ford did put the 427 sohc in some drag cars which where 65 or 66 fastbacks. ford gave up on building a true factory drag car after the thunderbolt they where loosing money on them at the end. there did offer a drag package on the mach1. i still love the boss 429 its still in the top 5 fastest production mustangs made only beat out by the 03/04 cobras.i just wish ford could build a big block mustang now but they wont cost too much to make it pass smog testing.one thing i do find funny is they make carb intakes for the mod motor and gm ls series even a distributor for the ls series.
ive never seen a true gt-500 except the 2007 gt 500 and my god that thing throws you back in the seats.
your car most likely is better cuz its 40 years newer and obviously not on a budget build, ford could have put a 427 sohc in the gt 500 and smoked any stock car with its 618hp, but then again a cammer back in the day cost as much as most cars, $2,500.
your cars better tarafield, no doubt
Thanks, I know it's far from original but if I didn't get it and do this it probably would have been crushed. It was a no option coupe with lots of rust. Even if it's a "restomod" it is still a Mustang and not crushed. Thanks for the compliments even if it's not your thing. Craig
ORIGINAL: fast66 A live axle is 1920s technology. It does what is required, but is not, by any strech of the imagination, superior to a well designed IRS.
I think you've hit the key thought with "well designed IRS", because a well done stick axle will outperform an indifferently done IRS. Certainly as part of the driver-car combination it will. I'm talking about predictability here as much as anything, because a car that sends out little uneasiness signals due to camber and toe curve effects is a car that most people will not drive as fast as they will a car with a similar performance envelope minus the nervousness. Or drive as fast, consistently. And if I can feel these things in a low-mileage C5 Corvette on first driving it, they're there. A 4th gen F-body that I drove as hard as I could at autocross (with precisely the same amount of previous seat time) showed no such tendencies.
Not all live axle locating arrangements are equal, so they should not be all lumped together with the implication that they are. They all do the bare minimum of holding the hind end of the car up, but differ quite a bit in their behavior under really hard driving. There really is more to a proper stick axle than the "1920's technology" description suggests. Quite a bit more, actually, and that's before you start considering things like decoupled torque arms, pull bars, and birdcages.
We could compare race-tuned cars with IRS, but to be fair we'd have to be comparing them to race-tuned stick axle linkage arrangements (which involves more than installing general descriptions and link counts). As far as adapting anything into a chassis that never featured either an IRS or a link and coil spring version of the stick axle, my money is on some variation of the stick axle ending up with at least equal useable performance. Particularly if it isn't being done at the experienced race shop level. The stick axle may not ride as well over really rough pavement, but 2+ Hz ride frequencies don't do all that well over the choppy stuff even with independent suspension.
I like the Eleanors and the GT 500's. But there are a lot of Eleanors out there and some are good and some are not so good. I say do whatever makes you happy with the car you have. I plan on doing a resto-mod with my 67 fastback. Not original, not a GT-500, not an Eleanor--but something in between. Something I have never seen before. Design it the way it makes the owner happy then you can't go wrong.
We could compare race-tuned cars with IRS, but to be fair we'd have to be comparing them to race-tuned stick axle linkage arrangements (which involves more than installing general descriptions and link counts). As far as adapting anything into a chassis that never featured either an IRS or a link and coil spring version of the stick axle, my money is on some variation of the stick axle ending up with at least equal useable performance. Particularly if it isn't being done at the experienced race shop level. The stick axle may not ride as well over really rough pavement, but 2+ Hz ride frequencies don't do all that well over the choppy stuff even with independent suspension.
Norm
You are correct Norm. As far as adapting an IRS to a classic, why bother. What irks me though is people like easttenmotors who would be lucky to have driven any RWD car with IRS other than perhaps a Cobra, and therfore think thats how all systems behave. As in my examples, a BMW M3 will run circles around ANY production live axle setup.
Posts: 2051
Joined: 11/9/2006 From: South Shores, CA Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: fast66
You are correct Norm. As far as adapting an IRS to a classic, why bother. What irks me though is people like easttenmotors who would be lucky to have driven any RWD car with IRS other than perhaps a Cobra, and therfore think thats how all systems behave. As in my examples, a BMW M3 will run circles around ANY production live axle setup.
Fast66, it kills me to type this, as I swore I'd never become this way, but here goes ... you have to keep in mind that many folks here are younger, often still living at home and haven't come to the realization that they don't know everything yet. There, I said it and I've officially become my father.
What is laughable is that the original Mustang was intended to be IRS and perhaps would've been if not for cost.
Fast66, it kills me to type this, as I swore I'd never become this way, but here goes ... you have to keep in mind that many folks here are younger, often still living at home and haven't come to the realization that they don't know everything yet. There, I said it and I've officially become my father.
Yep, I too have officially become my father aswell. In fact just yesterday I was ranting about some young punks down the street, wearing ther jeans half way down there ass! Cant stand it. Would never have done that in my day!
Thought I'd point out that the Eleanor from the original movie was a stock yellow '73 fastback.
i acually didnt know that until a few weeks back but thanks
when i say eleanor i refer to the 67 fastback, and that 73 eleanor i pointed out at the begining was not a remake of the 73 fastback but of the 67 fastback, just if you misunderstood
I love the Eleanor Mustang , it deserves it's respect also , but I 'm keeping my 65 2+2 as close to stock as possible , one reason 90% of the people that see Her comments how beautiful she is or if she is for sale , and that she's a show car , so keep it simple but thats a personal choice
the gt 500 is a gt 500 the original Eleanor was a 71 mach 1 posing as a 73 mach 1 and built by H.B. Halicki. The gone in 60 seconds with Nicolas Cage was actually a remake the fisrt one was filmed in 1975. I love the 67 fastback bodystyle, but I perfer the 71- 73 mach 1's the true Eleanor's.
ORIGINAL: fast66 As in my examples, a BMW M3 will run circles around ANY production live axle setup.
This IRS vs stick axle thing started over a comparison made between a relatively recent IRS and 60's stick axle technology that may have had to comply with some obscure 60's competition rule. Live axles have evolved since.
Comparing the M3 against [regular] production live-axle cars isn't exactly a level playing field, as the M3 is something of an in-house tuner car with lots of other things going for it. Then again, the original Lotus 7's had live axles . . . Anyway, comparisons involving "real" tuner Mustangs or F-bodies (as opposed to appearance-driven efforts) with streetable wheel rates would be appropriate.
I wish I could get at the SCCA's website from here (work computer), so I could look up autocross results for M3's and various stick axle cars, at similar levels of preparation and driven with a similar level of talent. Looking ahead a week or two, it will be interesting to see how Sam Strano does at this year's Nationals in F-Stock (running a Mustang after being in F-bodies for many years) vs the A-Stock and B-Stock M3's. Sam is a member here, I think.
Norm
< Message edited by Norm Peterson -- 9/19/2007 4:49:08 AM >
Ok Norm, perhaps a better comaprison would be to take any regular current 3 series BMW then, its the same rear end and teh M3 anyway. Even try a 350Z. Thats got to be comparable to even todays mustang live axle. Forget the 60s stuff.
Definetly too many Eleanors running around. I love the body kit and the paint scheme, but it's just way over done. It's a shame too, because it was definetly one great looking GT500, I can't really enjoy it now.
Posts: 4124
Joined: 3/13/2007 From: Huntsville, AL Status: offline
I hate the Eleanor kit, it was cool in Gone In 60 seconds, but then everyone start cutting the **** outta the already beautiful classic cars just to have an imitation of her wtf?
Printable Version
RE: GT-500 or Eleanor - 
[/image] 
