...
SPF2245,
OK. That does look good. NASCAR is due for a revamping.
==================
Quote:
Originally Posted by fsstnotch
Car looks good. Making a camaro, mustang, challenger car would be cool. But still, not near a stock car. I'd like to see these cars usung engines based on the car they resemble. Using 100% of the drivetrain, beefed up of course. Seems like it would be cheaper than the current situation.
I've always wondered why everyone hated on the mustang??? I assumed it must have to do with wheelbase or somehting because even in the class i race on dirt, camaro, monte, thunderbird... nobody races a dodge really and it's rare to see anything with a ford in it just because a 350 is cheaper to build and maintain than a 351. I've been pondering the idea of selling my g body monte and building a thunderbird, it'd cost more but I'd feel better behind the wheel of a ford!  |
Fsstnotch,
I'm thinking the reason late Fords aren't used much for dirt track could be the OEM suspension geometry. The Fox body cars, Ford Fairmont, Mustang, Cougar and T-Bird, all used a combo strut/A-arm front and rear four-link live axle that binds during body-lean. Factory-Five addressed this serious shortcoming with their 3-link rear option on their Roadsters (Cobra's).
On the contrary, the Camero, and possibly the Monte rwd, used a torque-arm/panhard live rear and long-arm/short-arm front A-frame geometry that works really well in factory configuration. I have a 2600 pound, 3.8 Buick powered 1980 Monza (H-platform, Vega etc) that even has this type of OEM geometry at both ends. Somebody at GM still cared to send the very best during their worst years.
Otherwise, the Ford Windsor smallblock should be economically competitive in the power department. I believe the popularity of the 5.0 Mustang made them neck-and-neck.
My 2 cents, anyway.
==============
I have to agree with
Dan40 on the "Its the pro wrestling of auto racing" NASCAR comment. I'd much rather watch local dirt track than modern national "asphalt" stock car.
Wes
...