top speed...?

BunBun said:

If i remember correctly, the drag coefficient for a 64.5-66 coupe is .42 or something close to that. The 67 body style was either .39 or .40

Bun

Click to expand...

Jeepers, I've heard the 69 fastback is 0.65 CD.

I believe it was me who posted it previously too I think 0.65 is way too much, the back on the thing should help it slip, I suppose the front wouldn't be that aerodynamic, but once you're up to speed, and there is some pressure built up in the radiator area, the CD should decrease. That's just my opinion though.

Route666 said:

Jeepers, I've heard the 69 is 0.65 CD.

Click to expand...

ok thats 2 against me... damn... now i'm gonna hafta actually do the math and calculate it out. You bast***s.

Be back later or tomorrow...

Bun

BunBun said:

please not my disclaimer "If I remember correctly" I don't remember where I got the info from and I certainly don't know if its right. .6 seems awfully high tho. .42 does seem a bit low yes, but I believe its correct. The more I think about it, the .4/.39 may have been for the mach body style.

Bun

Click to expand...

Hey if its written on-line in a semi-formal looking presentation it must be true.

http://www.stratics.com/content/portals/mco/content/gameplay/bigben/mustang.php

i've past the 120 and went almost to the 0 side half inch away- when i had my set up and a c-4 with 2.73 being stupid racing my friend down the freeway long time ago.

with the gears i have now in 3rd, tops approx 130 and i cant go WOT in overdrive

dodgestang said:

Hey if its written on-line in a semi-formal looking presentation it must be true.

http://www.stratics.com/content/portals/mco/content/gameplay/bigben/mustang.php

Click to expand...

lol, I bet thats where i remembered it from. I used to play that game I hope I can find all the measurements for the car so I don't have to do all that dang math. I am on a mission now Must ... find... cD of classic stang....

Bun

120 mph when I had my 2.80 gears. I will never do THAT again

130 with a mild 302 and 2.79 in the rear in my 66

I've been looking for the last hour on google and can't find squat on the Cd. BOOOOO!

Alright, how can it be done with maths? What is there to do? I'll do that if you tell me how to do it

well i just found out that the 65 coupe had .40-.42, i'm guessing there wouldn't be a big differnce through 64-68

In 1987 when I was building my 68 Dodge Charger we got a wild thought. All the NASCAR related books said the 68 Charger front end started to "float" off the ground due to the air pocket created by the inset grill. That is one of the reasons the 69s had a "splitter" in the grille area. Well, we built the motor (650+ hp), had my Art Carr 727 trans, but still had the 3.23 geared pumpkin in (my 4.56s were on the way). We were at a jobsite (environmental testing of a "retired military installation") and kept commenting how long and straight the entry road was. Then my buddy says "This would be a great dragstrip with lots of room for shut down". BING!!! That weekend we trailered the beast in, cranked the front torsion bars to get the front low, and we were off. At 165 on the speedo we could feel the car lift and I could move the wheel slight left & right with no affect. I'll see if I can dig the old VHS tape out of it and scan it in to mpg. We had big plans to make a Daytone style nose cone and try again, but we got busted by a state inspector. He happen to drive up as I was doin smokey burnouts. My boss laughed his but off, and then said if we ever did **** like that again without him he would can us

so your saying that if you keep the front end really low it will compansate for the poor CD?

on the track...willow springs streets course about 90. On the 605 freeway 5200 rpm in 5th with a tremec 245-50-16 tires and a 4:11 rear gear comes out to 142mph ran out of room car was still pulling. Fastest as a passenger was 176 in a twin turboed 911

none67 said:

so your saying that if you keep the front end really low it will compansate for the poor CD?

Click to expand...

It wont affect the Cd, but it will have an effect on the overall drag due to the smaller frontal area.

none67 said:

well i just found out that the 65 coupe had .40-.42, i'm guessing there wouldn't be a big differnce through 64-68

Click to expand...

Where'd you find that out from?

I've topped the speedo on my Mach (120mph), headed down hill. Guessing the speedo error, it was probably around 110 (the car was equipped with a 302 2v, FMX, and 3.0 gears). This was well before I rebuilt the suspension, but the car never felt squirelly or sketchy (though maybe a bit detached), and there was another 1500rpm left in the motor.

I know most frown on street driving at speeds like this, but I do think there are times when it is not only ok, but necessary. For example, the time I topped out the Mach was on a major trucking route in the Poconos. Anyone who knows those roads and those truckers know that they use the technique of barrelling down one hill to gain enough momentum to get up the next, often exceeding 100mph to do so. The roads are very straight, and go up then down repeatedly for miles, so everyone just falls into rhythm.

This was the first time I'd ever driven these roads and I was completely unprepared for the experience. So the first down hill comes and I let off the gas to maintain a reasonable 70mph, and suddenly there is this huge rig bearing down on me about to run me over. I change lanes only to find another rig in that lane coming up super fast too. Now realize, my mother is sitting in the passenger seat, I'm 16, we're both a bit concerned, and I'm thinking this is some bad trucker horror movie hazing session. Next thing I know, I'm laying on the throttle trying to get away and suddenly I'm doing 120mph on the speedo.

We get to the bottom of the hill and start heading up the next and I realize I'm pulling away from the rigs no problem. Watching those rigs slow down coming up the hill turned the light bulb on over my head... I understood. So the next 10-20 miles were spent in this dance of staying ahead of the rigs, and only passing on the up hills. Mom didn't give me any crap, and actually ended up complimenting me on how calm I was about the whole thing (she admitted she was much more freaked than she showed, and she's hardcore career soldier's wife :worship: ).

Moral of the story... I'm not sure there is one. I don't condone street racing, but I do condone using the appropriate driving skills and practices for each situation (no I'm not talking about running from the cops). There are certainly times when being a slow poke or "letter of the law follower" can be more dangerous than fitting into traffic or going with the character of the road.

Woh man, that's a story for the grandkids! I agree fully, if you had have been a caravan towing holiday maker going 55mph or something, that would have been a bad thing for a truck to crest a hill and find.

Route666 said:

Where'd you find that out from?

Click to expand...

I found a couple sites with between thoughs numbers, so i figured it must be correct.



Thats quite the story, i would have loved to see a lane like this.

DarkBudda---- enjoyed your story, I've driven cross-country and have done that very thing hundreds of times, only out west, I've done and seen other trucks do well in excess of 125 on some down hills. One that comes to mind happened between Price and Green River Utah at 3 am. Me and 2 other trucks "fell off" a hill that we had topped at 100 mph. My truck ran out at 105 ( max rpms for the motor at that speed in OD) this truck had 4.11 rear gears. The truck ahead of me went into "mexican OD" ( kicking the shifter into neutral at max rpms) with a 3.50 geared rear,his top speed must have been 20 mph faster than mine. I figured mine was doin 125-130 down that hill, his musta been hittin 150 at least. Even saw one do this on I-80 in western Wyoming and a State trooper didn't even bother hitting him with his radar, just let him go for it. Not many truckers still out there that'll try that now, all this happened back in the late 80's before the CDL went into effect.