OK,,OK,,Im impressed Need some info,,how long are they known to last? EXAMPLE-A well mantained 5.0 can go up to 200,000 miles on the engine,what about an svo?I know they still get good money for them.Whats the average price for a 85,,86 svo?
Most well maintained 5.0's that hit 200k miles don't see track time every weekendwillys1 said:OK,,OK,,Im impressed Need some info,,how long are they known to last? EXAMPLE-A well mantained 5.0 can go up to 200,000 miles on the engine,what about an svo?I know they still get good money for them.Whats the average price for a 85,,86 svo?
mr_woodster said:There were alot of lame cars, that doesnt mean they didnt exsist! The lost vodoo mustang II comes to mind. There were years that the vette/camero smoked the mustang , when the mustang was choked down in the 70's and some early 80's...it comes full circle.
I think its really good to compare factory times of similar vechiles in that time period. It helps to put things in perspective as to what "fast" was , at that time.
93 teal terror said:SVO was told the mustang was going to be canned after 1986 in favor for the Mazda MX6 due to its better EPA numbers which made it easier for ford to meet CAFE requirements. The SVO group asked for a thunderbird after considering their SVO a sucess. They had already started on their aero-T-bird and their mid-engine sports car, before the UAW convinced ford to sign an agreement to continue the mustang til 1993.
Yeah, I was going to say that I have at least 2 books that document this maybe 3. Its a nice thought to think that the ford execs couldnt stand having a 4cyl that pumped out more hp than a V8 but the timing just doesn't support that fantasy. I believe that more than one person at ford had a hard on for the 4cyl turbo. They had it optioned in at least 4 fox cars from around that time; the svo, 20th ann., 79 pace car and the t-bird. Keep in mind this was also around the time the 302 h.o. came back with ad's stating the boss is back. Team SVO did an awesome job with the SVO but unfortunatly their projects after that didn't fare so well.351wcoupe said:I have a book here that documents what teal terror stated.
351wcoupe said:I have a book here that documents what teal terror stated.
Pro-Hawk said:Shoot me a scan or two of this will ya?
Let me see if I'm understanding this...Ford canned the SVO because it had more Emessions than the V8s but yet continued to use and manufacture this motor for another 2 years? They did so many that just one year (88'TC)alone equaled 6 times the number of SVO ever built? Now are we talking about pure fuel econemy? The 2.3L(T) gets right at the same if not better mpg as the 5.0's do. This also depends on how the 5.0 is driven If it's emessions I would think any turbo motor would do better on this field than a N/A car. At any rate I would like to see this information.
willys1 said:You guys crack me up,,I just had this conversation in the 5.0 talk room,,theres no problem,,the 86 vette is a slug!! OK,,how fast do you think it is?? Im gonna have to go in the archives now!! WELL,,HOW FAST??// Im 37,I dont have too read it somewhere,,I "lived it",,I was there when it was new.Ive always been a car guy,I know what Im talking about.You 2.3 guys think your spaecial,,you NOT!!! Your in denail!!!
willys1 said:The only fast car in the 80's besides the Stang was the Buick Grand National(Turbo 6banger) it ran high 13's,,and its brother the GNX,
Stinger said:ProHawk...maybe you didn't notice but this discussion is over...no need to start all this crap over again.