On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 03:16:49 -0600,
tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com
(Brent P) wrote:
>In article <1137970305.114116.214210@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, michaelvogel@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm looking for some opinions on the smallest useful engine that can be
>> transplanted into a 1965 ford mustang... Is it a stretch to say that a
>> honda accord engine might be compatible and/or even strong enough to
>> drive the mustang?
>>
>> Or maybe the easier option is to modify the stang's 289 v8 to make it
>> more fuel efficient. Comments/suggestions?
>
>You want a fuel sipping mustang?
>
>1) Find one of the very rare 1969 Mustang E's. 200 cid I6 with a trans
>set up for fuel economy.
>
>2) Mustang ii 4 cylinder.
Having owned a Mustang II I tend to disagree with this... Unless
specially set up, even the V8s were dogs. I think the 4 banger would
have to strain more to move that much weight. It might save some in
the short haul, but in the long run... it's a question. I had the 302
w/4V and it still was nothing compared to my 72.
>
>3) 1979-1993 4 cylinder.
>
>Don't hack up a perfectly good '65.
>
>If you really want a '65 with better fuel economy, buy a '65 with 170 or
>200 cid I6.
>
--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
w/Black Std Interior, A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok;
Vintage 40 16" rims w/225/50ZR16 KDWS BF Goodrich
gForce Radial T/As, Cobra drop; surround sound
audio-video...
See my ride at....
Feb 2004-
http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/003_May_21_3004.jpg
Feb 2004-
http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/005_May_21_2004.jpg
Jul 2005-
http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/d..._11_05_002.jpg
Jul 2005-
http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/E...ebuild_006.jpg
