E49 vs Phase III - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Ford Forum Ford Forum

» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
ยป Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Older Fords > Classic Fords > Classic Falcons
Register Home Forum Active Topics Photo Gallery Auto Loans Garage Mark Forums Read Auto Escrow

FordForums.com is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-25-2005, 08:08   #1 (permalink)
Registered User
 
73falcongt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 344
E49 vs Phase III

I've read a bit about the E49 and Phase III and apparently the E49 was actually faster. Is this true? I've heard that E49's on modern tyres have been able to manage high 13's, and I've also heard, from someone on these forums I think, that a completely stock phase III with 3.9 diffs manage a 14.1 in the quarter. Whats the verdict? No matter how much of a ford man you are, theres no arguing facts. So is the Valiant actually a faster car?
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------
She may not be the cleanest of fastest XY on the road, but godamn it she's mine.
73falcongt is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-25-2005, 14:05   #2 (permalink)
Registered User
 
3FIVE1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 62
Re: E49 vs Phase III

with all due respect, a phase 111 with 3.9's is going to be much quicker than 14.1, They came out with 3 different ratios when new and the low 14 sec tmes recorded at the time were with the more common 3.25 ratio. Take nothing away from the E49 as it was a damn quick car but If you really want to see how quick they were back then get yourself a copy of the bathurst race where all the makes lined up against each other. The first time down conrod the first 12 odd cars were XY's,..my question is if the E49 was so much quicker in acceleration,..where were they ? surely they should have been mixing it up on the first lap ?

anyway forget about chargers,..the valiant hardtops are much nicer
__________________
---- AUTHORISED GM DESTROYER ----
3FIVE1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 16:18   #3 (permalink)
Approach with caution.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 1,043
Re: E49 vs Phase III

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3FIVE1
with all due respect, a phase 111 with 3.9's is going to be much quicker than 14.1, They came out with 3 different ratios when new and the low 14 sec tmes recorded at the time were with the more common 3.25 ratio. Take nothing away from the E49 as it was a damn quick car but If you really want to see how quick they were back then get yourself a copy of the bathurst race where all the makes lined up against each other. The first time down conrod the first 12 odd cars were XY's,..my question is if the E49 was so much quicker in acceleration,..where were they ? surely they should have been mixing it up on the first lap ?

anyway forget about chargers,..the valiant hardtops are much nicer
What people tend to forget about the HO's is they were built for curcuit racing, not drag racing!!
The Phase 3 had 3 different diff ratios options (3.25, 3.5 and 3.9), and a close ratio toploader.
The close ratio toploader essentially negated the low diff ratio in 1st so the car is never going to be as quick off the line so 1/4 times would not be as quick as it would with a wide ratio toploader.
The press got 14.4 with the 3.25 rear end but there were examples of 14.0 with the 3.9's.
__________________
F6: the fastest factory 4 door falcon in the world!
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 16:47   #4 (permalink)
The SB Slayer
 
FPVGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Should be polishing my GT's
Posts: 1,529
Re: E49 vs Phase III

Quote:
Originally Posted by 73falcongt
I've read a bit about the E49 and Phase III and apparently the E49 was actually faster. Is this true? I've heard that E49's on modern tyres have been able to manage high 13's, and I've also heard, from someone on these forums I think, that a completely stock phase III with 3.9 diffs manage a 14.1 in the quarter. Whats the verdict? No matter how much of a ford man you are, theres no arguing facts. So is the Valiant actually a faster car?
1/4 mile times yes but around a circuit i think the HO did have the edge over the 6 pot.Different story in NZ though the Valiants were unbeatable.If the Valiants had the same factory backing as Ford and Holden back then i would say that the Hemi 6 would of been a great contender and even would of won a few more races.
__________________
THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE LEGEND THE GT is back

Introducing the Boss 290 powerplant
The Boss 290 combines the best of both worlds, with race-bred power and everyday comfort. The awe-inspiring Boss 290 is a powerplant unlike any ever built in this country and comes to life on Australia's only current V8 production line.
FPVGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 17:21   #5 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Dmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Bullsbrook WA
Age: 45
Posts: 251
Re: E49 vs Phase III

There are many ways to measure the greatness of a car such as 1/4 mile, 0-100m, circuit racing, build quality, ride etc. I'm a bit of a mopar fan and the E49's have the honour of being quickest down the quater mile at the time. but round the track they had their share of problems.

Even though the GT's had a better track record than the E49, there was a year there that they couldn't compete against the XU-1's which recorded the quickest time ever for a 130 lap race, does this make them the greatest muscle car of the time? No, just great in it's own way.

The GT's are great because of the whole package IMO, That and the famed shaker. All these cars have their own space in history and it will be only time that see's all these mid seventies super cars become rare and priceless.

All these cars are great in there own way and should not be dismissed because of a quarter mile ETA or a lap time.
__________________
Dmax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 19:36   #6 (permalink)
Registered User
 
73falcongt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 344
Re: E49 vs Phase III

I see, well if modern tyres dropped the E49 quarter time from 14.4 down to high 13's, and the Phase III recorded times of 14 stock with the 3.9 diff. Then a 3.9 Phase III on modern rubber should be even quicker, like 13.6 or 13.7 maybe, am I right? I don't know whether these phase III figures are exactly correct, it seems like one of those things where the legend just grows you know. I mean, originally I read 14.4 quarter times, then I heard 14.1 sec quarters with the 3.9 gears, now I hear 14 sec. I'll believe it though, the Phase III was just a BEAST.
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------
She may not be the cleanest of fastest XY on the road, but godamn it she's mine.
73falcongt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 19:45   #7 (permalink)
Approach with caution.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 1,043
Re: E49 vs Phase III

people are more pedantic about 1/4 times these days, back in 71 it was lap times pople were interested in, you'll probably find they took 1/4 times with a stop watch!! LOL
All things being equal though i doubt an E49 would give a Phase 3 any trouble at all either over the 1/4 and there's no way it would touch it around the Mt!
__________________
F6: the fastest factory 4 door falcon in the world!
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 20:45   #8 (permalink)
Registered User
 
lukeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 868
Re: E49 vs Phase III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmax
There are many ways to measure the greatness of a car such as 1/4 mile, 0-100m, circuit racing, build quality, ride etc. I'm a bit of a mopar fan and the E49's have the honour of being quickest down the quater mile at the time. but round the track they had their share of problems.

Even though the GT's had a better track record than the E49, there was a year there that they couldn't compete against the XU-1's which recorded the quickest time ever for a 130 lap race, does this make them the greatest muscle car of the time? No, just great in it's own way.

The GT's are great because of the whole package IMO, That and the famed shaker. All these cars have their own space in history and it will be only time that see's all these mid seventies super cars become rare and priceless.

All these cars are great in there own way and should not be dismissed because of a quarter mile ETA or a lap time.
As it has been said,the Phase III came out with three Optional Diff Ratios[3.25,3.50,and 3.90:1] and as pointed out,the Phase III was apparently mostly Tested with the 3.25:1 Ratio Centre...So I will keep Quarter Mile Honours open in my mind at the minute.Someone mentioned earlier that a E49 cracked 13 Second Quarters on Modern Tyres?? If this is the case,then I'm sure a Genuine HO could do the same or who knows maybe better? I believe it is true that the Chargers did well on the short Tracks in New Zealand,but I do not know about unbeatable?Did they really win every single Race there? I have seen all of the Bathurst Videos of 1967 to 1974 and never even saw a Valiant/Charger even place in the Top 3 unless I missed something.I don't think that more Factory backing etc would have helped the Chargers do anything much differant at Bathurst,because besides Roll Cages and a small amount of other mod's,all the Car's had to be pretty much in production form.So any little Horsepower tricks that Ford could have got away with would have been considerably limited and could have also been done by everyone else and probably was.The Year that the HO was beaten by the XU-1 was 1972 and it was bucketing down rain which reeked havoc on the Big HO's chances of success[Around 400 Horsepower in XY GT HO with 4-Speed Top-loader and Detroit Locker Diff in lots of rain equals not good for racing...very bad !!] .If you look at the year before in 1971,Moffat even say's [Not in these exact word's]that he calculated how fast he only had to go to win and could still have pushed his Phase III more.Also with this in mind,I'm sure that Moffat's HO was very capable of beating the XU-1's Lap Record.I'm also pretty sure that in Bathurst 1972 that when the track dried up the Phase III's were catching the Toranas fast.Finally...Toranas suck and look crap,E49's look much better than any Torana IMO...but even being a Coupe,neither looked anyway near as good as the Phase III HO and were'nt the all round package and Superstar IMO !!!
lukeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 21:21   #9 (permalink)
Approach with caution.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 1,043
Re: E49 vs Phase III

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeh
As it has been said,the Phase III came out with three Optional Diff Ratios[3.25,3.50,and 3.90:1] and as pointed out,the Phase III was apparently mostly Tested with the 3.25:1 Ratio Centre...So I will keep Quarter Mile Honours open in my mind at the minute.Someone mentioned earlier that a E49 cracked 13 Second Quarters on Modern Tyres?? If this is the case,then I'm sure a Genuine HO could do the same or who knows maybe better? I believe it is true that the Chargers did well on the short Tracks in New Zealand,but I do not know about unbeatable?Did they really win every single Race there? I have seen all of the Bathurst Videos of 1967 to 1974 and never even saw a Valiant/Charger even place in the Top 3 unless I missed something.I don't think that more Factory backing etc would have helped the Chargers do anything much differant at Bathurst,because besides Roll Cages and a small amount of other mod's,all the Car's had to be pretty much in production form.So any little Horsepower tricks that Ford could have got away with would have been considerably limited and could have also been done by everyone else and probably was.The Year that the HO was beaten by the XU-1 was 1972 and it was bucketing down rain which reeked havoc on the Big HO's chances of success[Around 400 Horsepower in XY GT HO with 4-Speed Top-loader and Detroit Locker Diff in lots of rain equals not good for racing...very bad !!] .If you look at the year before in 1971,Moffat even say's [Not in these exact word's]that he calculated how fast he only had to go to win and could still have pushed his Phase III more.Also with this in mind,I'm sure that Moffat's HO was very capable of beating the XU-1's Lap Record.I'm also pretty sure that in Bathurst 1972 that when the track dried up the Phase III's were catching the Toranas fast.Finally...Toranas suck and look crap,E49's look much better than any Torana IMO...but even being a Coupe,neither looked anyway near as good as the Phase III HO and were'nt the all round package and Superstar IMO !!!
The Phase 3 had much faster lap times than the XU1, the rain gave the XU1 the edge, not its outright performance.
As for E49's in NZ well Ford didnt really give a stuff about racing over there and only fielded a token effort from time to time.
The Tracks in NZ were like winton, tight and no good for cars with long legs!
__________________
F6: the fastest factory 4 door falcon in the world!
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2005, 21:51   #10 (permalink)
The SB Slayer
 
FPVGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Should be polishing my GT's
Posts: 1,529
Re: E49 vs Phase III

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeh
As it has been said,the Phase III came out with three Optional Diff Ratios[3.25,3.50,and 3.90:1] and as pointed out,the Phase III was apparently mostly Tested with the 3.25:1 Ratio Centre...So I will keep Quarter Mile Honours open in my mind at the minute.Someone mentioned earlier that a E49 cracked 13 Second Quarters on Modern Tyres?? If this is the case,then I'm sure a Genuine HO could do the same or who knows maybe better? I believe it is true that the Chargers did well on the short Tracks in New Zealand,but I do not know about unbeatable?Did they really win every single Race there? I have seen all of the Bathurst Videos of 1967 to 1974 and never even saw a Valiant/Charger even place in the Top 3 unless I missed something.I don't think that more Factory backing etc would have helped the Chargers do anything much differant at Bathurst,because besides Roll Cages and a small amount of other mod's,all the Car's had to be pretty much in production form.So any little Horsepower tricks that Ford could have got away with would have been considerably limited and could have also been done by everyone else and probably was.The Year that the HO was beaten by the XU-1 was 1972 and it was bucketing down rain which reeked havoc on the Big HO's chances of success[Around 400 Horsepower in XY GT HO with 4-Speed Top-loader and Detroit Locker Diff in lots of rain equals not good for racing...very bad !!] .If you look at the year before in 1971,Moffat even say's [Not in these exact word's]that he calculated how fast he only had to go to win and could still have pushed his Phase III more.Also with this in mind,I'm sure that Moffat's HO was very capable of beating the XU-1's Lap Record.I'm also pretty sure that in Bathurst 1972 that when the track dried up the Phase III's were catching the Toranas fast.Finally...Toranas suck and look crap,E49's look much better than any Torana IMO...but even being a Coupe,neither looked anyway near as good as the Phase III HO and were'nt the all round package and Superstar IMO !!!
Refering to 1/4 times the HEMI 6 is quicker trust me my bros has one and he embarrasses a lot of CLEVO's around corners and Straights.
__________________
THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE LEGEND THE GT is back

Introducing the Boss 290 powerplant
The Boss 290 combines the best of both worlds, with race-bred power and everyday comfort. The awe-inspiring Boss 290 is a powerplant unlike any ever built in this country and comes to life on Australia's only current V8 production line.
FPVGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Older Fords > Classic Fords > Classic Falcons



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 00:47.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.