Stupid Mustang Question...

Quote
john vanlandingham
Now if a guy has one like the New and Improved Dave Clark over in Yakima then that's one thing, but I'd never suggest a person make efforts to get in one when there are those know dead ends waiting in parts which are hard like gearbox and that head design..

Sorry but the Moose-angst makes a ship-load more sense for a potential car.

Course a Volvo 240 make MORE sense but our new man here Adam i think has a Mooost-angst and has had them before, and that's a plus---if he worked on them.

Quote
espacef1fan

Now how would someone convince someone to be a co-driver....especially if they are a significant other...lol.....

Quote
heymagic
Using Utecht at Idaho is not a good example. That was one event, nothing more. Hurst won something like 17 wins with that car. Utecht still managed to win a few stages at Idaho I believe. Idaho would prove that you wanted an SRT Neon if want to use that example or a Golf or CRX. Always dangerous to use one stage, event or weekend to state a car or crew is good or bad.

Argue away....

Quote
phlat65
Just take her out on a TSD or 3, and if she likes that, she will LOVE Stage Rally.

2 minutes into our first stage as a team, my wife tells me I don't need to hold back for her, that I should go faster. After that moment, all the money needed to go rally was easy to justify

Quote
starion887

Quote
john vanlandingham
Now if a guy has one like the New and Improved Dave Clark over in Yakima then that's one thing, but I'd never suggest a person make efforts to get in one when there are those know dead ends waiting in parts which are hard like gearbox and that head design..

Sorry but the Moose-angst makes a ship-load more sense for a potential car.

Course a Volvo 240 make MORE sense but our new man here Adam i think has a Mooost-angst and has had them before, and that's a plus---if he worked on them.

And this is where you and I ususally diverge, John. You look to the long term developent potential for a car; I am looking at what it will do in stock or near stock form, if someone just drops in a cage and the safety equipment. The early 80's Celicas are tough, have decent torque with the 2.4L motor, and so on.

Adam, do you want something simple and will do OK as a training car in stock form, or one of the best platforms for long term RWD development? The answers to that question lead to different choices, IMO. John will always steer you towards the long term platform. I am not particular (Hey, I like Starions and Opels!), but if you want a simple starter, then look at a wider variety of cars. Of course, the Mustang will crash as well as any of them!

Regards, and best of luck,
Mark B.

Quote
wvonkessler
Hmm, what did John say about the Moostang 8 years ago? http://www.specialstage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6867&highlight=mustang

Quote
some crusty guy who is old now, and maybe wise
John Vanlandingham John Vanlandingham is offline
400 flat to crest

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: 2007 S.126th ST. Seattle, WA. 98168, USA.
Posts: 4,261
Default RE: JVL - Is a 2.3 liter Fox Mustang rallyable?
>Following up on some other threads. Is a 2.3 liter Fox
>Mustang rallyable?
Sure, everything is rally-able.
some people are pervese enough to choose things with sub 93" wheelbases for the freeways we drive on, go finger, eh?

On paper the dimensions look good,nice 100.5" wheelbase, acceptable overhang, cheap to get into, reasonable service room etc but I had a kid from up in Nude Hampster servicing for me once and his day job for a couple of years was working for his uncle rebuilding every week the same couple of Moose-angsts which uncle rented out to limp wristed weenie boy roadracers.
He said EVERY WEEK it was the same dead suspention bushes, dead ball joints, tweaked car and that was on smooth tracks, the cars driven sedately by old fart amatures. essential whupped to death weekly in less than 2 hours.


Is it the MKII Escort of the U.S. market?

No at all, unfortunately.
The MkII in its best spec, Group 4, was waaaaaay waaaaaay beeeechin because Ford made availble not just the parts,and they did, but a nice fat Book showing in photos and drawings what you need to do to modify your car, in essence making it so that anybody who could read could build their car to the spec that Ford themselves did.

And by the way, everybody used essentially the same stuff if not actually the same parts, and the same techniques as Ford did, virtually the same stuff in differnt shells and different motors.

>What would need to be done to stiffen up the chassis? Front
>strut sources? etc.
Hard to say, probably really serious 100% stitch welding and doubling up and then there is still thew question of wheel travel and steering.
>
>Could it be a cheap "spec" car? With cross-over appeal to
>the roundy rounders and drag racers? Group 2.3?
Well I buy from and have know a number of Circle track joints and they certain seem aware of rally and say it soounds fun but I cant say if we could 'turn' them.
>
>I know that you can get: (1) struts and shocks cheap from
>the roundy round places;
who knows if they are anywhere close to right for gravel?????



and (2) nice final drives for about
>$200.00.
Way less.


Plus all the other parts out there for Mustangs,
>including the Racer Walsh bits. I assume the T-5 is a simple
>bolt in,
Yeah I have a couple outa V8 mooose-angsts downstairs, and Thunder-chickens came with them in 2300 cars too. Easy


but I dont know anything about the car.
>
>Your .02 would be appreciated.

Wilson the reason I push the Xratty as what I call the 510 of the 90s or '00ies' is beacuse Ford made aavailable right from introduction expressly Parts AND Information, so again the average guy, if they can read English can put a car together which was capable in 2wd form in events close to the terrain and speeds of the US events of top 5 results and even outright wins.
We can make similar ft/lbs as the Cossie motor did, affordably and be withinn 100 lbs of the weight and we can suspend and spring it excactly as they did and know they spent some considerable effort at getting those settings. (When I was interviewing for mechanic at Ford Motorsport in 1989 I was told I would be on the road for approx 250 days a year, much of that would be testing. I said ACK!!!)

So sure it CAN be rallied but I bet with a little effort and a little glance at the Build books MOST reasonably bright people would realise that the chances of building a correct car for the job at hand would be more important than Brand fixation.
>

Quote
espacef1fan
I guess I want both. As far as in near stock form, its ok if its not competitive. While I have great confidence in my driving skill and ability to learn, I dont pretend to be the Stig or even just a garden variety Peter Solberg slayer

I would imagine that the car would improve with my skills ...

Reliability is my bigf concern...Relibility means you dont have to spend the money on the same thing over and over(well 'cept tires, gas, and stuff like that..)

Thats why I mentioned the Mustang..lots of stout driveline parts available and lots of engine choices... I suppose the same is true with about any solid axle car

Quote
SgtRauksauff
Plymouth Volare FTW.


/thread.

Quote
heymagic
I sold those things new back then...