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!
walt peifer wrote:
> <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,
>
>
Brent P wrote:
> In article <43D58EE1.8030303@here.com>, cprice@here.com wrote:
>
>> or better yet, sell the 65 and buy a prius.
>
> He should just find a 4 cylinder probe! After all, that car was nearly
> the 1989 mustang.
....or an SVO turbo-4. Those were pretty good on fuel economy if you
didn't have a lead foot.
Ritz wrote:
> Brent P wrote:
>
>> In article <43D58EE1.8030303@here.com>, cprice@here.com wrote:
>>
>>> or better yet, sell the 65 and buy a prius.
>>
>>
>> He should just find a 4 cylinder probe! After all, that car was nearly
>> the 1989 mustang.
>
>
>
> ...or an SVO turbo-4. Those were pretty good on fuel economy if you
> didn't have a lead foot.
<rant>
Please dont cut up a SVO for this project. hack a t-bird, a merkur or
other turbo ford car. SVO's are becomming fairly rare these days, and we
dont need people hacking them to bits.
cprice@here.com wrote:
> Ritz wrote:
>> Brent P wrote:
>>
>>> In article <43D58EE1.8030303@here.com>, cprice@here.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> or better yet, sell the 65 and buy a prius.
>>>
>>>
>>> He should just find a 4 cylinder probe! After all, that car was
>>> nearly the 1989 mustang.
>>
>>
>>
>> ...or an SVO turbo-4. Those were pretty good on fuel economy if you
>> didn't have a lead foot.
> <rant>
>
> Please dont cut up a SVO for this project. hack a t-bird, a merkur
> or other turbo ford car. SVO's are becomming fairly rare these days, and
> we dont need people hacking them to bits.
>
> </rant>
A decent '65 is pretty rare too. It seems idiotic which is why I
suspect the whole thing was just a troll/joke.
Ritz wrote:
> cprice@here.com wrote:
>>
>> <rant>
>>
>> Please dont cut up a SVO for this project. hack a t-bird, a merkur
>> or other turbo ford car. SVO's are becomming fairly rare these days,
>> and we dont need people hacking them to bits.
>>
>> </rant>
>
>
>
> A decent '65 is pretty rare too. It seems idiotic which is why I
> suspect the whole thing was just a troll/joke.
>
> Cheers,
<cprice@here.com> wrote in message news:pTeCf.452647$ki.288322@pd7tw2no...
> Ritz wrote:
> > cprice@here.com wrote:
> >>
> >> <rant>
> >>
> >> Please dont cut up a SVO for this project. hack a t-bird, a merkur
> >> or other turbo ford car. SVO's are becomming fairly rare these days,
> >> and we dont need people hacking them to bits.
> >>
> >> </rant>
> >
> >
> >
> > A decent '65 is pretty rare too. It seems idiotic which is why I
> > suspect the whole thing was just a troll/joke.
> >
> > Cheers,
>
> Agreed.
I have a 65 Mustang and if i wanted something fuel efficent, i would have a
mod ped. Gas is expensive, get the biggest engine and enjoy the money your
paying for gas.
walt peifer wrote:
> <michaelvogel@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1137970305.114116.214210@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > > >
> 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,
my reference to the "honda accord" was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.
Anyway, yes I agree that a rebuild is probably the most efficient way
to improve some gas mileage while still preserving the mustang's
original power.
Ill take your motor off your hands!!
<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
>
Linear Mode
