Maroon92 wrote:Replicate this little badass. The Monroe Handler.
This! Is. So. Awesome! I have a metal sign from Monroe with the Handler on it, and Hot Wheels just released a version of it.
Maroon92 wrote:
This! Is. So. Awesome! I have a metal sign from Monroe with the Handler on it, and Hot Wheels just released a version of it.
I've been trying to find one for a while. Got this little 2.3 turbo w/5speed in a beat T-Bird that I have a hankering to put in a MII or Pinto!
I'll trade the worlds ugliest Miata for it!
Bruce
egnorant wrote: Got this little 2.3 turbo w/5speed in a beat T-Bird that I have a hankering to put in a MII or Pinto!
Bruce, you need one of these...
Ok, so the 302 was only rated at 140hp. But for the love of God, building a 302 with 250-300hp is stupid easy.
Depending on the CR of the pistons and condition of the rings and such, slap on some GT40P heads from a junkyard explorer, a nice 4bbl highrise dual plane manifold, matching cam and small(650cfm?) carb, junk what emissions crap you can and you have a healthy small block with worlds more power than stock. If you can avoid digging into the block, you can do it with out pulling the engine.
If you did have to go farther in, a rebuild kit with pistons starts around $300.
I have a friend with a Mustang II Cobra, and a pile of parts from a second car too. He'd started restoration, but has a ton of other projects(anyone need a pair of Vega GTs, '70 Mustang notch, or a Sunbird Turbo?), so he might sell as-is.
No idea on price but pm me and I can get you in touch with him.
In reply to alfadriver:
Word . . .
fast_eddie_72 wrote: Shoot, now you got me looking again. Found this coupe:Kind of along similar lines as the blue car, but a coupe.
I would take the above add:
Mix ingredients and beat the crap out of it
"How far North is North?"
Rough calculation . . . Virginia Beach. Takes about 12 hours for each of us. You leave at 6AM and head north at highway speeds, I do the same heading South. Route 95 all the way.
We meet up a little before 6PM for a nice dinner, or better yet, we dash across four lanes each and sign/date titles wind blowing them all over the place, flashlights in our mouths. and 18 wheelers roaring in our ears Trying to talk over the din, I LIKE that image a lot.
WE sprint back to each other's cars and you head on South and I north. We mail each other the number plates when we get the chance, no real rush.
Easy Peasy, about one full day, back by the next morning, only cost is the fuel burnt by two 5.0 engines. Surprised it doesn't happen every day . . .
TC
So much hate for this car. I don't get it.
I actually like Mustang IIs. I find them attractive (especially in fastback) and they have a lot of potential.
rallymodeller wrote: So much hate for this car. I don't get it.
Were you around when these things were new? It's one thing to rebody your performance car on a Pinto chassis, but in trying to fit that style on that little chassis, the proportions just didn't work out. Ford built a lot of really ugly cars in the 70's, and this one is at or near the top of the list.
Well, since it is basically a Pinto, and they were all known to spontaneously combust with minor provocation, I would insure for a bazillion dollars and wait for the explosion
Right after highshcool, my folks and I were car shopping. A local dealer had a '78 Mustang II Cobra that looked just like the one pictured but was red and white. It had a 302 and 4 speed. The guy wanted $4k but my folks said no 
I ended up with a 1986 Bronco II base model for $4500 instead. I would of rocked the hell out of that Pintostang...
THAT is the car my buddy had! Louvres rock! Why we dont see them any more is beyond me...
Had a few Pintos in my day (cheap and plentiful at one time) and also a 4 banger M2 hatchback. That thing was a understeering wallowing piece of E36 M3. The earlier Pintos with the German Ford 2.0 and 4 speed could run rings around it. The M2 weighed ~2700 pounds, the Pinto ~2000; that had a lot to do with it.
A gallon of gas, marshmellows, and some matches.
I don't understand the M2 hate either, yes they sucked when new, but so did nearly everything else from that time period. They are fairly light by the standards of today, and with some modern engine tech applied they should be respectably quick.
If a nice one came my way I'd be happy to play with it.
HappyAndy wrote: I don't understand the M2 hate either, yes they sucked when new, but so did nearly everything else from that time period. They are fairly light by the standards of today, and with some modern engine tech applied they should be respectably quick. If a nice one came my way I'd be happy to play with it.
Same here.
If someone said you could get a two-door, rear wheel drive, V8 manual car that weighed less than 2800# a lot of us would be all over it. I've seen less (in looks and mechanicals) bought and worked on -especially here -with some pretty cool results! There were one of the cars I looked at in my V8-quest and passed on them mainly because there is more support and parts for my Fox-body (another can-of-worms I suppose...).
I see the same situation for the Aspen/Vorlare twins from the 70s even from Mopar freaks. I just don't think a lot of car guys like late 70s car between the styling and lack of performance from the factory.
fast_eddie_72 wrote:
When I bought my '65 Musang fastback, it had that same Shelby R-Model fiberglass front apron. I hated it and couldn't wait to get it off there. I eventually gave it away.
The same front apron looks really good on that Mustang II, though. Much better than the huge 70's bumper. I don't think they even reworked it much. It looks almost like an untouched '65 part, maybe just narrowed a little in the center.
I would rock a Mustang II but I have a Yugo (and a constant running search for French and Eastern Bloc cars) so my judgment may be a little off. 
You'll need to log in to post.
