280_ hp in the Mark VIII and it idles like your gramma’s car.
Imagine what some hot cams (4 of ‘em!) and an aggressive computer would
do for that engine.
>Now ask me the same question in five years when the 4.6L has been around
>long enough to attract the attentions of the performance industry…
I don’t think it will take long at all for 4.6 speed goodies to become
available. I’m sure they’re being developed right now by the after-
market. As soon as the new RX7/300ZX/Supra came out, there were all
kinds of kits available boosting output to 400+ hp. The market for
Mustang speed parts is HUGE compared to the rice rockets.
IMO, anyone who shells out the $30+k (after dealer markups) for a 351
powered Cobra R needs to have his/her head examined. I mean, they’re
getting screwed twice: they’re paying $10k extra for the engine the
Mustang should have had in the first place (with no 6-speed BTW).
In light of the vastly superior performance buy of the Z28/Formula,
I wonder how long Ford can sell Mustang GTs on mystique alone…
Scott
dav…@alantec.com (Dave DeBuhr) writes:
>ca…@cs.mcgill.ca (Carim) writes:
>> I will be purchasing a new car soon as my old one seems to
>>truly be on it’s last legs. Ammong the models I’m considering,
>>the Mustang GT is the one I like most. So I guess I’m looking for
>>advice on such a purchase.
>> Some questions:
>> 1) Are there any other cars in this price range I should be
>>considering? (such as Jetta GLX VR6, …)
>Take a look at the Camaro Z28. It is the most direct competition that
>the Mustang has and is cheaper and faster. I am a liitle biased since
>I have one.
He said he liked the Mustang.But if you want an all around performer that is
safe,reliable,and will practially last forever.Look into the Taurus\Sable
line.
—
Ian R. Campbell i…@penrij.UUCP
Ian R. Campbell (i…@penrij.UUCP) wrote:
: He said he liked the Mustang.But if you want an all around performer that is
: safe,reliable,and will practially last forever.Look into the Taurus\Sable
: line.
: —
: Ian R. Campbell i…@penrij.UUCP
Tauri and Sables all around performers? The SHO, yes, but not the rest.
Look at the latest CR where they tested wagons. Look at the C & D where
they tested family sedans — the Taurus was so outpointed last year, they
didn’t even include it this year! And last forever? Their reliability
is rated just "average."