Ok, this is a quote out of Hot Rod Magazine "Hotrod Archive" Muscle Car edition. under the headline "Sprint"
quote:
In 1972, Ford offered "sporty" sprint option pagckages for its mustang, maverick and pinto models. They were decor packages only, and none was a "Muscle car", really. But we cant resist a gal in hot pants and gogo boots
(there was a model in go-go boots next to the car...)
Any way, on the page was a '72 Maverick, Mustang and Pinto, all with the same body styling because they had similar packages. Hence why i said they appear to look alike.
Posts: 6984
Joined: 12/19/2006 From: Citrus County, FL Status: offline
the mavericks dont really like that close to the mustang II or pintos (which DO like kinda similar..... kinda, even though really they ARENT the same car)
just remember, the oh so loved fox body stangs share their unibody structure with this ugly mug.....
i dont know why the pinto got such a bad rep the maverick is 10 times uglier and fox 4 banger are just a bad as a pinto performance wise. a 79 4 made like 68-88 hp at the damn crank! that like 50 at the wheels on a bad day , lol! i have a 4.2l v8 outa a 80 mustang it looks to have a smaller oil pan than a 302 without the double hump, wonder if it will clear the k memeber??? and i have the c4 that came with it and another c4 with a smaller bellhousing as well. i want to put this motor in it since its sitting here and runs great and was rebuilt in 89 as well. im not trying to make the car fast, just drivable and dependable for cruising
the mavericks dont really like that close to the mustang II or pintos (which DO like kinda similar..... kinda, even though really they ARENT the same car)
just remember, the oh so loved fox body stangs share their unibody structure with this ugly mug.....
You'll have to have the oil pan and pick up tube for the MUSTANG II. Nothing else will clear the rack and pinion cross member. Even with the MII oil pan you have less than a 1/4" clearance.....I saw somewhere - just recently that someone had put a 4.2L in a 78 II, it was a sweet set-up, fuel injection and chromed out like a mother. When I get home this evening, I'll see if I can find the link. It may of been on www.mustangii.net or www.mustangii.org - I honestly can't remember which site it was right now. I'll research it tonight and post it after I find it.(If I can find it) I also have to come clean - I NEVER would of went searching for 78 Mustang II, I stumbled across this one by pure accident. It had been parked for 17 years, 83k original miles, unmolested, NO RUST/DENTS to be found. Interior needed some help - mice! Had been covered in a garage the entire time. Price was unbelievable - so I figured WTF - why not? I have had more fun with this car than I ever had in my 67 Mercury Cougar X-R7 or my 66 Ford Fairlane GTA or my 66 Chevrolet C-10 (and that had a 350 w/ 400+ HP, TH-350 & 4:11 gears). Would I buy another? Damn right I would and I'd build it even tougher than the current one I own. Lot's of fun and extremely rare, I draw a lot of lookers when I'm out and about - even some snickers/giggles until I fire it up and then someone realizes "OH SH*T" this car is for REAL.
_____________________________
Wayne '78 Mustang II '99 Eddie Bauer Expedition '08 Limited Expedition Smithfield, VA
Posts: 6984
Joined: 12/19/2006 From: Citrus County, FL Status: offline
that pic i posted was of a fairmont btw - ugly as hell.
gwb is right, the II oil pans are front sump, and i dont know which "smaller" bellhousing you have, but chances are your going to have fitment issues. i DO have an extra automatic flexplate, but i dont have a converter or bellhousing. edge racing is a great place for a converter and the bellhousing you'd have to look on ebay or mustangII.net or .org
If you're just looking to get it running for a potential sale, why not just rebuild - if possible. As long as it's not a rust bucket, dust it off, paint it and roll it on.....You gotta be careful though, spare parts are difficult to come by and are usually expensive not many reproduction parts available yet. I've seen the C-4 bellhousing go for over $200 on B-bay and a rusted, dented oil pan sold for $150 for the 302. Good luck, either way. Hopefully it won't be left to just rot away. The value of these little "junkers" have been steadily climbing over the last few years. I remember guys buying wrecked II's just for the front end so that they could put it under their Nova's and Chevy II's, can't help but wonder how many were ripped to shreds for a Bowtie!
_____________________________
Wayne '78 Mustang II '99 Eddie Bauer Expedition '08 Limited Expedition Smithfield, VA
its a 4.2l debored 302 block 80 mustang, very small oilpan. and since the 78 has a c4 that might bolt to this?hmmn theres really only 2 c4 belhousings out there, so it clears or it dont on the belhousing, i dont see why i would have prob clearing, its the tranny it came with.im trying to get the pig to start right now, so we can move it. almost, ive had it running a few months ago, so i know it will. they made the damn starter wire so fn long! it cranks really week even with a big f150 battery thats new! and on a 50 amp boost start! i cleaned all connections except the one on the starte its self. he says u have to remove the header to change the starter! or lift the engine
Posts: 6984
Joined: 12/19/2006 From: Citrus County, FL Status: offline
i know i have to remove my front header pipe, the motor mount, and the frame mount to get my starter out. all C4 bellhousings will bolt up to the 302 or the 4.6 but that doesnt mean they will clear the rest of the car or leave any room for exhaust down there.
let me see if i can find pics of the oils pans, because there are a few different types of front sump pans but ONLY the mustang II pan will go in without bashing the bottom of it.
that is a front sump, from a 77 truck - it will NOT fit.
another front sump - aftermarket (65-87) it will NOT fit
the problem is where the pan curves to go down into the sump. the mustang II pans have a sharper bend, which keeps the pan close to being flat longer - this gives the extra clearance needed to fit in the car.
you can take our words for it, or you can fight the install the whole way.
mine looks like the 77 truck on:( and again its a 4.2l not a 4.6 big big diff. the 4.2l make 120hp, lol! the 4.6 is like 230hp. i almost got it started. hes now getting interested, i just want it outa the weeds. ill sand and prime the rust spots for him. eventually ill prolly get it if he never does anything with it and sees me cleaning it up for free.i think once its in a nicer spot ill pull the timing cover off and see if it did skip. he says it was pretty fast,lol, i dunno. said it was alway really hard to crank over, wonder why?? i just want to make it driveable. it just needs paint, nothing else. all the ponies inside are nice n shiny still interior is pretty damn good too
Posts: 6984
Joined: 12/19/2006 From: Citrus County, FL Status: offline
we need pictures. if its hard to turn over with a new battery, selenoid and cable then its time to replace the starter. should be alot easier on the V6 than on the V8's i'd imagine. btw if you DO put the 4.2 in there at least pop the heads off and throw some stock 289 or 302 heads on there with a basic intake. the 4.2 has reallllllly small intake ports, and bolting on a set of junk yard E7TE's would be like putting aftermarket racing heads on a stock 302 LOL
i got pics:) we started it drove it and its behind my lex in the driveway all cleaned up:)
quote:
ORIGINAL: my77stang
we need pictures. if its hard to turn over with a new battery, selenoid and cable then its time to replace the starter. should be alot easier on the V6 than on the V8's i'd imagine. btw if you DO put the 4.2 in there at least pop the heads off and throw some stock 289 or 302 heads on there with a basic intake. the 4.2 has reallllllly small intake ports, and bolting on a set of junk yard E7TE's would be like putting aftermarket racing heads on a stock 302 LOL
< Message edited by 351w8bang93stang -- 5/2/2007 12:03:34 AM >
Printable Version
RE: 78 v6 mustang. if u know anything about this car .... - 
