I cannot for the life of me figure out why you are so passionate about something that seems so individual and, well... unimportant to me. As my engine sits, the only thing Ford designed is the block. Everything Ford designed and built had completely crapped out. I wasn't up for a big block... although it would have been a blast, too much engine bay reinvention for me. I wanted the sassiest little 289/302 I could get without pissing my wife off with the bills. I pushed it, but she still loves me. Name a part and I've gone better than what was designed as stock. Discs front and back, Granada, Jeep. Frame stiffening, brakes, wheels, fuel tank, Gauge cluster, suspension, steering... on and on with the upgrades. If I could pick up my body and slide an '07 Corvette soul under it, it would be done. I'm not capable. I thought original sucked. I don't morn for any of those original parts. There's really nothing wrong with the way my Carter carb is functioning. If you have this Megasquirt, the world is your dyno. You can adjust certain things and see results in real time. It seems to me, a luxury.
I'm befuddled not by the opinion of someone who likes the nostalgia of originality, but by the passion with which they hate the restomod movement. I was already aware of Glen's opinion; not particurly threatened by it. Many here tend to want to confront him. I'd just like to know WHY he and others have such energy behind that opinion. I think of all the homes in the US that were built before central air. Air conditioning is soooooooo cooooool! (pardon the pun). The upgrade to central air and an EFI upgrade are parallel in my mind, but not in everyone's mind. If any of you "originalators" would take the time to help me understand what specifically sparks such emotion regarding originality, there'd probably be a lot less confrontation here. Anyone care to give us the "why" behind these passionate opinions? A favorite memory? Treatened by change? Cause we should all like the same things the same way? What? I'd really like to know.
Some of us think of restomods as painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel with a roller or getting a pair of mannequin's arms from the store front at Macy's and sticking them on the Venus de Milo. On the other hand, I repainted my house last year and replaced my old gas cooktop with one that don't require a pilot light. Same thing? There's a time and a place for everything; I've learned to draw the line. Jim
Ahhh..it's good to be back off vacation and back to the stream of consternation.
Glen, Please stop telling board members to go find another hobby because they disagree with you.
thanks
Another hobby would be to get a Fox body Mustang and build all the 5.0 EFI engine you wish to pursue, but leave our classic carburated engines alone in our classic bodied Mustangs, designed in the mid 60's for mid 60's performance and comfort. It is inherent that we will reach a disagreement on this forum because we have a 40 something year old car that screams to be road worthy. Some of us are wishing to keep our 40 year old cars as they came from the factory with adjustments to parts in order to keep them on the road as a daily driver, whereas there are others who heavily modify their perfectly good classic Mustang into a car that it was never meant to be, and then there are those who just want to keep them running to drive to school.
Does that mean that since I bought my car minus engine that it's ok for me to go EFI?
ORIGINAL: 66GTKFB Some of us think of restomods as painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel with a roller or getting a pair of mannequin's arms from the store front at Macy's and sticking them on the Venus de Milo. On the other hand, I repainted my house last year and replaced my old gas cooktop with one that don't require a pilot light. Same thing? There's a time and a place for everything; I've learned to draw the line. Jim
I couldn't agree more. There are individual cars, rare in status, that should never be modded. There there are others (in my case a run of the mill 6cyl) that would only have a second chance at life as a personal project.
But the issue in this thread was never about individual choice. It was about respecting other's choices. When was the last time we saw anyone on here lamblast Glen for having an original car?
_____________________________
If you're reading this, thank a Teacher. If you're reading this in English, thank an American Soldier. JamesW's Website
I have both, a 289 stock (mechanically...Holley and everything) 1965 FB and a highly modified (EFI blower)1966 FB. Finding a new hobby is not the answer to an age old debate. I will throw the flag and say everyone has the right to do what they chose with their own property. Just a newb I know, but I was hoping this forum would be an open forum to exchange ideas and share information about cars. In our mutal case, classic Mustangs of all kinds. I am grateful to all for sharing some great information.
Posts: 1998
Joined: 9/5/2006 From: Barossa Valley, South Australia Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: JMD everyone should try to unbunch those panties...
+1 and great way of putting it too a word of warning tho...this post could become a debate about which knickers to untwist. Would they be granma's bloomers or a itty bitty piece of string from the off topic section
_____________________________
quote:
A 2007 study found on average Australians walk 900 miles a year. We drink 26 gallons of beer. That means, on average, Australians get about 34 miles per gallon. Not bad hey!
I don't read that anybody's panties are in a knot. I think it's great that we can discuss these topics on here without calling each other names or using inflamatory language. I am proud of all of you for being able to state your compassion in a manner that we can all understand, but maybe not agree with.
Go for the EFI. Much more user friendly. Hard to find a carburated 600hp that is truely streetable and get 20mpg. How can you knock that kind of potential if thats you gig?
My 66 coupe is a C-code with a salvaged title. C-code= boring and a 2003 Cobra engine is more fun and the more I think about it the more I want to do it, maybe just to spite the concours snobs.
I'd rather see a classic car on the road regardless of engine.
Oh and the 5.0 is a 302 which was available starting in 1968.
Another target in the Classic section? As I recall the vote not to split or add a "restomod" section is starting to haunt us again. Other forums have this and they seem to have few problems. Providing information and answering questions with the intent of helping someone is one thing, to try to sway their idea or intent by a derogatory comment is another, and should be avoided. So again, is it getting to the point of anyone seeking information about upgrading or restomodding THEIR car going to get smacked around again. Well, maybe its time to remove fodder from the cannon fire and start a "Restomod" section where people can freely seek information without the worry of being demoralized by asking a simple question pertaining to THEIR car or project.
Another target in the Classic section? As I recall the vote not to split or add a "restomod" section is starting to haunt us again. Other forums have this and they seem to have few problems. Providing information and answering questions with the intent of helping someone is one thing, to try to sway their idea or intent by a derogatory comment is another, and should be avoided. So again, is it getting to the point of anyone seeking information about upgrading or restomodding THEIR car going to get smacked around again. Well, maybe its time to remove fodder from the cannon fire and start a "Restomod" section where people can freely seek information without the worry of being demoralized by asking a simple question pertaining to THEIR car or project.
Evil, if you look at the name of this section, it's called the Classic section. Now, if you want a restomod section contact Chris and he will most likely help you. However, in the meantime, this will remain the classic section of MF.
Check this out. There is a universal EFI computer being sold that has no real limitations as you dial it in. This gives you complete control over fire as well as fuel. It is sold as a "learning tool", probably so no one can come back on them and claim the company destroyed an engine. Here it is...
A person would have to learn how advance affected things. You'd have to know about types of FI. But it would allow you to collect just about any parts for cheap and have them work. Fun or futility?
Near as I can tell, the biggest advantage offered vs other aftermarket systems might be the pricing. At a quick glance, the sequential fire option is the biggest feature that it offers vs the Accel/DFI system that I've been running in the thumbnail car for several years. And that's the DOS Calmap version, BTW. For max power at mid to high revs, I'm not at all sure that SEFI gains you anything (though it does get a good bit more complex to get the fuel timing right). The Accel/DFI has better fuel map resolution (16 x 16 vs 12 x 12) but poorer ignition (don't remember offhand).
Of course, that's only part of it. If you really want to take advantage of EFI you'll be scrapping any thought of working from a wet-flow intake manifold. Otherwise, your torque curve will end up looking like - surprise! - a carb'ed engine of similar specs.
It's a learning tool, all right. You should learn a bit about internal combustion theory before messing with it. And over the full range of engine operation, not just WOT. In that respect it's like buying a carb that has no jets, power valve, accelerator pump, or emulsifiers in it, and you have to figure out what your engine wants. If there's a means within the software to give you a fuel map that will at least allow the engine to run, that gets you to "complete carb with all the little bits and pieces" status". It'll run, just like an out-of-the-box carb will run. And about here is where the EFI starts looking better - it's much easier and less messy to tune, and you'll be more willing to tinker as each tuning iteration is not much different than editing a spreadsheet table and saving the new data. You don't have to buy any new parts, or worry about getting to the store before it closes, or if they even have the specific piece.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that EFI (assuming decent tuning) will give you an engine that's much smoother-running while it is warming up and is far more tolerant of lugging down at low revs in the "wrong" gear. Add a knock sensor and you won't have to time your ignition quite as conservatively or worry as much about gasoline octane. Do not underestimate the value of these in anything resembling a daily driver.
A little bit off on the tangent, but I think the hotrodding world would have been poorer for it had nobody dared to put flathead V8's in '27s or OHV's in '32s . . . though an in-law of mine whose chief automotive interest lies along antique cars rather than hot rods might beg to disagree.
I myself am all about putting an EFI motor in a classic. Its what you like. If i had the money, a 5.0 with a blower would be in my car. It would still be a 1965 mustang. Theres nothing special about my car, so doing this would not hurt the value at all. People need to lighten up. When it is all said and done,its still a mustang. Unless you put a Bow tie under it, then thats just stupid.. I do love my 289, but if had the chance...
< Message edited by dr1965 -- 8/20/2007 9:01:45 AM >
I have EFI, overdrive, rack an pinion and a modern coil over suspension. I should be able to drive circles around a stock "classic" mustang while it is at the gas station getting filled up. With gas at $3+ per gallon I don't mind the investment to make my car more fuel efficient. A side benefit is I am doing my part to keep the environment clean since EFI cars generally run cleaner.
Posts: 2051
Joined: 11/9/2006 From: South Shores, CA Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: dr1965
Unless you put a Bow tie under it, then thats just stupid..
You nailed it right there! Glen, Jim and others see EFI as a similar modification in that it has no place in the classic Mustang. Once I realized how strongly they felt about it I was no longer bothered by their comments. I'm not being an apologist, rather accepting that they feel strongly about it and wish to express their opinion.
[edit] On topic, if I were to go EFI it would be the Ford EFI.
< Message edited by gothand -- 8/20/2007 9:06:23 AM >
Posts: 3138
Joined: 1/18/2007 From: Las Cruces, NM Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: gothand
quote:
ORIGINAL: dr1965
Unless you put a Bow tie under it, then thats just stupid..
You nailed it right there! Glen, Jim and others see EFI as a similar modification in that it has no place in the classic Mustang. Once I realized how strongly they felt about it I was no longer bothered by their comments. I'm not being an apologist, rather accepting that they feel strongly about it and wish to express their opinion.
And that is the whole thing in a nutshell,,, No one here is going to "convert" Jim or Glen to to pro-EFI in a classic,, they hold their opinions about this issue.
Acceptance of this point of view, and not getting hurt about differing opinions might make all of us look a little bigger...
We all need to stop Proselytizing...
< Message edited by JMD -- 8/20/2007 8:35:41 PM >
_____________________________
66 Coupe I-6 Conversion, 408 Windsor, Tremec TKO 600 Wilwood fronts, SSBC Rears 9" Track Loc.
The truth is, if the EFI systems available today were around in 1965, they would have been in the Ford catalog as a factory option if not on the showroom floor on a K code 289 FB, just like they were on some of the early Corvettes(mechanical fuel injection, then eventually EFI). A modern EFI system in a way was never intended to be in a Classic Mustang, but only as a matter of fact they they didn't exist. Radial tires weren't intended to be on classic cars, nor was synthetic oil, or modern brake fluids, or asbestos free brake pads/shoes, or aluminum heads, but all because they didn't exist at the time, at least not at a reasonably costly level. I have no problem with someone putting modern technology into an older car, older cars had what they had because that was what was available at the time. I also have no problem with someone wanting to make the car all original down to the stickers. I'm not too fond of putting a bowtie in a Mustang, but an LS7 in a 67 Coupe(if you could get it to fit) would make for one fast car
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
Another target in the Classic section? As I recall the vote not to split or add a "restomod" section is starting to haunt us again. Other forums have this and they seem to have few problems. Providing information and answering questions with the intent of helping someone is one thing, to try to sway their idea or intent by a derogatory comment is another, and should be avoided. So again, is it getting to the point of anyone seeking information about upgrading or restomodding THEIR car going to get smacked around again. Well, maybe its time to remove fodder from the cannon fire and start a "Restomod" section where people can freely seek information without the worry of being demoralized by asking a simple question pertaining to THEIR car or project.
Evil, if you look at the name of this section, it's called the Classic section. Now, if you want a restomod section contact Chris and he will most likely help you. However, in the meantime, this will remain the classic section of MF.
I agree with Glen. There is no need for a restomod section. The term 'Classic' means anything and everything associated with early model Mustangs. This section is as restomod...perhaps moreso, than any other on the internet.
Keep asking the questions... it's your car and someone will be here to help..whatever the direction. If you need some help with EFI... Let me see if I can help.
_____________________________
If you're reading this, thank a Teacher. If you're reading this in English, thank an American Soldier. JamesW's Website
Another thread gone astray. I have no problem with keeping the section together provided the negative comments pertaining more to ones personal opinion of what should be done to a car, rather that what someone wants to do to their car, are witheld regardless of what an individuals ideas are.
I don't see it that way at all, at least not yet. Jim and Glen have responded to scouttrooper's request for insight behind strongly held opinions and nothing more. Post #40, and yes, it was a little off-topic.
By the strictest definition, "original" can have only one answer, so it can't possibly have interpretations as loose as may exist within "restomod". If that makes proponents of maintaining originality seem a bit rigid in their beliefs, it's simply the nature of the beast, and it's unrealistic to expect much in the way of change.
Then too, not everybody is as diplomatic in expressing their disagreement as may suit some. But as long as it goes no further than mildly un-PC posting there's no harm and no foul. Just different personalities.
Can we put the genie back in the bottle now?
Norm
< Message edited by Norm Peterson -- 8/21/2007 7:13:56 AM >
No one has ever come up to me and asked, "Is that a new car made to look like an old Mustang?" I get, "Is that a 64 or a 65". Or once in a while I get, "Is that a 67?" How do I respond? "It's a 65." And then I assure them they would have guessed the correct year if I hadn't messed around with the grill or badging. They often look deflated when they've guessed wrong. Then they say, "Right on... cool car," and that's the end of it. Mine's only 40% Mustang parts, but what does everyone see? It's clearly a Mustang. What's underneath that identifiable shell is secondary.
With the exception of the truly historic and limited mustang variants, or cars that have managed to stay concourse perfect to this day, I think the mods you choose are no more significant than the color you choose to paint it. No one is on here barking about original colors. (Why not, by the way??) If the Mopars and Pontiacs had been as easy and cheap to modernize, they wouldn't have been crushed, wouldn't be as rare today, and they wouldn't be high dollar cars. The fact that Mustangs are "modernizable" is one of just a few things that has kept them as prevelant as they are (IMO). Had they not been updatable, they too would be museum pieces or trailor queens... or, they too may have been crushed.
Printable Version
RE: Not about to pick on Soaring, and I listen to your ... - 
an original car?
[/image]
[/image]
