Mustang SVO vs Dodge Shelby GLHS

Tom_Spangler wrote:

DrBoost wrote:

integraguy wrote: Having driven V8 Mustangs and "tons" of FWD cars, the Mustang is the more "entertaining" car to drive.

Oh but the GLH can be made to handle better than the mustang, despite FWD. I don't think my GLH is far behind, for challenge money.

Ummm.... aftermarket? Griggs, Maximum Motorsports, etc. SVO by a country mile.

Everything on my GLH is from the Mopar family except for the aftermarket camber plates, springs and the cage. All the 'go faster' bits are factory stock parts from other Chrysler family vehicles, Jeep, Dodge (viper), Chrysler, and I can drop in a Lotus head from the family too. And you'll never wish you'd have gotten the V-8.
I used to tell people this all the time (not really related to this thread....). If I almost beat a 'vette in my GLH I can brag "dood, I almost beat a vette!" and I'll have a great story to tell. If a vette beats me he can't hang around with his buddies and say "man, I beat this 4-door, 4-cylinder dodge econo-box from the '80s!!!" The punch just isn't there.
And for the record, I've beaten many vettes, toyed with F-bodes and Mustangs. I was actually asked to stop running my car at Milan dragway when my company rented the track for the day. Seems a company that soups up Mustangs (starts with an R, ends with a oush) doesn't like to see a little omni beating up on their product all afternoon

I'm pretty sure the GLHS was over a second quicker in the 1/4 and 0-60.

SVO, no question. Always wanted one.

Stock I would say SVO, GLHS if an engine and transmission (and some other stuff) swap is ok. Neither are really daily driveable anymore stock, the only thing thats a big problem for the GLHS is CV joints (unless someone had started making new ones since I had my charger).

Why couldn't you DD an SVO? Hell, I DD a Merkur and they break if you look at them cross-eyed. SVO can't- CAN'T be any worse.

Wow, as much as hate Ford I have to choose the svo.

fast_eddie_72 wrote: Why couldn't you DD an SVO? Hell, I DD a Merkur and they break if you look at them cross-eyed. SVO can't- CAN'T be any worse.

I mean in stock form. You might find NOS ball joints etc once, but its not something you can count on for wear items.

The Ford is SSSSOOO much harder to tune... Seriously it isn't like the 80's Mopar electronics are something to write home about.. But damn.. They are so far ahead of the crap system running the SVO it isn't even funny...

One of the first things you have to do is go to a standalone in the SVO (unless someone knows some tricks I dunno about..) With the GLHS you can make as much power as you want by just popping a new calibration in...

With the GLHS you have a reason to have a 4cly.. With the SVO.. Why wouldn't you have a v8... 5.0's respond awesome to turbos.. I like the idea of the fast 4cly... just to tick off the 5.0 guys.. but beyond that small circle the GLHS is way more fun to show off..

I fell in love with Shelby dodge cars out beating up on the old 5.0 rustangs.. And never met an SVO that was much faster than any of them...

The 2.3 turbo ain't a bad engine.. But really.. Iron head... come on..

I'll take the shortcomings of the 2.2/2.5 any day of the week over that..

GLHS.

Travis_K wrote: You might find NOS ball joints etc once, but its not something you can count on for wear items.

Ball joints for an '84 SVO $7.43 at Rock Auto all day long.

Maybe I don't understand, but why would a mid 80s Mustang be a difficult car to maintain? The turbo motor? They only made about a billion. Shoot, up until a few years ago, a '72 Capri was my DD. Finding parts for an SVO is a doddle.

ronholm wrote: One of the first things you have to do is go to a standalone in the SVO (unless someone knows some tricks I dunno about..)

Wait, why? Why would you need any trick at all? If'n you need a trick:

http://www.boostvalve.com/

In reply to fast_eddie_72:

Right.. and what about spark control... fuel tuning.. ect.. back in the day even us Shelby dodge guys were using bleeds and hacks to force more boost through a stock system.. but now... Not so much.. Some of us actually give the car a proper tune instead of just boosting the hell out of it...

I have a buddy who swapped a 2.3 turbo ford into a 59 Edsel...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH84yl_Oh8E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZvuXnwLNTY

He was taking a break from the Shelby dodge stuff... and the 2.3 came along cheap enough...

But yeah... Just ask him sometime..

ronholm wrote: In reply to fast_eddie_72: Right.. and what about spark control... fuel tuning.. ect.. back in the day even us Shelby dodge guys were using bleeds and hacks to force more boost through a stock system.. but now... Not so much.. Some of us actually give the car a proper tune instead of just boosting the hell out of it...

Well, again, why? The stock Ford system works just fine. What is so lacking that you must immediately put stand alone engine management on it?

Travis_K wrote:

fast_eddie_72 wrote: Why couldn't you DD an SVO? Hell, I DD a Merkur and they break if you look at them cross-eyed. SVO can't- CAN'T be any worse.

I mean in stock form. You might find NOS ball joints etc once, but its not something you can count on for wear items.

I DD mine 100 miles a day and autocross it every chance I get. The ball joints can be taken out after 10 minutes with a die grinder. Then just have them machined out a little and stick a modern balljoint in it. MM has a sleeve that will allow it to fit into the svo knuckle. You can still buy rotors, pads, everything else. Way safer than an omni, and plenty of room for me and my kids with booster seats in the back. Jcamper

GLHS. No FWD car from the 80s has any business with 175 hp. And a Mustang from the 80s has no business with a 4 cylinder.

Appleseed wrote: GLHS. No FWD car from the 80s has any business with 175 hp

When driving one, you DO NOT want to punch it without holding the wheel firmly with both hands. lol

integraguy wrote: Since Dodge/Chrysler took their turbo a bit farther, development-wise, than Ford, I'd say Dodge. HOWEVER, you "could" swap out that Ford 4 cylinder for a V8...not possible with the Dodge.

There was a factory Mopar kit to convert to V8

Travis_K wrote:

Appleseed wrote: GLHS. No FWD car from the 80s has any business with 175 hp

When driving one, you DO NOT want to punch it without holding the wheel firmly with both hands. lol

Ahh, it's not that bad. Just grow a pair and punch it. And like someone else said, you can toy with 5.0L mustangs all day long in a very mildly tuned GLH. Buy a $1,000 GLH, put a few hundred into it and you're in the mid 12's. I can steer the rear end of mine with my right foot all day.

Stock I would say SVO, GLHS if an engine and transmission (and some other stuff) swap is ok.

I dont get it.. an engine swap benefits the SVO more than the GLHS...

Well, again, why? The stock Ford system works just fine.

Because stock boost is boring and broken pistons are irritating? The Mopar system is very advanced for the year. Individual cylinder timing retard, major safety feature and even diagnostic aid. The stock ECU has been hacked so much that you can tune everything, including stuff that most car enthusiasts dont know what it does. It goes way beyond megasquirt, for example. You can even put anti-lag, launch limiter, flash a light when its picking up knock, all sorts of cool stuff.

fast_eddie_72 wrote: Ball joints for an '84 SVO $7.43 at Rock Auto all day long.

Bull honkey. Actually read all of the product descriptions at Rock Auto. Every one of them says "EXC SVO". That means excluding the SVO. That's what pisses me off about RA, they list all of these parts like they're for that car, yet when you read the description they are not. They also don't have SVO front or rear calipers.

Ranger50 wrote: SVO. Because it ain't wrong wheel drive.

Yup.

GLHS, but I've wanted an SVO for a loong time.

Travis_K wrote: Stock I would say SVO, GLHS if an engine and transmission (and some other stuff) swap is ok. Neither are really daily driveable anymore stock, the only thing thats a big problem for the GLHS is CV joints (unless someone had started making new ones since I had my charger).

Not daily drivable? Big problem is CV joints? Uh, wrong and wrong again. My GLHS is parked between a Ferrari and a new ZO6 at the moment. More often than not, I chose the dumb Omni to drive to the office or Cars&Coffee on Saturday mornings. It has been tracked more times than I can remember, participated in a Bull Run, still annoys Porsches and new Shelbys at auto-X's-all while returning nearly 30 mpg when out of the boost. Its a 4-door hatchback so its also practical as well. Mine has just over a 100k on the original engine and its only mods are tires, brake pads, motul fluids, a Momo wheel and a computer with slightly higher boost. The key to these cars is don't raise the boost very high without upgrading other parts, keep the cooling system in good order(be prepared to change the fan relay once in a while) and run good tires.

Jcamper wrote:

Travis_K wrote:

fast_eddie_72 wrote: Why couldn't you DD an SVO? Hell, I DD a Merkur and they break if you look at them cross-eyed. SVO can't- CAN'T be any worse.

I mean in stock form. You might find NOS ball joints etc once, but its not something you can count on for wear items.

I DD mine 100 miles a day and autocross it every chance I get. The ball joints can be taken out after 10 minutes with a die grinder. Then just have them machined out a little and stick a modern balljoint in it. MM has a sleeve that will allow it to fit into the svo knuckle. You can still buy rotors, pads, everything else. Way safer than an omni, and plenty of room for me and my kids with booster seats in the back. Jcamper

While I also like the SVO Mustang, I doubt that its any safer than the 4-door(with sedan door pillar and big bumpered) Dodge.

Appleseed wrote: GLHS. No FWD car from the 80s has any business with 175 hp. And a Mustang from the 80s has no business with a 4 cylinder.

and modern cars don't need 556 hp in station wagons-isn't being a car enthusiast fun?

In reply to ronholm:

The beauty of the 2.2 is that yuou can beat the snot out of them. if not for oem head gasket issues, they should receive a mention on the "most reliable engines" thread. Even teh head gasket problem is solved with the Mopar Performance or Cometic gasket. I have done ungodly things to 2.2s and they have always come back for more. Things I have discovered about the plebian little 2.2. 1) It can run a for at least 15 minutes without coolant in the summer with no ill effects.

2) Its bottom end can tolerate sustained use above 6000 RPM (pretty good considering in what cars it was used). I am talking about a non-tubro K-car bottom end.

3) A better ignition system (I use a Crane Fireball set-up) wakes the baby Mopar right up.

I'd rather have a turbo Lancer than the Omni's and I'd rather build my own SVO-like Mustang using a coupe body and a Mazda F2T (yeah, you heard me, F2T!) and a bunch of SN95/Maximum Motorsports/etc bits.

Assuming I had the time and ability and tools and etc etc etc.