|
Author
|
Topic: Building 12 sec car, engine or suspension?
|
I65Stang
Gearhead Posts: 6508
From: Folsom, CA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-02-2005 01:04 AM
   
So watching Steve/Mels '66 got me thinking. Say someone on a budget is trying to run mid 12's in the quarter mile on "street" tires, what is the "cheapest" way to do this? Should one build a bad a$$ engine and just overpower the damn thing to get 12s without traction or use a basic engine with a extremely tuned suspension or somewhere in between? Look at superstock cars (Alex, Tony) and what they can do with all those rule restrictions. Tony's Capri runs mid 12's with the "great" '86 intake, electronics and heads and a heavier car than a '65. It seems to me that a basic 351W in a '65 with a properly set up (Moneymaker engineered  ) suspension could easily do this.Thanks for any insight, just curious and thinking out loud! ------------------
Tim M&M Member #35
1965 Mustang coupe, 200 I6, Holley 2300, Clifford header, true duals w/ 26" Smithys
1988 Mustang GT AOD vert, 15.810 @ 88.871 mph 100% stock w/ no traction
1991 Ford Festiva, 30+ mpg, enough said
https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/I65Stang.html
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-02-2005 01:09 AM
Tim, I agree with a mild but well built 351w plus an Alex tuned suspension you could run in the 12's. BTW is were I hope to be one day too.
The one limiting factor will be the street tires. With some slicks and 3.80 or so gears you'd there.------------------
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
IP: Logged |
indyphil
Gearhead Posts: 2690
From: Senoia, G.A. USA
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 05-02-2005 01:01 PM
Friend of mine clicks off low 12's all day with a mildish fox body car. 300hp 5.0 (bunch of GT40 stuff on it), slicks, 5 speed tranny 4.11:1 gears. Its definitley a drag car, with skinnys up front and the biggest slicks he could fit out back, but its runs great and its super reliable. 300hp isnt even testing his bottom end. ------------------
'68 coupe, '66 289 C code
engine, edel 600cfm carb, performer intake, dual exhaust http://www.geocities.com/ottouk_77/68mustang.htm
IP: Logged |
Stewart
Gearhead Posts: 10041
From: Monterey, CA Mustangsandmore Member #437
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 05-02-2005 02:10 PM
Buy an 01+ Lightning, slap a 6lb pulley on it with a CAI and custom tune and you'll be in the 12's! Stewart
IP: Logged |
I65Stang
Gearhead Posts: 6508
From: Folsom, CA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-02-2005 07:09 PM
Thinking more into this whole suspension vs power thing, it would seem to reason that an overpowered car with a soft suspension would be nicer on parts (if the engine is built correctly and not outside of being reasonable) than a standard powerplant with a great suspension setup due to torquing parts as a result of traction. You can overcome a traction problem with hp if you can get traction in 2nd gear (high mph, not so great et)Ron, the more I hear about these M/T's the more impressed I get. Phil, that sounds similar to one of the 5.0s that was out at the track on Sunday. I did however notice that the car was no longer straight lol (front end was tweaked) Stewart, for less money I could get a 5spd 5.0, build a bullet proof engine and slap a s/c on it. Ohhhh, or I could spend $23K on a "bulletproof" Lightning engine and run 11.9  ------------------
Tim M&M Member #35
1965 Mustang coupe, 200 I6, Holley 2300, Clifford header, true duals w/ 26" Smithys
1988 Mustang GT AOD vert, 15.810 @ 88.871 mph 100% stock w/ no traction
1991 Ford Festiva, 30+ mpg, enough said
https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/I65Stang.html
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-02-2005 07:24 PM
Tim, I agree that with enough power you'll run fast enough. But it will be hard on parts too. Think about the fact if you run a mostly stock 65 with brute power. If you ever find traction you'll break something for sure.
Maybe it all matters on what you mean by a bad a$$ motor?
I think my mild built 351w should be enough power, but I still need better gears and traction. Traction always means the use of stronger parts.
I still think for a reasonable amount a 12sec daily driver can be done. Now whats a reasonable amount
I now have about $8000 into my 65 including purchase price. I don't see why I couldn't run in the 12's for under $10,000 is that reasonable or not with everything new or rebuilt?------------------
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics [This message has been edited by Fastymz (edited 05-03-2005).]
IP: Logged |
74merc
Gearhead Posts: 1268
From: Demopolis AL
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-02-2005 11:50 PM
Given infinite funds, I'd probably have 10x the purchase price in my car today easily. I paid $1200 cash 8 years ago...What is the 1/8 mile speed requiring a roll cage, btw?
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-03-2005 02:14 AM
quote:
Originally posted by 74merc:
Given infinite funds, I'd probably have 10x the purchase price in my car today easily. I paid $1200 cash 8 years ago...What is the 1/8 mile speed requiring a roll cage, btw?
Not sure what you mean? do you mean $12000 is infinite funds? ------------------
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
IP: Logged |
74merc
Gearhead Posts: 1268
From: Demopolis AL
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-03-2005 09:15 AM
sorta.
if I had no money troubles, $12000 would be just getting it right. I could put that much in it in a hearbeat.Just kinda commenting on "Now whats a reasonable amount"
$12000 would be a good start, not even buying anything fancy...
IP: Logged |
662+2
Gearhead Posts: 141
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 05-03-2005 10:38 AM
Tim, if you can the cheapest way is to have two cars. This may sound strange but I have seen guys trying to keep there cars, stock looking and streetable and make them fast and it is alot more expensive than just taking a car make it light and strong and build a nice powerplant. I know that not everybody will agree with this but I am talking from experience from my friends and I. We all have just cars for racing and cars for crusing no one for both. Just my opinion.
IP: Logged |
Fastymz
Moderator Posts: 20708
From: Reno Nv USA M&M#1240
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-03-2005 12:14 PM
I agree on having two cars. You could pick up a 5.0 and make it run 12's cheaper then changing over your 65. But then again it's always fun to have both in one. "Just kinda commenting on "Now whats a reasonable amount"
$12000 would be a good start, not even buying anything fancy..." I agree when got back into this hobbie. Six years ago I couldn't believe how much everything cost. I had a goal of under $8000 for all new or rebuilt parts on my 65 including purchase price. 
I now have a goal just to get there,and stop adding it all up. 
------------------
oddly obsessed with big scoops on little Mustangs 65 coupe 351w C4 Big Boss 429 hood scoop,8" 3.40 TracLoc. My Pics
IP: Logged |
I65Stang
Gearhead Posts: 6508
From: Folsom, CA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-03-2005 11:23 PM
Yes, I know it's more "reasonable" to have a second car but that really wasnt my thought process as cheapest wasnt the question . I went that route before with the vert (lol, yeah, I know but the main reason is smog nazis). I am not really looking at getting another car or the cost of doing the v8 swap itself  . The '65 hasnt been my daily driver in years due to the idiots driving around here. The question I had was whether it was more economical to get great traction or build a really strong engine or midway on both? Looking at both original costs and maintenance costs (ie parts breakage, wear, etc) along with dependability. Sorry, its the economist in me . ------------------
Tim M&M Member #35
1965 Mustang coupe, 200 I6, Holley 2300, Clifford header, true duals w/ 26" Smithys
1988 Mustang GT AOD vert, 15.810 @ 88.871 mph 100% stock w/ no traction
1991 Ford Festiva, 30+ mpg, enough said
https://mustangsandmore.com/ubb/I65Stang.html
IP: Logged |
74merc
Gearhead Posts: 1268
From: Demopolis AL
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-04-2005 12:07 AM
Fastymz, I started the same way. I figured I have a spare car for parts, this is cheap.hehe... now I'm into tuning the factory suspension for corners (ha!!) and trying to run at least low 8's in the eighth... (ha!) I shoulda started with a tube frame... it woulda been cheaper. I65Stang, shoot for 350+hp at the flywheel and traction, 12's shouldn't be too far from that. I think it could be done cheaply considering. I have a bud that ran a 10.87 in the quarter with a Fairmont wagon with a 5.0 + T5 for a little bit of nothing. Anything is possible.
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
