Ford Forums is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. We discuss all Ford models on the forum. Registered Users do not see the above ads. Please Register - It's Free!
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?
>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?
>
Easier to modify your foot.
--
December 9, 2005 (CNN) While interviewing an anonymous
US Special Forces soldier, a Reuters News agent asked
the soldier what he felt when sniping members of Al Quaeda
in Afghanistan.
The soldier shrugged and replied, "Recoil." (Possible Urban Legend)
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?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michael
>
> 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?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michael
>
What mileage do you want?
The same as the late 5.0's?
--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!
>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?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Michael
A ricer in a Mustang????? Is lynching still permitted?
--
>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?
what's a honda?
>Comments/suggestions?
Good thing we can't actually reach into the computer monitor and slap some
sense into you. honda, crap, you should have your Stang taken away from you
for even THINKING that. Must be a troll...
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.
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.
<michaelvogel@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1137970305.114116.214210@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> 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?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michael
>
rebuild the 289. carefully select the cam, run a 4-v intake with a small
(low cfm carb with vacuum secondary. upgrade the ignition (petronix, unilite
ect) use high quality cap, wires and plugs. Find a 35 amp alternator, no
after market electronics, quality using a manual trans convert to over
driven T-5, lighten the flywheel and pressure plate, with an auto for an
over drive type AOD. lighten the drive shaft (carbon fiber, aluminum) find a
set of 2:11 or 2:34 gears, change the tires to the narrowest highest
pressure p-metric radials you can find and are comfortable with. remove the
carpet and trunk mat and the insulation under them, reinstall the mat and
carpet. don't carry anything extra in the trunk. Drive as if there is and
egg between your gas pedal and the floor,
>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 wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2006 14:51:45 -0800, 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?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Michael
>
> A ricer in a Mustang????? Is lynching still permitted?
I can't help but agree. I'm sure ANYTHING is possible with a sufficient
amount of money and elbow grease applied. Nationalist sentiments aside,
it would probably be a lot easier to transplant an inline Ford 6
cylinder like a 200 or 250 which was both available and plentiful at
that time. With appropriate tweaking, those engines CAN be quite fuel
efficient with the old single barrel carbs.
Keep in mind that your time is allegedly also worth something. So
spending a month trying to shoehorn in a more fuel efficient engine
might not be the big money saver that you think.
Lastly, I suspect the original post was a joke....but ya' never know....
Linear Mode
