Both are true - oh and wasn't there someone recently who wanted to run the Boss 429 engine in top fuel drags, so the NHRA outlawed that Ford engine as well? It gets easier to compete when you just change the rules every time some one beats you.
Both are true - oh and wasn't there someone recently who wanted to run the Boss 429 engine in top fuel drags, so the NHRA outlawed that Ford engine as well? It gets easier to compete when you just change the rules every time some one beats you.I think you got one thing wrong up there. The Bad ass engine legislated out of existence wasn't the Mopar Hemi, but the Ford SOHC 427. And only then cause Nascar didn't want to give the "Wine & Cheese" racers from Europe a foot in the door with their high tech small displacement V8's (that got their butts handed to them with a big nasty passenger car pushrod V8 at Lemans )
As far as Pro-Stock....ALL the Ford guys cared when Glidden ruled with a 500 cid engine in the late 80's. Didn't you? Now Pro-Stock doesn't mean a ting, right? What did Ford ever do in Modified-Eliminator when it was still here? Or S/S? Or Stock. Befor the 428 CJ...not too much. But on the street...Chevy was and still is KING.
I would much prefer having the gas tank sitting in my lap, as was done with the Corvair. Wouldn't you?SAFETY?? How about the PINTO internal memo comparing the cost of building the car the cheap way and the death benifit pay-out versus building the car the right way. The cheap way with more deaths by fire won out.
SAFETY?? How about the PINTO internal memo comparing the cost of building the car the cheap way and the death benifit pay-out versus building the car the right way. The cheap way with more deaths by fire won out. I do believe FORD wins the DEATH CAR championship series with the internal gas tanks in Mustangs, the fires in Pinto's and the roll-over deaths in Explorers...you do remember the 26 psi Ford said to run and the 32 psi Firestone said to run in those tires...right.
As far as Pro-Stock....ALL the Ford guys cared when Glidden ruled with a 500 cid engine in the late 80's. Didn't you? Now Pro-Stock doesn't mean a ting, right? What did Ford ever do in Modified-Eliminator when it was still here? Or S/S? Or Stock. Befor the 428 CJ...not too much. But on the street...Chevy was and still is KING.
I think what is going on here is I am willing to admit the truth about those motors and that is that they were DEFFECTIVE in design. otherwise Ford would not have put the first production electronic rev-limiter on the damn things and all you "Ford can do no wrong" types cannot stand the truth.
I owned a 1970 and bought a 69 motor to go through and install when I broke the 70's motor. Funny how my 271hp289 would rev 7000+ and not need a rebuild for more than 60,000 miles but at around 35,000 the 302 broke 7 pistons. I would NEVER own another without the 5.4" rods. Find a copy of SS%DI and read about their 318" BOSS drag car that ruined cylinder walls.
Her's the truth about street Fords in the 1960's....THEY COULD NOT KEEP-UP WITH THE CHEVY'S AND MOPARS.....not until a former Chevy division president named Bunky Kundsen came over and created the 428 CJ, BOSS 302 and BOSS 429. Didn't like hearing THAT, did you. And please, answer this...exactly WHERE is Ford in Pro-Stock nowadays?
Don't get me wrong, I really like my little 289 65 coupe...but I do know and admit the truth. And the truth will be that if GM builds the new Camaro it will cost the same or less than the Mustang and outperform it in all catorgories. Always has..always will.
I think he's also conviently forgotten that Chevy was NEVER competetive in Nascar back in the 60's to early 70's. Wasn't untill Ford and Mopar dropped their involvement in it that Chevy's started to dominate the scene, and that's not because of the superiority of the SBC. You can win any contest if you throw enough men, parts, engines etc into play. And as for his Explorer comment, he also forgot that when anyone drives an SUV at 100 mph and blows a tire, ANY SVU will be subject to a rollover. That's also true for any vehicle with tires that have sidewalls that're 6-8 inches tall. Blow the tire, vehicle "sinks" suddenly by a half a foot on one corner, that destabilizes any thing. at that speed. It takes an experienced driver to be able to control a vehicle in that situation. Not a Soccer Mom screaming at her kids when it happens.
all good points DH. you are right that ford and chrysler were the dominant marques in the mid 60's, but dont forget pontiac, they dominated in the early 60's, and hudson was the marque to use in the 50's.
all good points DH. you are right that ford and chrysler were the dominant marques in the mid 60's, but dont forget pontiac, they dominated in the early 60's, and hudson was the marque to use in the 50's.
alright, let us look at a few of these things, first the pinto. that memo that indicated the cost comparison was REQUIRED by the nhtsa, using nhtsa numbers. in other word the government required ford to hang themselves. second, the few pintos that did have their tanks rupture were hit by cars the were traveling at high speeds, and were much heavier than the pinto, on the order of 2 to 3 times the weight. in fact the biggest news was the pinto the burst into flames, and the person who died sued ford. the article casually mentioned that the dodge van that hit the pinto was doing 70mph at the time and the driver never hit his brakes. hmmmmmm interesting that the media threw it in as an after thought isnt it.
as for the ford explorers, the firestone tires were a defective tire, THAT was proved in court. it seems that firestone used wire in their steel belts that were corroded, and would fail dramtically on a regular basis, and not just on explorers, but many other vehicles as well. now the explorer is a high centered vehicle, and most people faced with an emergency stuation, like a tire blowing out, panic and do stupid things like hit the brakes hard, over correct when steering etc. they also tend to drive high centered vehicles like the explorer as though it was some like an ltd station wagon. car and driver tested the theory that explorers were prone to rolling over when the left rear tire blew out at speed. they bought a 91 explorer, and except for replacing shocks, that had long ago died, with stock replacement ones, and installing a roll cage to protect the driver, and rigging the left rear tire to deflate suddenly, the vehicle was as it came off the used car lot, and it was stock. they started the test at 30mph and went all the way to 70mph, and each time the explorer tracked perfectly each time, until the 70 mph test, when it wiggled a bit and required a minor steering correction. but never through out the test, did the explorer do anything to indicate a propensity to roll over.
how about you decide to study the real facts rather than just spout something you heard or read once or twice.
I think he's also conviently forgotten that Chevy was NEVER competetive in Nascar back in the 60's to early 70's. Wasn't untill Ford and Mopar dropped their involvement in it that Chevy's started to dominate the scene, and that's not because of the superiority of the SBC. You can win any contest if you throw enough men, parts, engines etc into play. And as for his Explorer comment, he also forgot that when anyone drives an SUV at 100 mph and blows a tire, ANY SVU will be subject to a rollover. That's also true for any vehicle with tires that have sidewalls that're 6-8 inches tall. Blow the tire, vehicle "sinks" suddenly by a half a foot on one corner, that destabilizes any thing. at that speed. It takes an experienced driver to be able to control a vehicle in that situation. Not a Soccer Mom screaming at her kids when it happens.
Really? Go take a look at the race results.
Understand this....if Chevy screws-up with the Vega engine...I'll call them on it. If Oldsmobile does it with the diesel...I'll call them on it. If Fords KILLS people with the tank mounting design of a car...I'LL call them on it. If Ford kills people with the 26 psi recommendation in tire pressure, I'll call them on it...and I HATE Firestone!
It's people who are blind to the facts thaa allow the manufacturers to get away with murder....pun intended.
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?