Mustang's car search thread - IT'S OVER!

  • Thread starter Thread starter mustangGT90210
  • 696 comments
  • 29,577 views
So, closer ratio gearbox is the abswer.. since it multiplies the torque. am I on right track? :p
 
Leonidae
So, closer ratio gearbox is the abswer.. since it multiplies the torque. am I on right track? :p
Click to expand...

Sort of. It's not really that the ratios are closer, but gearboxes are torque multipliers, yes.

But gearboxes don't make acceleration either. Only ONE thing affects acceleration - and it isn't crank torque, or crank torque-to-weight ratio.


Crank torque, like crank power, is a big number to put in brochures.
 
Guys, can you please take your argument out of my thread?

N4HS, you are taking a fanboyish approach to your V6's, japan CAN make good engines, but look where they are built, the main idea with them isn't top speed!

Famine, thanks for getting those NB 0-60 times in, that helps a lot. Chances are I'll be seeing a 1.6 though, if I take this route, so what might those times be?
 
mustangGT90210
Guys, can you please take your argument out of my thread?
Click to expand...

I was thinking we're getting a bit off topic :lol:

mustangGT90210
N4HS, you are taking a fanboyish approach to your V6's, japan CAN make good engines, but look where they are built, the main idea with them isn't top speed!
Click to expand...

Japan has notoriously punitive laws for large capacity engines, which is why they make smaller ones and, if they need grunt, nail forced induction on. Capacity = torque, FI = extra capacity.

I don't find it surprising that a country which doesn't make large capacity engines generally doesn't make naturally-aspirated engines with high torque figures. I guess nd does find it surprising. But still, all the crank torque in the world doesn't actually mean a thing.

mustangGT90210
Famine, thanks for getting those NB 0-60 times in, that helps a lot. Chances are I'll be seeing a 1.6 though, if I take this route, so what might those times be?
Click to expand...

It's pretty much of a muchness with MX-5s. The big-engined one of each generation runs 0-60mph times around about 8s (and I wouldn't be quibbling about 7.8-8.2 - it's around about 8s). The small-engined one of each generation runs 0-60mph times around about 10s (similarly, 9.5-10.5 is around about 10s). The exception is the detuned EU 1.6 from 96-98 in the NA, which is s-l-o-w.


But all MX-5s are driving machines. And, if you fancy, take to turbos and superchargers quite nicely.
 
Famine
I was thinking we're getting a bit off topic :lol:



Japan has notoriously punitive laws for large capacity engines, which is why they make smaller ones and, if they need grunt, nail forced induction on. Capacity = torque, FI = extra capacity.

I don't find it surprising that a country which doesn't make large capacity engines generally doesn't make naturally-aspirated engines with high torque figures. I guess nd does find it surprising. But still, all the crank torque in the world doesn't actually mean a thing.



It's pretty much of a muchness with MX-5s. The big-engined one of each generation runs 0-60mph times around about 8s (and I wouldn't be quibbling about 7.8-8.2 - it's around about 8s). The small-engined one of each generation runs 0-60mph times around about 10s (similarly, 9.5-10.5 is around about 10s). The exception is the detuned EU 1.6 from 96-98 in the NA, which is s-l-o-w.


But all MX-5s are driving machines. And, if you fancy, take to turbos and superchargers quite nicely.
Click to expand...

Small little turbo would work nicely. I read that the NA 1.8 started in '94, so I shouldn't have trouble getting that with my range.
 
mustangGT90210
Small little turbo would work nicely. I read that the NA 1.8 started in '94, so I shouldn't have trouble getting that with my range.
Click to expand...

Yep - should be a walk in the park for you.

The 1.8 was turboes anyway for its application in the 323. They take to supercharging well too. NAs tend to run just shy of a metric tonne (and a little bit more shy of an Imperial ton), so even mild sprucing gives you a lot in return. 150hp in an NA is plenty enough to see horizons approaching rapidly, but you can push much, much further.
 
Famine
Yep - should be a walk in the park for you.

The 1.8 was turboes anyway for its application in the 323. They take to supercharging well too. NAs tend to run just shy of a metric tonne (and a little bit more shy of an Imperial ton), so even mild sprucing gives you a lot in return. 150hp in an NA is plenty enough to see horizons approaching rapidly, but you can push much, much further.
Click to expand...

In a car that small it'll feel faster too! I gotta test drive one to make sure I'm comfy inside it. That's always the caveat of these things...
 
You'll find that the driving position forces you to put your hands in the right place on the wheel and the gearstick is so naturally placed. Plus with the roof down you'll never muck up a reverse park again :lol:
 
Famine
You'll find that the driving position forces you to put your hands in the right place on the wheel and the gearstick is so naturally placed. Plus with the roof down you'll never muck up a reverse park again :lol:
Click to expand...

I handle reverse in an '06 Escape rather well, and even a newer F-250. MX-5 outta be a cakewalk lol

That sounds like a great driving position.
 
Prosthetic
That they look kickass and I have only ever seen one in my life.
Click to expand...

Just one? There's one right down the street from me. Dark maroon with the orange stripes.

Has anyone owned or driven one?
 
mustangGT90210
Hey guys, what do you know about the '87-'88 Monte Carlo?
Click to expand...

Brilliant cars. Get one.

mustangGT90210
Just one? There's one right down the street from me. Dark maroon with the orange stripes.

Has anyone owned or driven one?
Click to expand...

I've driven them, they are slightly more comfy as a road car than a Camaro/Firebird while still being "sporty". I have mad respect for Monte owners. They look awsome in any color too. If you can find an SS cheap and in good shape you need to buy it.
 
Look how gangsta I could go
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...oors=&transmission=&max_price=4000&cardist=44

img_popup.jsp

Drop it back to stock height or a little shorter and get rid of that god awful grill and it won't be too bad

3 Spd auto??? goodbye gas mileage: http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...oors=&transmission=&max_price=4000&cardist=28
 
Actually, the 3 speed has a ridiculously high final gear, and it's great for highway cruising. Decent gas mileage as well, and bulletproof.
 
TopHat
Actually, the 3 speed has a ridiculously high final gear, and it's great for highway cruising. Decent gas mileage as well, and bulletproof.
Click to expand...

+1

That maroon V6 only has 46k some-odd miles. That is a great car to start out on. Will last another 200k easily. If I had the cash I would buy it.
 
mustangGT90210
Hey guys, what do you know about the '87-'88 Monte Carlo?
Click to expand...

Will you be able to afford to fill it up when fuel goes over $4.00 this summer? They probably aren't bad cars, I've known a people who have owned them in the past and they never had issues with them. All I remember is is took quite a bit of fuel and burned it fairly quick.
 
TopHat
Actually, the 3 speed has a ridiculously high final gear, and it's great for highway cruising. Decent gas mileage as well, and bulletproof.
Click to expand...
You wouldn't happen to know the EPA estimates would you?
JCE
+1

That maroon V6 only has 46k some-odd miles. That is a great car to start out on. Will last another 200k easily. If I had the cash I would buy it.
Click to expand...
Very low miles, it's a great deal if everything on it works well.
Joey D
Will you be able to afford to fill it up when fuel goes over $4.00 this summer? They probably aren't bad cars, I've known a people who have owned them in the past and they never had issues with them. All I remember is is took quite a bit of fuel and burned it fairly quick.
Click to expand...
I doubt gas will climb that high, we're probably very near the peak right now. But that's still a scary thought.
 
mustangGT90210
I doubt gas will climb that high, we're probably very near the peak right now. But that's still a scary thought.
Click to expand...

At the end of 2005 and 2006, gas was over $2. This winter it was over $3.00, so I think there's a good chance it will increase nicely in the summer.
 
ROAD_DOGG33J
At the end of 2005 and 2006, gas was over $2. This winter it was over $3.00, so I think there's a good chance it will increase nicely in the summer.
Click to expand...

Chance, but I don't think it'll be as big as everyone is thinking. 3.50 maybe, but not 4.00
 
It's already $3.50 in quite a few areas, if you plan on keeping whatever vehicle you are buying for an extended period of time you need to think about these things.

I'm not sure where you live, but if it's in a region that snow you also need to think about your driving ability with a big, heavy car with what I assume is no ABS and is RWD.
 
Joey D
It's already $3.50 in quite a few areas, if you plan on keeping whatever vehicle you are buying for an extended period of time you need to think about these things.

I'm not sure where you live, but if it's in a region that snow you also need to think about your driving ability with a big, heavy car with what I assume is no ABS and is RWD.
Click to expand...

Gas is 3.19 around me.

Appreciate the concern, but I live in nice sunny never under 40 degrees Florida. I only gotta look out for rain. Lots of rain. And snowbirds:scared:
 
G-Bodies are great. I use to own a 86 Regal 305ci myself. Pretty much the same thing, I pretty am sure youll like it.
 
mustangGT90210
Gas is 3.19 around me.

Appreciate the concern, but I live in nice sunny never under 40 degrees Florida. I only gotta look out for rain. Lots of rain. And snowbirds:scared:
Click to expand...

Gas around here is around 3.30 a gallon for 87 Octane. 👎 I can expect it to go over 3.50 a gallon over the summer.
 
Bah up in the UP it's 3.40-3.50 a gallon as we speak...luckily I don't drive very often so I can make a tank last for a month.
 
Long Island is kinda odd, there are prices ranging from 3.21, all the way to 3.69 a gallon... :crazy:

But yeah, you'd be fairly well off with a Monte of that vintage GT90210. 👍
 
Wow... here it's like uh... almost $4 a lot of places around here. :grumpy: Plus if you want to go anywhere you also have to pay bridge fees. I guess you get that for living in the Bay Area. And well, taxafornia.
 
Yet you still get Diesel 30 cents cheaper than we do. 👍 Nearly $5 a gallon here for that stuff.
 

Latest Posts

Back