I was comparing the track width and weight of an NB Miata to a 1961 Ford Falcon 2 door post just the other day. Thought was it would make a neat car with the complete Miata drive train and suspension in a 60s sedan. Maybe add a JR supercharger kit, or an FM turbo set up. So,to the OP I say "Go for it! "
I really wasn't trying to trash the Mustang. I like them, but they are an old technology, and it was nothing more than a tarted up Falcon.
More I was thinking about the proposed engine and the total end result. A fair bit of work, for what kind of result?
I don't know, kinda strikes me like going to the work of installing a Toyota Supra engine into a Nova. OK, but why? Lot of work, what was gained?
I would think for a vintage Mustang radical engine swap I would want as much power with as little weight as I could financially get. I don't see one of the Duratec engines giving that.
I had several rapid thoughts reading this:
-
Thats not enough motor for that heavy of a car.
-
Hmmm the base 6 wasn't a powerhouse by any means, and was small too.
-
4 cylinder Mustangs can't be cool...Wait a second SVO!
-
You're building a prequel to the 80's SVO Mustang!
-
This is cool afterall. Add much lightness.
Chris_V
UltraDork
1/24/13 8:57 a.m.
DeadSkunk wrote:
I was comparing the track width and weight of an NB Miata to a 1961 Ford Falcon 2 door post just the other day. Thought was it would make a neat car with the complete Miata drive train and suspension in a 60s sedan. Maybe add a JR supercharger kit, or an FM turbo set up. So,to the OP I say "Go for it! "
The '60-63 Falcon 2 door and 4 door sedans weighed a mere 2300 lbs with the stock 6 cyl. The early Mustang 6 cyls were up to a "portly" 2500 lbs. (by comparison, my '70 Mustang fastback w/2 bbl 302 weighed in at 2800 lbs)The Miata or Duratech drivetrains woudl be more than enough for them, especially if you took a modicum of effort in lightening them up.
I really wanted to put the 2.3 turbo in my '62 4 door, as it woudl be like a T bird Turbo Coupe with over a thousand lbs shaved off. I'd say a Duratech or Zetec, especially turbocharged, would make an early Mustang or Falcon pretty quick.
Maroon92 wrote:
The one pictured is definitely a 67-68 car, the 64-66 cars are a little more subdued.
It's a '67, you can tell by the "brake vents"; only '67s have that finned looking insert.
And OP, I say go for it. I'm a little more curious as to what motor you're going to start with for this project and what you're going to do with the suspension.
I've seen a really clean SVO 2.3T swap into an early coupe, but I can't seem to find the pictures of it; I'll edit my post if I do.
mndsm wrote:
I've had similar thoughts with many chassis/engine combos over the year. Open the hood, super sweet engine bay, rest of the car is meh.
I'm pretty sure you just described my Javelin...
Engine bay :
Car :
Hoop
SuperDork
1/24/13 9:19 a.m.
Gearheadotaku wrote:
I had several rapid thoughts reading this:
1. Thats not enough motor for that heavy of a car.
2. Hmmm the base 6 wasn't a powerhouse by any means, and was small too.
How much do you think those Mustangs weigh?
Also, for inspiration: (someone puts a 2.3 into an Edsel)
http://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1959-edsel-eco-boost/
At the moment this is a thought exercise/bench build. I still have a rusty ass starlet that I need to build/give up on. At the moment, I don't have a car or drivetrain so it was just a thought I had yesterday.
Sacrilege?
Heck, I still want to build a clone of that Mustang from Tokyo Drift. Only I want to get a Nissan badge, a Ford Badge, a Skyline Badge, and a Mustang badge and cut and paste them to make the back say:
NORD SKYSTANG
Adrian_Thompson wrote:
Hang, you’re asking if it’s sacrilege to put a Duratech (Which can be had with a Ford logo cam cover) in a Mustang on the same board where we’re all fawning over a Subaru swapped into a Ferrari like school girls at a Justin what’s his name concert!?!?!?
I say go for it, and rather than take Ddavids dim view of the handling, while you’ve got the welder out add a proper 3 or 4 link rear end and a decent SLA front suspension with R&P, call it a Locost with an existing steel body.
This is pretty much what I was going for. I like the looks of the old stang (especially in anti-hero patina form) and think that there is little reason that it HAS to have a big ass v8. The suspension is so simple that putting something better is required for anyone building one of these for corner carving purposes. My dad has a 65 coupe and it is a bore to drive but with some custom work, it could be fun.
This whole thought was inspired by the guy who is running a turbo ecotec in his C4 vette. I don't recall where his build is posted but it is pretty sweet.
Javelin wrote:
Car :
But it's the control unit for a giant robot right?
Many many years ago, possibly on the old board, wasn't there a guy who built a 60's Mustang for the Challenge based on something like an old Datsunissan Z car or something. He used the floor pan, IRS, front suspension, turbo engine, trans the lot?? I seem to recall it was a bright reddish/orangeish color in the end.
ddavidv wrote:
With FT on this one. Old Mustangs are for pretty. They drive like oxcarts, even with several thousand spent trying to 'fix' them. You efforts and dollars can be better spent to more effective results elsewhere, and you won't wind up with a car no one will want to buy when you're done.
That's highly inaccurate. Radial tires, a slight drop of the upper control arm, and front disc brakes turn a vintage mustang into a very enjoyable car to drive. And it doesn't cost thousands.
GameboyRMH wrote:
ddavidv wrote:
With FT on this one. Old Mustangs are for pretty. They drive like oxcarts, even with several thousand spent trying to 'fix' them. You efforts and dollars can be better spent to more effective results elsewhere, and you won't wind up with a car no one will want to buy when you're done.
Yeah this is the problem, I don't think they can be made to handle. If they could I'd be all for it...but I don't think they can.
That is a ridiculously ignorant statement.
I always wanted to take some old 67-68 6 cyl Mustang coupe... keep it plain jane with "original patina" BUT swap in a very clean and simple 2JZGTE and a 6 speed. swap in a Mustang II front end, keep steelies on it, albeit 8" or 9" wide, and then find unsuspecting....
I've always been an old Mustang fan, and have had several, including a couple of '65's and a '70 Boss 302. I say do whatever you want.
I also agree they need a LOT of work to handle anything like a modern car, but that's not all bad. Even the Boss wouldn't turn or stop very well, and it was in fact truck like, but that does have some charm in a raw kind of way. It all depends on what you want.
To me though, and this is just my opinion, if it's not a V8, then there are other cars that'd I rather have. That's the appeal. I had a 6cyl '65 once, and it took all of a month before I was ripping it out for a V8 swap. It's personality evaporates with the 6 and leaves it emotionless.
But, you wouldn't be building it because I like it, so if you like the idea, then by all means do it. Then I'll look at it and while I may not agree with the concept, I will certainly appreciate the effort and results.
Perfect amount of sacrilege. But I can hardly wait until wait until the ecoboost engines start getting swapped into vintage Fords.
In reply to AngryCorvair:
These are all excellent points. To respond to point 2: I blatantly hot linked that photo via google. It had just the right amount of patina so I could look past the odd bolt pattern issue.
This guy is kind of on the same page as me. His car is too shiny and it has (gulp) an AUTOMATIC!!!
http://www.moddedmustangs.com/forums/classic-mustangs/146318-1966-mustang-svo-2-3-turbo.html
Go for it! If that's sacrelig then I'm going whereever you're going too.
Swank Force One wrote:
Is that a rotary? Now that is sacrilege.
Oh, God, make it stop.
Sky_Render wrote:
Swank Force One wrote:
Is that a *rotary*? Now that is sacrilege.
Oh, God, make it stop.
It's a 20B, yes. And i bet it's probably a torquey sumbitch compared to the stock lump that was in there.