Wait... that was the moral of the story?The moral of the story: be different. Just don't try to be too different.
You missed a few things.74stang2togo said:Mustang II:
1974: 2.3L 4-cylinder and 2.8L V6
1975: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8
1976: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8
1977: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8
1978: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8 (302 called a "5.0" for the first time in the 1978 King Cobra)
Fox:
1979: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor, 3.3L I6, 5.0L V8 (which was identical to the engine used the previous year)
1980: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor, 3.3L I6, 4.2L V8
1981: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor, 3.3L I6, 4.2L V8
1982: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor (Canada only), 3.3L I6, 302 V8
1983: 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with EFI, 3.8L V6, 302 V8
1984: 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with EFI (with big improvements, used in the SVO), 3.8L V6, 302 V8
Here's the REAL crazy thing. The 302 in the 75-79 Mustangs? Was almost completely unchanged from the 2-bbl 302 used in the '73 Mustang. That one little anemic smogged-down 2-bbl 302 soldiered on through three generations of Mustang.
Correct.You missed a few things.
1979: 2.8L V6
1981: the 2.3T was available in Canada only
1982: 4.2L V8
1984: the 2.3T was also still in the Turbo GT
What? I missed a few. I had it all typed up correctly, and closed the wrong tab. When I typed up again pissed at myself and in a hurry, I missed a couple. Well, I missed the 84 Turbo GT both times, forgot that one got a second year.
What's a Chasis?
Well,....you also like a MII well enough to own one...Completely discounts your objectivity.
Seriously, nobody is getting mad at anybody, and yes Mike is annoying, that's why we love him, well like him at least.
...or yours
Speak for yourself. I monitor this channel in order to catch a glimpse of the demon.
"Dude... GTF up. We got chit to discuss".
I wouldn’t say he’s a true “ demon” in the scope of things. and now that I think of it, there are all manner of lesser imps and demons that might come calling on you in the dead of night when you go to sleep with too much sht on your mind.But the demon that comes calling on me looks just like me, only somewhat more superficial, and transparent....or yours
Speak for yourself. I monitor this channel in order to catch a glimpse of the demon.
"Dude... GTF up. We got chit to discuss".
Yeah, well is he fast?I wouldn’t say he’s a true “ demon” in the scope of things. and now that I think of it, there are all manner of lesser imps and demons that might come calling on you in the dead of night when you go to sleep with too much sht on your mind.But the demon that comes calling on me looks just like me, only somewhat more superficial, and transparent.
I wouldn’t say he’s a true “ demon” in the scope of things. and now that I think of it, there are all manner of lesser imps and demons that might come calling on you in the dead of night when you go to sleep with too much sht on your mind.But the demon that comes calling on me looks just like me, only somewhat more superficial, and transparent.
Mustang II:
1974: 2.3L 4-cylinder and 2.8L V6
1975: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8
1976: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8
1977: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8
1978: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.8L V6, 302 V8 (302 called a "5.0" for the first time in the 1978 King Cobra)
Fox:
1979: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor, 3.3L I6, 5.0L V8 (which was identical to the engine used the previous year)
1980: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor, 3.3L I6, 4.2L V8
1981: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor, 3.3L I6, 4.2L V8
1982: 2.3L 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with a draw-through carburetor (Canada only), 3.3L I6, 302 V8
1983: 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with EFI, 3.8L V6, 302 V8
1984: 4-cylinder, 2.3L 4-cylinder with EFI (with big improvements, used in the SVO), 3.8L V6, 302 V8
Here's the REAL crazy thing. The 302 in the 75-79 Mustangs? Was almost completely unchanged from the 2-bbl 302 used in the '73 Mustang. That one little anemic smogged-down 2-bbl 302 soldiered on through three generations of Mustang.
There's no shame in any car losing to a Neon SRT-4. Those cars are the most devious thing Chrysler ever dreamed up.
They literally looked at the ugly, deplorable, horrid little bastard that was the Neon and said "what if we added boost, cut out weight, managed to care even less about reliability and build quality, and then got nasty about it?" then they did it. Then the tuner crowd couldn't leave them alone. I've driven 700 horsepower Audis, I've driven 662 horsepower Shelbys, I've driven 650 horsepower Z06 Corvettes... and the ONE car I've ever driven that's ever made "poo come out" as Jeremy Clarkson so eloquently put it was a heavily modified SRT-4. Those cars are absolutely batcrazy.
Yup, that little 2.3L Lima didn't die off until 2001 (it grew to 2.5L in 1998).That little 2.3L was around for a long time wasn't it? They were using them in Rangers in the 90s as I recall?
Chrysler excels at this - just when you think they couldn't get worse...they figure out a way. Adding Fiat into the mix gave them all sorts of new ideas re:unreliability.
Now all they need to do is add Alfa Romeo to the mix.
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?