Why can't I find a clean fox?

[streetroc]

But the cool factor of having a sweet fox wayyyy outweighs the fun factor.

I'd say the fun factor is way better than the cool factor. A sub 3,000 lb car with a solid rear axle and 400 lb of torque is a recipe for dirty fun on the street. My 89 LX would side step in third gear if I wasn't careful with the throttle.

And the sound. Nothing sounds like a fox body. Especially with some long tube headers and a mild cam through some flowmasters. Just listening to it idle is like an ear orgasm

 

[alexs2006]

I'd say the fun factor is way better than the cool factor. A sub 3,000 lb car with a solid rear axle and 400 lb of torque is a recipe for dirty fun on the street. My 89 LX would side step in third gear if I wasn't careful with the throttle.

And the sound. Nothing sounds like a fox body. Especially with some long tube headers and a mild cam through some flowmasters. Just listening to it idle is like an ear orgasm

I'm with you on the sound! Just Don't forget the turn downs! Echoing off the pavement

 

[Stampede]

You know the Chevy is faster. I'd never believed it. I was a die hard Ford fan most of my life. I've done a lot of research on this. Just sayin

If I remember right, based on the magazine tests back in the 1980s the 5.0 was faster. A Mustang with a Tremec 5spd was quicker than the Camaro with the 350 (since it required a 3spd auto) and the 305 Camaro.with the manual (since the Mustang was lighter).

I'd have to dig through my magazines to get the actual test numbers and dates, but that is what I remember.

 

[lostchild]

I'd say the fun factor is way better than the cool factor. A sub 3,000 lb car with a solid rear axle and 400 lb of torque is a recipe for dirty fun on the street. My 89 LX would side step in third gear if I wasn't careful with the throttle.

And the sound. Nothing sounds like a fox body. Especially with some long tube headers and a mild cam through some flowmasters. Just listening to it idle is like an ear orgasm

Dunno, those mid-60's factory hi-po Chrysler products had a sweet exhaust sound right off the showroom floor. Especially the little 273 cu in Commandos.

 

[jpm2953]

What about a 1981? 4 banger. Got a Built 302 ready to drop in. crankshaft in the engine cost more than the car

 

[Stampede]

Seriously what happened to all of the Fox Body Mustangs? I've been looking for a nice notchback coupe for several years and they are an endangered species now. I get that they're all over 30 years old and the prices have risen quite a bit but I can't find anything other than ragged out project cars that people want $10k+ for.

Ideally I'd like an 89 LX in dark blue with 03 Terminator wheels. Pure sexiness

View attachment 8928435

I wish you the best sir! They used to be everywhere and were pretty affordable. Now everybody wants one to relive the 80s and to have a fun car to drive. I looked for a while but got frustrated at the number that has been "kustomized" with all kinds of crappy JC Whitney parts or cut up for roll bars so I don't look anymore.

Of course the Fox platform covers so many Fo-Mo-Co products from that era you could broaden you search to other Fords, Mercurys and Lincolns to get something else that could be fun. Just a thought... A Lincoln Mark VII LSC would be a fun car to me. Good luck in your search!

LTD LX....

A Capri is cool, but would be even harder to find.

 

[streetroc]

What about a 1981? 4 banger. Got a Built 302 ready to drop in. crankshaft in the engine cost more than the car

I appreciate the offer but I'm pretty set on a later model that doesn't have the four eye headlights. Ideally 87 88 and 89 because they don't have airbags with the ugly steering wheel that came from a Ford Taurus

 

[Tony2X]

What about a 1981? 4 banger. Got a Built 302 ready to drop in. crankshaft in the engine cost more than the car

Pics?

 

[basstracker89]

If I remember right, based on the magazine tests back in the 1980s the 5.0 was faster. A Mustang with a Tremec 5spd was quicker than the Camaro with the 350 (since it required a 3spd auto) and the 305 Camaro.with the manual (since the Mustang was lighter).

I'd have to dig through my magazines to get the actual test numbers and dates, but that is what I remember.

The 305 was gutless. I was talking about a full blown race car. Not so much stock. I guess I thought that was where you were headed. The Mopars are faster too. I used to think for the size, the Ford was the most powerful. That probably still is true. But if you're talking a custom built no holds barred, that's a different story. I'm also partial to 426 cu in or larger. There just is no substitution for displacement. I do stop at @ 500 cu in. I figure if it's good enough for top fuel dragsters getting 10,000hp, it's good enough for me.
I mean if you just like the Ford, then by all means. But if you're looking for king of the road, you'll fall short. It took me a long time to learn that. If you're like me, always looking for the fastest thrill. There is faster than Ford. Now if they still made the 427, 8 or 9, that might start leveling off. They do make a 7.3L in a heavy duty truck, that's what I'd buy if I was looking for new.
You take a Chevy stroker engine, you'll open a new world. Those big Mopars are bad to the bone too. Granted you can stroke a Ford as well. You'll love the performance difference. I've found the Fords to be more conservative on power. Certainly on the stock level.
I watched the old classics at the race track. Fords were pretty much always beat. The Mopars and Chevys on the top. Don't get me wrong, I still have a Ford I drive and like. 460 cu in, but it ain't the fastest. My 496 GMC will run circles around it. Then there's the big Mopars. The old 426 and 440. Back in the day, the Mopars dominated even to the point of being baned

 

[Stampede]

The 305 was gutless. I was talking about a full blown race car. Not so much stock. I guess I thought that was where you were headed. The Mopars are faster too. I used to think for the size, the Ford was the most powerful. That probably still is true. But if you're talking a custom built no holds barred, that's a different story. I'm also partial to 426 cu in or larger. There just is no substitution for displacement. I do stop at @ 500 cu in. I figure if it's good enough for top fuel dragsters getting 10,000hp, it's good enough for me.
I mean if you just like the Ford, then by all means. But if you're looking for king of the road, you'll fall short. It took me a long time to learn that. If you're like me, always looking for the fastest thrill. There is faster than Ford. Now if they still made the 427, 8 or 9, that might start leveling off. They do make a 7.3L in a heavy duty truck, that's what I'd buy if I was looking for new.
You take a Chevy stroker engine, you'll open a new world. Those big Mopars are bad to the bone too. Granted you can stroke a Ford as well. You'll love the performance difference. I've found the Fords to be more conservative on power. Certainly on the stock level.
I watched the old classics at the race track. Fords were pretty much always beat. The Mopars and Chevys on the top. Don't get me wrong, I still have a Ford I drive and like. 460 cu in, but it ain't the fastest. My 496 GMC will run circles around it. Then there's the big Mopars. The old 426 and 440. Back in the day, the Mopars dominated even to the point of being baned

I'm just talking about the magazine tests of the new cars from back then. I don't know how you got off onto top fuel dragsters or race cars.