Welcome me back! I bought an '86

[4000 Pounds of Iron]

Meet my new '86.

It's a dead-stock 1986 'vert with a blowed up 3.8 and Maaco paint that I got to replace the 1991 Crown Vic that I spent a couple years with. Plopping the T5 in the Vic was an experience, but now I want to build something a little faster that can actually handle.

Here's a few logistical questions for you:

I want good 4-wheel discs and five-lug wheels. I have a junkyard budget. What are the obstacles to me swapping in SN95 struts, spindles, rearend, and assorted brake stuff? Would I be better off with Turbo Coupe or Mark VII parts? I actually really like the way the 94-98 16" wheels look on Foxes, so I'm in the market for a set of those.

I've heard from a couple sources that an 87-93 longblock with a 650 holley, a good intake, headers and decent exhaust makes about 270HP. True dat?

Ya think a 7.5 rear and 4-banger T5 would hold up if I never dropped the clutch (I don't) and didn't ever use slicks or DRs? (I won't)

Dig on the interior. It was rehashed about 10 years ago but is getting to need it again.

I don't know if it's normal (I doubt it) but the center console of my car is covered with stitched leather.

Four-eyed stangers, what are the differences between our cars and the others?

Thanks for the help.
4k#Fe

 

[Darkhorse845]

Congrats on your 86 Welcome Back to Stangnet!

 

[MrKwik]

Definately got potential. Gotta love those four eyes. The 4cyl stuff will hold up for a bit if you are really nice to it. But start side stepping the clutch or running sticky tires and its toast. You also need to use a special pilot bearing for the 4cyl trans to bolt up to a v8. Unless you are dead set on having 5 lug, I would go with a TC rear because it will have better gears than the SN95 rear end. The rear out of a TC auto will have 3.73's and 3.55's in a stick car. Keep in mind that they will both be wider than stock which can be an issue if you plan on running wide tires. If you just want to run the later model wheels, the cheapest route is to use the ranger/aerostar axles and drums on the rear with ranger 5 lug rotors on front. Thats what I did on my 86 to get the 95GT wheels on it. The caviat to that is that you still have the puny front brakes. The upside is that the whole conversion was under $200 with brand new front rotors and junkyard axles/turned drums.

 

[4000 Pounds of Iron]

Anybody know if 225/55 16s will fit on a TC rear in a Fox?

Anybody know what rear gears V6 SN95s came with, and if they ever had a traction-loc?

Anybody know if the SN95 spindles with their nice big brakes are a bolt-in swap with new struts? Cause that would be cool.

Steve

 

[MrKwik]

I think you would be fine with that size tire. You could allways roll the fender lip if need be but I dont think you would have to. Not sure about the gears on the SN95 rear but I believe you either need to drill the spindle or use a special spacer to hook up to the tie rod end if I remember right.

 

[4000 Pounds of Iron]

Any reason why I couldn't use the SN95 rack?

4k#Fe

 

[v8only]

-the stitched leather on your center console is custom
-your door panels are custom too, looks like 87+ armrests and a custom door panel
-seats are 87+
-the turbocoupe rear is a 4 lug, and sticks out .75" on each side. For a budget 5 lug upgrade, don't go with the lincoln rotors, your wheel choice is VERY limited, as most wheels wont fit it. use 94/95 v6/gt spindles/brakes on the front end, and use two pass side aerostar 5 lug axles for the rear to convert to 5 lug, then use 9 inch ranger drums. If you MUST have disc brakes, you can modify the aerostar axle assembly for sn95 rear discs, and you won't have issues with the wheels sticking out. However, do use the turbocoupe rear, as you'll get the good gears (3.73s for auto, 3.55's for stick). It's the axle shafts in the turbocoupe that stick out, not the actual rear being longer, rear itself is the same size as the mustang rear.

-if you have to deal with emissions, you can't go carb'd on this cars, as the 86's have efi, no longtubes either.

-the 87-93 engines have 225 stock, and just adding an intake and exhaust probably won't get you 50 more horsepower, I'd honestly say more like 25 tops. If you want a killer budget junkyard engine, source out a 96-01 explorer 5.0. they have the gt40 iron heads on them (96) or the gt40p heads (97-01) and a gt40 clone intake. sell the intake for 200-300 to an efi mustang guy. The whole engine should cost you maybe $700- a grand tops from a salvage yard. This is what we're doing. You'll need to swap the oil pan, oil pump, timing cover, accessories, valve springs, and cam over to the mustang stuff, then you'll be pushing an easy 270 horses.

 

[4000 Pounds of Iron]

-the 87-93 engines have 225 stock, and just adding an intake and exhaust probably won't get you 50 more horsepower, I'd honestly say more like 25 tops.

I know that's what an EFI 5.0 makes. I think it was Car Craft (?) tested a HO block with E7s, the stock HO roller cam, stock headers, and a Performer RPM intake with a 600/650 Holley carb and it made 270 something on an engine dyno. I don't know if it had an electric waterpump or an alternator or anything, so that could account for a little.

They used it as a baseline to show that AFR 165s alone would add 100HP.

Yowza.

Emissions here in TN consists solely or checking to make sure the cat (or shell of a cat) is there, making sure the engine light is off, and sniffing the pipes at idle.

I had a 1983 CJ7 prior to this without a single functioning piece of emissions equipment that I got to run cleaner than my 1997 Dakota simply by leaning out the idle screws when the engine was hot. It ran like crap cold until I richened it up again, but I had like 3 ppm of CO and NOx, new-car clean.

4k#Fe

 

[willys1]

Welcome to the family!(Im the prodical child,LOL,) Love the seats