Close



Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1

    Default YouTube bickering about early GTs

    Going back and forth with some cement head regarding 82-85 GT performance. Kind of funny. Chime in if you like.

    https://youtu.be/Y1ToVW_wHHA
    1984.5 GT 5.0 5 Speed ANALOG
    BBK Long Tubes/H pipe/FM
    Edelbrock Intake/Holley 600
    8.8 w/FMS 3.73s
    Steeda Shifter

    2010 GT 5 Speed DIGITAL
    Track Pack
    Pypes Violator axle back
    Airaid Cold Air

  2. #2
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FoxChassis View Post
    .........

    From "Talkin' Engines with 'V8 Wally' Beaber",

    Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords

    Jan. 1994, by Jim McGraw:

    JM: But you were most closely asociated with the V8 engine in the current Fox Mustang. Were you there at the beginning?

    WB: Yes. In 1979, when we introduced the Fox Mustang, the 5-liter was released, but we didn't tell anybody about it. We were hyping the turbo 4 and the Cologne 2.8 liter V6. Then in 1980, we brought in the 4.2 V8 with automatic only for two years and dropped the 5-liter. We were going to drop the 5-liter and replace it with the 3.8L V6. The 2.3 turbo had some in-use problems with emissions, and we had to take it out of production. When that happened, the company took a look and said, "Hey, we have a Mustang out there and no performance option!"

    They asked my manager, Jim Clarke (father of the modern 5-liter and later of the modular engine program), to put the 5-liter back in. Jim came to me and said, "We’re gonna put the 5-liter back in, but, gee, we ought to warm it up a little bit." He wanted to put in the marine cam, the 4-barrel cam, for power. I thought, We’ve got an old Torino cam that will work better. So we did some dyno tests and we used the Torino cam in production. Even with a 2-barrel carburetor it went 132 miles an hour in the Michigan police car trials, and we didn't better that for about two years with the 4-barrel.

    We were revitalized. We opened up the air intake with a dual-snorkel air filter housing, a bigger filter. We worked on traction because it had terrible axle hop at first. The next year we put on the 4-barrel and did some more tune-ups. We had gradual improvements every year through 1987, which is when we stagnated. In 1988 the new Mustang was going to be a Probe with a Mustang badge. The customers wrote in thousands of cards and letters and said, "We don't want that."
    The late 1981 preview Mercury RS Capri press cars were hastily recoded SS Capris that definately had the 351W Marine cam inside. They ran 6.9 sec 0-60mph times.

    The stock 1982 5.0 option was traction limited for sure.

    The 1973 Torino cam and big 2-bbl 1.23 carb was perfect with the 1982 5.0 HO engine parts. If the tires were up to the hp, they often ran better numbers than 4-bbl 5.0's and first year 86 EFi's.


    Even the police cars with a 0.46 drag factor dd 132 mph. The stock 87 Mustang 5.0 GT EFi with much smoother body and a 0.36 drag factor . Although the pre-production press HO Fox 5.0's illicted performance that took years to filter down to normal production 83-86 M codes, and production 1982 5.0 HO is a match for a stock 83-87, probably the 88-92 Mass Airs as well.


    Cam Benty in 1983 did a PH article on factory HP readings for 1982-1983 Ford 5.0'S and Chevy and Trans Am F cars. He suugested that Ford and GM had started fudging net HP figures again.

    There is no way 157 hp was even the flywheel figure as the 1987 GT had 225 hp and had trouble doing 136 mph and 15.4 second flat 1/4 miles with the best gearing and a 5 speed.

    The 2-bbl even with the D3OE-6250-AA part number 351 W Torino cam was clearly a 193 to 200 hp factory engine.

    There is a reason 2-bbl 5.0's are "factored out" in NHRA racing.

    A good Mototcraft 2150 2-BBL is every bit as fast and quick as the 4180 4-bbl and Speed Density 5.0. Ford put many years of development in that 2V 1982 High Output 5.0 combination.

    They dfidn't even need to use the D2JE 6250-BA 351 W "Marine" cam, or the very slighty more tame E0OZ 6250-A, the factory 171/165 hp 80-81 5.8 Ford LTD cam. The GT 5.0 cam in production had a lot less lift and duration than the press cars Marine cam.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •