Jump to content

MeanMachine

VIP Members
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MeanMachine

Vehicle Info

  • My Car
    1971 Coupe
    Built 306ci, Nitrous,
    Modded C4, 9" rear w/4.57s

Location

  • Location
    Alabama
  • Region
    Southeast

Personal Information

  • Sex
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

MeanMachine's Achievements

Enthusiast

Enthusiast (6/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

16

Reputation

  1. I really like the design and ram air vents, yet the front end is shorter than our year Mustangs.
  2. Actually the wheel flares and center hood scoop look like they were sculpted in well. Love huge rear wheels on our year Mustangs. Cool find for sure! Looks like Camaro fender vents. Not a fan of the square headlights, but maybe not too hard to change if someone wanted to go back.
  3. I remember seeing a 71-73 fastback, in person, for the first time in 1989, and I was hooked. It was a maroon and black striped, '73 Mach 1, and I decided right there that I had to save my pennies to get one. I worked on base at the time and saw another '73 fastback running around with big tires and aftermarket wheels, this one white with black stripes. I spoke with the owner at the commissary one day where I got a close up of the 460 engine swap, increasing my desire to have one. I think the design from the rear is menacing (especially the fastbacks), the ram-air hoods look like they mean business and fit the car so well. I really like how well these year Mustangs drive and the interior is big enough for someone my size. I also like that I can fit just about any powerplant I want in to the engine bay. I'm not a big fan of the totally all-stock appearance so both my classics are lightly resto-modded. These year cars are truly unique and I enjoy all the thumbs-up and honks I get whenever driving mine. -I once had a guy tell me my '71 was the meanest car he'd ever seen! My only critiques are the slightly longer than need be front end and the bad press our cars usually get: 'Too big and too heavy' (sigh)
  4. Nice and clean! I did an X-pipe as well after I added ceramic coated Patriots to my '71. I run 3" pipe to Jones single-chamber mufflers and turndowns at the axle. Far from quiet, but then again I only drive it once a month and love hearing that Lunati cam working.
  5. I dare to be different sometimes, as long as my changes compliment the car. By the way, I really admire the 385 series engines, in the early 90s I was building a 460 with 429 SCJ-spec heads for my M-Code Mach 1, unfortunately I sold the car before completion, but building that big block left a lasting memory.
  6. Thanks, and if you're referring to the '302 Windsor' graphic on a ram air hood, I was the one that designed that too. :) (search: 'A Spin on Graphics')
  7. I've seen only a few restomod builds of our year cars and hope to see more builders look toward our Mustangs in the future. I'm still waiting for that one build that knocks it out of the park! Even though I'm a Chip Foose fan, and thought if anyone could pull off a great '71-'73 build, it would be him.....MachFoose just didn't impress me. I was hoping that he'd take some of the already muscular features and design of the fastback and really punch it into the 21st century. One car I was impressed with, from the SEMA show a few years back, was the '72 Javelin that the Ring Brothers built. Being that the Javelin shares some similar styling with our '71-'73 Mustangs, it would have been interesting to see their vision of a Mach 1 build. I like how they tied in the 70's design with modern flare. If I had to critique, I would have preferred a built AMC engine rather than the Hellcat powerplant. Nevertheless, I'd be very interested to see (even sketches) how they'd build a '71-'73 stang. So far, all their builds look top notch. I made this in Powerpoint to illustrate some of the ideas I thought might accentuate the design of the incredible '71-'73 Mustang. Things like more prominent hood scoops, large honeycomb grill, bigger wheels, graphics, front spoiler redesign, side marker light deletes, etc.
  8. My '71 started out as a 2-BBL 302 with 3.00:1 gearing and it would roast the (single) tire when I first got it. I don't fear the gear, being that I don't have to commute long distances or cruise the highway. The '71 is far from stock anymore and runs a 4.57 gear with a 28" tall tire. My Mach 1 has the option of a 4.11 or a 3.70 gear, as I have multiple 'pumpkins' for 8 and 9 inch rears. Guess you can tell, I enjoy acceleration :)
  9. Anyone interested in the dimensions I found for the 2020 GT? 54.3" H 75.4" W 188.5 L Weight: 3705 lbs (Manual) / 3733 lbs (Auto) Considering these stats, should they still call the '71-'73 Mustangs the "Big-Bodies"
  10. So right, I was a big fan of 460s back in the early '90s (still am) and remember the bias toward Chevy 454s. But what may be more odd is the division among Ford fans over pushrod vs overhead cam engines, and the bias towards the modular 5.0L. Is it me, or does it seem that Mustangs with Coyote engine transplants get all the attention? It is a great engine, no doubt (I have one), but seems like the trend is to fit a modular 5.0 into every restomod out there, as if it's the only real engine of choice. And when comparing 302s, (5.0 Coyote vs 5.0 Windsor), I've read comments implying Windsor inferiority and the blocks splitting at 500 horse. Ironically enough, Richard Holdener did a video recently about that 'theory' and tested 9 different combinations of 500+ horsepower Windsors on a dyno, some engines having had hundreds of tests done.....without splitting the block. (things that make ya go "hmmm")
  11. Actually, I have a 2014 Track Pack GT as well and the dimensions I have on it show it's actually only 1" shorter than my '71.
  12. True, my reference was more from a "musclecar comparison", but if we're talking pony cars than I could replace Chevelle and Charger with Challenger and (Mercury's pony car) the Cougar Eliminator. :)
  13. 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' ??
  14. Personally, while the 'shaker' scoop is popular (and many were let down when the new Mach didn't have it) I think a lot of people forget about 71-73 Mach 1s with ram air hoods. In my opinion, a NACA/NASA styled hood like ours would have looked great on the latest Mach and worked well with the lines of the car. It would have also provided uniqueness from the GT, GT350 and even GT500. There are already 'heat extractor' vents in the hood, you'd think tooling to change and widen their shape to reflect 71-73 scoops wouldn't require a herculean effort. Just an idea....
×
×
  • Create New...