From: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: <<< Mustang Powered Miata >>>
Reply-To: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Organization: Minimal.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 04:22:54 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.034508.4599@hubcap.clemson.edu> lharris@hubcap.clemson.edu (Larry Harris) writes:
>kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Apr9.191325.20822@hubcap.clemson.edu> lharris@hubcap.clemson.edu (Larry Harris) writes:
>>>The Mustang also leaves plenty of room for the shade
>>>tree mechanic to make his own improvements, something those sealed
>>>engine Japanese cars don't offer (I'm not really critisizing them for
>>>it, though).
>
>>This is one of the most important (to me) aspects of the Mustang.  The
>>engine in it has been around for almost 30 years.  There are *lots*
>>of aftermarket products for it, and it's real easy for someone with
>>a relatively small budget to get incredible performance out of the
>>Mustang.
>30 years exactly if I'm not mistaken!

If you start with the 221, then yeah, exactly 30 years.  I think the
302 itself has been around since 1969 (perhaps a little earlier.  I
think they raced them before they put them in the Boss 302).

>>And it's what has me more worried than anything else about the
>>next-generation Mustang.  As I understand it, they're planning on
>>putting in their "modular" V-8.  DOHC.  A completely different
>>design.  No real aftermarket for it, and I suspect there won't be
>>for some time.  Oh, it'll be an excellent engine in all likelihood.
>>But Ford got most of the basics right some 30 years ago with the
>>221 (which begat the 260, which begat the 289, which begat the
>>302 :-) ).
>
>I am very excited about the new Mustang.  I would very much like to buy
>a '94 or '95 Mustang SVO convertible when it comes out, but I will still
>keep my '86.  The '95 will become my daily driver, while I'd like to hot
>rod the '86 with GT-40 parts and maybe a Vortech Supercharger, G-Load
>suspenson, etc...  It will be my tinkering car.  I figure that with a
>300 hp modular, being a daily driver, I'd probably leave it alone.  Of
>course I always need something to twiddle my wrenches on!

I think one of the best things about the current engine is that it's
relatively easy to tinker with.  I'm concerned that the "modular"
won't be as easy to tinker with (Ford came out with a SOHC version 
of the 429 back in the 60's, and the timing chain was HUGE.  I can
imagine that it was a real pain to work on).  4 camshafts instead of
one!  That alone will make it a lot more expensive to tinker with the
valvetrain, and rebuilds will be a lot more expensive.

The only engine type in which it doesn't make sense to have a centrally
located camshaft is an inline engine.  For those engines, it makes much
more sense to use an overhead cam (preferably DOHC).  But for a V-type
or flat engine, a centrally-located camshaft makes a *lot* more sense,
and reduces complications.

>>But worse than that: will they continue to manufacture the 302?  It's
>>such a good little engine that I'd hate to see them stop production
>>of it.  I don't want the aftermarket for the Ford smallblock V-8 to
>>die for a LOOOONG time.
>
>From what I understang, Ford wants to keep making the Windsor as long as
>they can.  They'll probably use it as the basic truck workhorse motor.
>I would expect to be able to walk into your local Ford dealer in 1995+
>and order a basic F-150 with a 302/351.  I think the aftermarket for
>this motor will be around for a long time, just look how many of them
>there are around.  

Yeah, you're probably right.

I hope, too, that a good aftermarket gets built for the new modular V-8.
Since I haven't seen what one looks like, I can't say how easy it'll be
to play with them.  I just hope it's as easy as playing with the current
V-8.

>Jeez, my father was disappointed to see the market
>for Flathead parts disolve!

Were they easier to work on than the current V-8?  :-)

>-Larry Harris-                |  '86 Mustang lx 5.0 notchback
>lharris@hubcap.clemson.edu    |  Meyer's Tow'd Dune Buggy
>lharris@clemson.bitnet        |  OS-9, a leaner meaner UNIX
>Clemson Computer Engineering  |  RUSH, YES, R.E.M, The Who


		Kevin Brown (kevin@taronga.taronga.com)

Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.tech