Cars are really hard to work on anymore

[arrow]

Full power shift tend to break the tires loose. Looks, sound and feels cool but........There is a risk of loss of control when the tires break loose on a shift. Also the 1/4 mile time may improve when the tires stay in full contact and the chassis/suspension does not have to absorb a shock load. Backing off the engine torque a little during the shift isn't all bad. Makes for simple reliable and smooth shifts from one clutch pack to another.

Quarter mile? You're speaking my blood. Worked on funny car engines mid to late 60's. There you had to adjust clutches with sufficient slip dependent on the track you were on, weather conditions and who was driving. Had a 68 Mustang that if you stomped on it in 4th while doing 65 mph, you'd break the tires loose until you got back out of it. Currently built a 318 95 Dakota enough to do high 12's w/o nitrous and still be streetable. This new stuff "computer torque reduction" makes me a bit nauseous.

 

[dodge man]

I own a Challenger and I think Chrysler calls it "torque management". Its probably on anything with a Hemi, and maybe everything that isn't. It basically pulls maybe timing and fuel on the car during a shift to cut back on the power. I've added a tuner to my car and turned off the torque management. It will break the rear tires loose on dry pavement now during the one two shift, but the car is without a doubt quicker with it turned off.

 

[arrow]

It will break the rear tires loose on dry pavement now during the one two shift, but the car is without a doubt quicker with it turned off.

As a car of that power should. If you like to dance at street lights and sidled up next to something like my Dakota, you'd want it off.

 

[mikehaugen]

As a car of that power should. If you like to dance at street lights and sidled up next to something like my Dakota, you'd want it off.

where do I get tickets for this show?

 

[dodge man]

My Challenger is pretty quick, but it isn't 12 second quick.

 

[jaotguy]

I have no idea how fast it was ... but one of the "60's" Chev cars I had would spin the tires in first second and squawk when you hit third .. ( a three speed of course ) 0 - 60 in 4 seconds. .... fast in the straight line , but no where as good handling as the cars of today .....

ford had a 428 ? 429? in their mach mustangs over 600HP ... couldn't sell them ... so Tilden or Hertz (my memory is fuzzy) bought the lot and advertized them as "rent the car your wife wouldn't let you buy".

 

[RobertN]

Was it '68, or '69 that you could get a Ford with a 427, 428, or 429?

427 and 428 were same family, but different bore, stroke and a lot of other stuff; some of the 427's had astronomical redlines compared the the FE 390 and 428. 429 was totally different family(same as 460; 385-series family)

Were'nt all the Hertz Mustangs smallblocks?

Interesting thing about the Boss-429. It was built to compete with the Mopar 426 Hemi in NASCAR. Ford had looser rules than Mopar; the Hemi Mopars were already being restricted.

When Ford introduced the Boss 429, they had to make 500 and put them in cars as part of the homologation rules. You would expect, that they would have made 500 Boss-429 Talladega's, but they didn't. All the Talladega's had 428 auto's. Mopar, had to make 500 Daytona Hemi 4spd cars for homologation rules. In '70, when they came out with the Superbird, they had to make even more; that is why there were more Superbirds than Daytona's.

Ford never had all the restrictions Mopar had. Even as awesome as the side oiler FE-427's were, FOMOCO would have never kept up with the Hemi Mopars without the restriction on the hemi's. Of course, GM was a non factor in NASCAR Grand National at the time.

That was a crazy time; FOMOCO and Mopar were really going to town with motor and aero work. Sad they got too fast and NASCAR limited the Daytona/Superbird/Talladega/Cyclone to 355ci. Petty destroked a Hemi to 355 and was competitive, but '71 was really the end for Aero cars; Big Blocks did not last much longer either.

Interesting even now, Superbirds and Daytona's are worth significantly more than Talladega's.

ford had a 428 ? 429? in their mach mustangs over 600HP

 

[2458n]

In 1989 people were buying ford trucks with diesels to get 250-300 thousand mile engines. The same 5.7 chevy gas ended up getting 250+, and many lowly rangers with the 2.3 went the same distance. And back then you did not have the ability to GOOGLE your problem. Today had a 78.00 dollar Napa part replaced by a 12.88 PRICED PIECE FOR A WESTERN SNOW PLOW. You have to love that 7.3 ford diesel.

 

[Loadstar]

In 1989 people were buying ford trucks with diesels to get 250-300 thousand mile engines. The same 5.7 chevy gas ended up getting 250+, and many lowly rangers with the 2.3 went the same distance. And back then you did not have the ability to GOOGLE your problem. Today had a 78.00 dollar Napa part replaced by a 12.88 PRICED PIECE FOR A WESTERN SNOW PLOW. You have to love that 7.3 ford diesel.

Glow plug relay I take it

 

[jaotguy]

I think that Ford was a Boss 429 ... and that 600 Hp was probably closer to 500 but it was wicked fast. .. back then all the manufactures tried to be the last to print specs for their engines ( they kept dyno numbers secret) and measured at the crank ...... somewhere around 72 ? they were mandated to list "wheel HP" and all the numbers dropped big time ... losses at tranny, water pump , pwr steering , air, diff ... etc.

any one remember the 6 pack ( no not the beer )