Jump to content

Oh, the double standards....


Recommended Posts

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"

                            

1971 Coupe - 306ci (circa 1971) - 10:1/750 Holley/RPM Air Gap/Lunati camshaft (221/231@.050)/Comp roller rockerarms/Ford Racing pulleys/Ported cylinder heads/MSD ignition/Patriot Ceramic LT headers/Single Chambers/Carter fuel pump/NOS Sniper/9" diff./4.57 gears/B&M Holeshot convertor/B&M Shiftkit/B&M Z-Gate/CE subframe connectors/Jegs Sport Star rims/Lakewood traction bars/Fiberglass Ram Air hood/Electric fan/Rear seat delete/Relocated battery/Custom graphics

 

1972 Mach 1 - Ford 400ci/C6 trans/Quick Fuel 750 carb/Weiand Intake/Harland Sharp rockers/Performance cam/Patriot headers/CVF racing underdrive pulleys/Carter Fuel pump/Jegs Sport Star rims/4.11 gears/Spool/Traction bars/Accel distributor and ignition/Miloden 8-quart/Jones Full Boar exhaust/Hurst Pro-matic 2 shifter

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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 lik

Pretty much standard schlock that illustrates how many of these "writers" are simply regurgitating information that was poorly fact-checked when it was first published. Some of it is derived from auto

If the 71-73 variant of Mustang is a land yacht, my Jaguar XK8 is a Container ship. I can tell you this ... I know beauty is in the eye off the beholder... but...FFS ..Heck,  I have people in the UK w

Posted Images

On the topic, this is a nice article with historical weight data for Mustangs from CJP.

https://www.cjponyparts.com/resources/mustang-curb-weights

Out of curiosity I wanted to see for the first generation, what was the bigger engine available and the maximum weight listed for the fastbacks (which is likely the one with the biggest engine). Data from CJP article and Wikipedia. Please make corrections if needed. The data for 1967 is conflicting.

1965: 2,914 lbs, 289 Windsor

1966: 2,978 lbs, 289 Windsor

1967: 2,919 lbs, 390 FE (Weight here does not make sense so this data may not be accurate)

1968: 3,362 lbs, 428 Cobra Jet

1969: 3,463 lbs, 429 Boss

1970: 3,472 lbs, 429 Boss

1971: 3,607 lbs, 429 Cobra Jet

1972: 3,437 lbs, 351 Cleveland

1973: 3,521 lbs, 351 Cleveland

The point is that the cars became generally heavier due to the bigger engines, which meant beefier bodies and drivetrain. Also bigger noses to fit the bigger engines.

 

20160929_171923_edit2_small.jpg

 

1971 M-Code Mach 1 w/Ram Air, 408 stroker, 285/291 0.558" roller cam, Blue Thunder intake, TKO600, Hooker headers with electric cut-offs, FiTech EFI w/ RobBMC PowerSurge pump

Strange center section with Truetrac, 3.5 gear and 31 spline axles, 4-wheel disc brakes

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd call BS on the 69/70 data - Ford's own data book says the 70 Mach 1 was 3400 lb with a 351/3speed. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hemikiller said:

I'd call BS on the 69/70 data - Ford's own data book says the 70 Mach 1 was 3400 lb with a 351/3speed. 

The data for weight is from the CJP article and it is given as a range. Probably it did not include the 429 in that range because I doubt the 429 is only 72 lbs heavier than the 351, plus any additional weight from 3 to 4 speed.

20160929_171923_edit2_small.jpg

 

1971 M-Code Mach 1 w/Ram Air, 408 stroker, 285/291 0.558" roller cam, Blue Thunder intake, TKO600, Hooker headers with electric cut-offs, FiTech EFI w/ RobBMC PowerSurge pump

Strange center section with Truetrac, 3.5 gear and 31 spline axles, 4-wheel disc brakes

Link to post
Share on other sites

From an OLD post.

The questionof  how much do the cars weigh has come up several times. I had my car scaled today using a four corner race car scale system. With approximately 13 gallonsof fuel , without driver, it weighed 3583 lb.. Thefuel  weighs about 80.6 lb.. It is a 72 Mach 1, AC, PS, PDB, Magnum 500 wheels, sp...
Link to post
Share on other sites

I always figured my 71 J Code Vert to be in the 3800lb range ( not including gas...). The Vert frame set up, all inclusive, adds 200 lbs +\- and the big block 100-150 lbs. 

I will have to get it weighed one day...

Edited by 7173Vert

"Yes dear", has kept me in the hobby a long time...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know perspective is always a factor, but I think these offer up some compelling evidence to support argument that the '71-'73 are are NOT as gigantic as everybody thinks.

So this shows the relative size comparison - pretty much the same except the nose looks MUCH smaller on the '70.  Why is that?  (The '71 would also look shorter and possibly even longer if the TuTone and rockers were black, I imagine)

mach1vs70mach.jpg

Because the nose is squared off on the '71-'73s, rather than tapered on the '69-'70s.  Look how much bigger the nose of the '70 Shelby looks than the '69 Mustang.

69comparison.jpg

I don't know about you, but the newer car looks a LOT bigger than the '71.  I think everybody is now used to seeing huge wheels on newer cars and tend to forget that the older cars had smaller wheels, thus making them appear bigger than they are (in proportion).

IMG_0476.JPG

The newer Mustangs almost seem like minivans in comparison.  (Forgive me as a take the same kind of liberty with my comment as those who complain about how gigantic our 'Big Bodied Clydesdales' are)

oldandnew.jpeg

And just for fun, since everybody thinks '71-'73s are SO big, let's compare a '70s against a newer Mustang... which looks less smaller than the newer Mustang than the '71 does above.

DSC00263-1-1.jpg

People would rather just stick with the same ol' arguments when they have nothing new or credible to add to the mix.

Keep comparing numbers against numbers all day, and the arguments hold water.  Line 'em up and see the arguments disappear.

  • Like 1

Eric

mach1sig2.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
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".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...