Ask the Car People.SM


Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"

25638 messages,  Last post on May 20, 2013 at 7:41 AM

You are in the Classic Cars Forum.

What is this discussion about? Classic Cars

Messages Page 2435 of 2565

#24332 of 25638 Re: and another thing [gsemike] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Apr 23, 2012 (11:54 am)

Replying to: gsemike (Apr 23, 2012 11:24 am)
Ah, things were just as bad in the old days...to remove the air filter housing on a Fiat you had 8 bolts, all locknuts (so you have to turn them all the way out with a wrench, no fingers allowed) AND they were 3 different sizes!
 
Wingnuts might rattle loose and get caught in a lawyer's briefcase!

#24333 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [andre1969] by hpmctorque

Apr 23, 2012 (2:03 pm)

Replying to: andre1969 (Apr 23, 2012 9:57 am)
Interesting, thanks.
 
The way they're optioned could make a significant difference, in terms of an apples-to-apples comparison. If they were the same price, my choice for '86 would be GN, first; Mustang V8, second; SVO, third. The Monte, 4-4-2 and GP don't do much for me, although of these three I'd prefer the 4-4-2. Come to think of it, I'd put all five above the SVO. Now, between a SVO and a Merkur...no, I won't go there.

#24334 of 25638 Re: . [fintail] by xwesx

Apr 23, 2012 (2:08 pm)

Replying to: fintail (Apr 22, 2012 5:02 pm)
Hahahaha; that happened to me once (when I was much less "senior" than I am now) when driving my '69 Chevy pickup on our cross-country trip. I checked the oil in Fort Nelson, BC on the way home, and found it to be low enough to warrant another quart. I added the quart, closed the hood, finished the fuel stop, and off we went! Then, in Watson Lake, I went to check the oil again and found it was about a quart low again! I was surprised, since it tended to run 1,500 miles per quart, and then received a bit more of a surprise as I went around the other side to pop off the filler cap.
 
Lucky me, it was mid-day on a week day, there was a NAPA in town, and they had a replacement cap in stock. My original cap ended up littering the highway somewhere in the intervening 320 miles.
 
-----
 
Yesterday, I put a new starter in my old '69 Econoline. While it cranked magnificently afterward, it still didn't want to light up. It was getting fuel, so I figured it was a weak spark and was probably time to replace some things anyway. $120 and two hours later, I had a new coil, points, spark plug wires, and spark plugs installed in it.
 
To my amazement, the van started the moment I turned the key, and it ran smooth as butter (for a 302 V8). I was pleased and left wondering why I hadn't done that a few years ago!
 
Long live antique cars!

#24335 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [Mr_Shiftright] by explorerx4

Apr 23, 2012 (6:47 pm)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Apr 23, 2012 8:46 am)
It's funny, I gave up on the Mustang SVO topic, but it got a second life.
I had an '86 Mustang GT, yes first fuelie V8 Mustang.
Closest i ever was to fantasizing I was Steve McQueen.
Still want one of those late SVO's.

#24336 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [explorerx4] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Apr 24, 2012 (7:30 am)

Replying to: explorerx4 (Apr 23, 2012 6:47 pm)
I think one has to view the SVO as a product of its time--the desperate 80s, when most cars were not sexy, not fast, and not desirable. The SVO was an attempt, I think, to breath a little life into a moribund Mustang, as least until the V8 HO could get its mojo back.

#24337 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [Mr_Shiftright] by stickguy

Apr 24, 2012 (8:09 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Apr 24, 2012 7:30 am)
this was also the time when the domestics started feeling heat from the europeans (outside of the cheap small car arena). So, there was a push for "euro" models (heck, Chevy even called their's "eurosport") So I looked at the SVO as trying to appeal to a different type of buyer than a traditional gut-thumping V8 GT afficianado.

#24338 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [Mr_Shiftright] by texases

Apr 24, 2012 (8:30 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Apr 24, 2012 7:30 am)
I bet there's a turbo 4 in one of the 'new' 50th anniversary Mustangs...just a LITTLE better than that old SVO rock crusher.

#24339 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [texases] by gsemike

Apr 24, 2012 (10:55 am)

Replying to: texases (Apr 24, 2012 8:30 am)
Right. Wasn't that SVO the same old pushrod 4 with a turbo on it?

#24340 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [gsemike] by texases

Apr 24, 2012 (11:04 am)

Replying to: gsemike (Apr 24, 2012 10:55 am)
It was the SOHC 4 with a turbo, 2.3 l, I think. First showed up here as an option for the Pinto, friend had one in a Capri (European). Later on the turbo version was in the SVO and Merkur. While it put out OK hp, it was known for its noise.

#24341 of 25638 Re: it makes no sense... [texases] by andre1969

Apr 24, 2012 (11:22 am)

Replying to: texases (Apr 24, 2012 11:04 am)
It was the SOHC 4 with a turbo, 2.3 l, I think. First showed up here as an option for the Pinto, friend had one in a Capri (European).
 
Yep, that was it. I think the confusion arises because in 1984, Ford took what had been their old inline-6, cut off two cylinders, and came up with a 2.3 pushrod 4-cyl that went into the Tempo/Topaz. I think it also went in Bronco II's and Rangers, and a few years later, a 2.5 enlargement went into the Taurus for a few years.

Messages Page 2435 of 2565

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement