Printable View
I want to upgrade from my Fiesta. How would a mustang coupe do? Which is better the coupe or hatchback? I am speaking of the Fox body. ITB with a 4cyl.
------------------
TOO MUCH POWER IS JUST ENOUGH
[This message has been edited by trueblue (edited December 23, 2002).]
Great car, there are some wicked fast ones out there and some that shouldn't be on the track. The 2.3L motor should make alot of hp and also has good aftermarket support. I'm trying to get a friend to build one and race with me and my Escort. As far as coupe vs. hatchback, probably doesn't matter although most are doing coupes. Have fun.
Hatchbacks are much more plentiful for parts, both in the U-pulls, and on the open market. The weight difference is minimal (60lbs approx), and the HB looks cooler. Of course all that said, I'm building a coupe, but it's more of a "Been there done that" with the hatchback, so I'm trying something a little different. Since the Mustang chassis is such a noodle anyway, a real cage in either chassis will make the two about the same. Look at the A/S guys, and you will see about an even split, with no real difference in performance. So... I guess it just depends on what you have to begin with. My one-owner coupe was a no-brainer for me, especially since it has all the 93 updates already built in. But if you don't like EFI, better get a 85, they had a bit better chassis (thicker, reinforced a bit) but still way lighter than the later cars. Hell, a 79-82 would be the lightest, but they are hard to come by in good shape anymore. HTH.
------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com
[This message has been edited by SilverHorseRacing (edited December 24, 2002).]
My one-owner coupe was a no-brainer for me, especially since it has all the 93 updates already built in.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Marcello
What up dates does the 93 have over the others?? & what year did they start putting the twin plug head on the 2.3 90-91? Being away from ford for awhile you tend to get stupid http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/biggrin.gif
[This message has been edited by Gerard Salmon (edited January 14, 2003).]
Hey Marcello, would there be any aero-advantage for the HB over the coupe (or vise versa)?
Cheers.
Ok... Let's see what I have to offer.
1)Aero advantage? Not really. If you were to look at a side profile of both the coupe and HB, you would see they are remarkably similar. (My rendition for the new car was a very slight modification of my old drawings) The coupe gets a ever so slight advantage because it does not require the spoiler in back to help the rear, but I've driven the HB with and w/o the spoiler, and noticed no real difference. And if you remove the spoiler, you save another 10 Lbs off the back of the HB, making the weight that much closer.
2)The twin plug head was available in the Mustang from 1991-1993. The computer catch code for the manual transmission and MAF system is C1A1. The D1 code refers to the automatic, although it could be used in a pinch.
3)Updates... the 93 had the best refined (of the Fox Mustangs anyway) K-frame pickup points and front suspension, the bigger brakes, the chassis reinforcements (driver seat and door openings notably), the mass-air, the dual plug head, and you can still find one owner versions of them for cheap in nice shape. Now a lot of the upgrades were done "on the fly" so really anything from 87-up can be modified without any work. My old 87 had all the 93 updates, save for the seat brace, but since the floor never cracked, and the seat was bolted to the cage, it didn't matter. Almost all 91-93's are identical, save for a couple minor movements of things in the front suspension. Earlier than 87 and you start getting into needing uprights, racks, brakes, etc... to make them the same as a 93 (if that is your goal)
4) Finally, I want to say if you have a coupe or HB, any year, you can bring them up to the same spec as a 93, and although I'm building a coupe this time around, the HB I had for 8 years was a nice combo, and had the added advantage of easy storage of stuff in back. (Something the new car sorely lacks) I am partial to the newer cars because I like injection, but if you want to go carb, there is no reason why you can't start with a light 79-82, and build from there (they are considerably lighter than the later cars). I needed a more "turn-key" solution for my new car, hence my decision to get a 1993. I just don't have the time anymore to go play at the U-pull digging through cars to get each piece individually, saving a minimal amount of money in the process.
Anyway, HTH, back to construction of the new car! (New seat would look better in the car than in my den!)
------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com
BTW, what data I have on the aero... both cars were approximately a .36 CoD, basically a brick on wheels.
------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com
Hey Marcello, then what is the advantage, if any, of running an earlier FOX? What IS the race weight of the 79-82 car?? Im not sure of this, but arent the 74-93 2.3 cars on the same "spec line?" Does this mean you can take an early chassis and mount the newer brakes/suspension/motor etc on the car?? Im wondering if there is an advantage to be had by running the earlier model. Let me know. Thanks!
Jive
One I can help on. All 1979-1993 Mustang 2.3s are on the same spec line. The 1979-1986 Mercury Capri 2.3 has it's own spec line.
Yes, 14 model years on the same spec line. In that time 2.3 Mustangs had:
13, 14, 15, and two metric sizes of wheels.
2 different brake sizes (9.x and 10.x if memory serves.)
6 different transmissions (based on ratios)
Carb, EFI, dual plug engines.
Notchback, hatchback, and convertible.
9.0 and 9.5 compression ratio.
Two basic fascia arrangements, older sealed beam headlite models '79-'86, and later composite/aero headlites '87-'93.
But they were all basically the same, all the same chassis. Parts swap easily from year to year. Lot's of early cars being raced with later bodywork for example.
(Yes, the spec line doesn't agree with some of the above. Comp Board has a letter to update it, no response yet.)
As for the best mix and match of parts, I've heard many opinions. Since I don't race one, I can't really say myself what is best.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jiveslug:
... but arent the 74-93 2.3 cars on the same "spec line?" Does this mean you can take an early chassis and mount the newer brakes/suspension/motor etc on the car?? ...
Jive
Whoa, hold up bro. Are you telling me that the Mustang is a Dr. Frankenstien dream come true?? DONT TELL ME THIS!!!!! I was reading the post and started laughing like a b-movie villain. That info is like giving a 5 year old a loaded gun. hehe. Anyway, I have always had a thing for the FOX Mustangs, my very first car when I was 16 was a former CHP 5.0 Notchback. I had kinda given up on these since I thought they couldnt run with the pack. Now, the question is; is there a difference in the race wieght for the various years? Im guessing not because they are on the same spec line, but Im curious. Thanks for the info!
Jive
One spec line, one weight. Don't have my GCR handy, so I don't know what it is.
2640 lbs.
Oh, ok, so there is no difference. Cool. But Ill assume that its easier to get there with an early coupe than a later one then. I know its generall frowned upon (i.e. illegal) to mix and match parts, but can you drop all of the 93 spec parts into, say, a 79-82 body??? I can get one of those for CHEAP out here in LA. Would an early FOX be legal with a 2.3 twin plug?
Jive
It is not illegal and it is not frowned upon. It is how you get the car you need that the factory never built all at one time. The quote about 74-93 is incorrect, it should be 79-93. The 74-78 Mustang was a rebodied pinto, and not a very good one at that. The 79-82's were lighter from the get go, but you can make any of the 79-93's (HB included) make weight if you are careful in your selection of parts and components. I don't want to give away all the tricks here, but there are plenty of ways to make the car make weight that are 100% legal, if you scour the parts bins from 79-93. Like I've said before, build what you like, you can make any of them as competitive as the next. There wasn't a coupe in the SEDIV that could keep up with me in the past two seasons, and that's with my hatchback. I'm not bragging, just saying that you can be fast with either body, so long as you do it right. Ok... back to building the new car... I've only got six weeks to go from street car to full out race car! Yikes... talk about burning the midnight oil.
------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com
There has been some great advise in here. This is a great site! I am going to move to the Mustang. I am going to dry my ears off a little with the Fiesta first. I would like a notch back but I would take either one.
aha. ok, i thought that spec line looked rather odd. it actually has the mustang IIs grouped with the FOX mustangs on one of the SCCA sites. im not insane, contrary to popular belief. im considering the mustangs, but im gonna need some help making weight if and when the time comes. will ya let me in on some of the secrets at that point marcello??? lol
Oh, btw, the site looks great. i like the conceptual art of the 93 car. ;-)
Jiveslug,
Just to clarify the point of specifications; on Pg. 39 of the SCCA ITCS 2002 year, the Mustang II years '74-'78, and the Fox years '79-'93 are listed on two distinct lines. They are not entered together.
Given the additional 200 lb. or so with the same engine listed for the '74-'78, I'm not sure why anyone would want to run one.
Good racing. Bill
Quote:
Originally posted by Jiveslug:
will ya let me in on some of the secrets at that point marcello??? lol
Oh, btw, the site looks great. i like the conceptual art of the 93 car. ;-)
Flattery will get you everywhere... if you're running a carb, making weight is a piece of cake. If you're going EFI (due to more wiring, etc) you need to pick through the yards on the older cars to find some of the lighter parts. Remember, you're not going to do it in one shot, it's more like 8 ounces here, one pound there, and it adds up. Also, you have to strip the car to the extent of the rules, and then add back from there until you get to the weight you want (or add more cage). Also, you an actually get a pretty good diagonal weight balance if you pick and choose carefully. You should look at the layout of a 79-82, then look at a 87-93. You'll see a lot of subtle differences that all add up. And remember that the base shell is different in weight from the early cars to the later ones. My old car dropped over 200lbs, and none of it came off quick or easy, but it all came off. Happy hunting!
------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com
and a WALMART battery!
Hey now... don't go giving away the real expensive speed secrets! http://Forums.ImprovedTouring.com/it/smile.gifQuote:
Originally posted by joeg:
and a WALMART battery!
------------------
-Marcello Canitano
www.SilverHorseRacing.com