Jump to content

EdM

Members
  • Posts

    559
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by EdM

  1. Well today I picked up my car, a 427 Windsor 73 Mach 1, from the shop and I am more than pleased. I had dismantled the manifold so I could have it powder coated black. They did the install as I am have never been comfortable with "wiring". As has been written easy cold start, crazy throttle response and just a very linear build of power. Going 75 in 5th and I am just touching the pedal. They did a very clean install given the harnesses, wire galore. I had them mount the ECU and connector behind the glovebox. I am glad I waited on Edelbrock getting this system sorted. Now to sell my Edelbrock air-gap, Quickfuel carb and Pertronix distributor...

    [img]https://i.imgur.com/tCrr1JH.jpg[/img]

    [img]https://i.imgur.com/lcQo5ML.jpg[/img]

    [img]https://i.imgur.com/IR5pMxF.jpg[/img]

     

     

     

     

     

  2. On 8/30/2020 at 9:23 PM, cwalker509 said:

    1973  Mustang                                  69 Camaro RS                     71 Mustang (from WIkipedia)

    351C                                                         350                                         Boss 351

    L. 193.8"                                                  186"                                          189.5

    W. 74.1"                                                     74"                                            74.1

    H. 50.7                                                      51.1"                                         50.1

    Wheelbase 109.1"                                    108"                                         109

    3,411LBS.                                             3,492LBS.                                   3560

    Hence my question. Same goes on with my Mopar forum where the A bodies apparently had to start their own forum from the "collectables".

  3. On 8/27/2020 at 10:05 PM, Big Red Mach 1 said:

    1973 Stang (Biggest, Heaviest) vs. 1969 Camaro RS (That no one complains about)

    351C                                                         350

    L. 193.8"                                                  186"

    W. 74.1"                                                     74"

    H. 50.7                                                      51.1"

    Wheelbase 109.1"                                    108"

    3,411LBS.                                             3,492LBS. 

     

    So we're 8 inches longer on  73 with the huge bumpers. 71 and 72 would be better, but I wanted to take the biggest example. 

    Same width. Slightly lower. 1" longer wheelbase. 81lbs. lighter. 

    Anyone ever hear a complaint at all about the size or weight of a 69 Camaro RS or SS??? Didn't think so. 

    Can you add a column with the 71/72 dimensions?

     

    On 8/27/2020 at 10:05 PM, Big Red Mach 1 said:

     

     

     

     

  4. 6 hours ago, MeanMachine said:

    So I just read another short write-up about the 1971 Mustang, and was disappointed to see how, yet again, the remarks focused on size and weight. No telling how many articles I've read where words like bloated, portly, or Clydesdale described the model, or coupled with remarks like declining sales (Mustang actually outsold rival Camaro in '71, '72, and '73...but I digress). Rarely do I sense real research done into the history of the car, when reading an article, describing how it came about or why it grew in size, or even focus more on attributes than critiques (can we talk Super Cobra Jet, fastest production Boss, handling, musclecar war big block?)

    Oh the double standards; back when I had subscriptions to muscle car magazines, I don't remember reading articles knocking the size of the '71 model Chevelle SS, Roadrunner, or Charger (all of which were longer, wider and taller than the Mustang by my research). In fact, during my search, I found the '71 Mustang is fairly close in size to the famed '73 Trans Am SD 455...but shorter in length.

    Lastly, if the '71 Mustang is a "land yacht" based on its dimensions and weight, why don't I read comments knocking the new GT500, which is taller, wider and just as long.…oh, and weighs a whopping 4,100+lbs?!  (that, of course, is a rhetorical question....I certainly know why).

    If the '71-'73 Mustangs are forever compared to the original '64 1/2 - '65 model year, why isn't the same done with the latest generation??  Did I mention a 'double standard' ??

    Horsepower and handling, perhaps.

    6 hours ago, MeanMachine said:

     

     

  5. 53 minutes ago, Stanglover said:

    David, as you say, a matter of opinion. To some extent I agree with you. If oil broke down that much, it wouldn't get recycled and re-refined and sold as an "off brand' oil. Personally, I do like to change the oil and filter each spring, but that's MY choice. I do not use synthetic oil in these motors, to me, that is a waste of money. Actually it burns me that a barrel of oil at the well head cost say 40 dollars, but a 5 (US) quart jug of 10W30 cost 35 bucks (in Canada). Can you say "Profit Margin"!

    My intent with this post was to discuss oil filters and their pros and cons and not so much about whether one should or should not change the oil.

    Clearly you have not worked in the oil and gas industry to realize the capital spent to take a barrel of oil to a quart of oil.

×
×
  • Create New...