|
|
|
|
|
Go back and vote on this image.
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=15585 |
|
| Comments: 24 (Read/Post) Favorites: 1 (View) |
Submitted
on: 12-05-2002
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Car |
|
|
Description:
Cool paint job. |
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
 |
| #3 |
2-16-2003 @ 12:02:14 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Looks like it took a sideswipe, the doors are off anohter car, and the rear quarter is a filler job
|
|
| #8 |
2-22-2005 @ 05:12:34 PM |
| Posted By : Hoopd87 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
From '77-'79. Also on the same platform as the Thunderbird and Cougar. I have a '78 Cougar.
|
|
| #10 |
2-22-2005 @ 05:26:38 PM |
| Posted By : Hoopd87 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
mines battleship poogrey and as basic as they came.
|
|
| #12 |
2-22-2005 @ 05:29:40 PM |
| Posted By : Hoopd87 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Stock was a lo-po 302, but that cracked, so It currently has a mo-po 302 from an '85 T-Bird.
|
|
| #14 |
2-22-2005 @ 05:34:24 PM |
| Posted By : Hoopd87 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
around there, yeah. It *should* have around 170-180, now.
|
|
| #15 |
2-22-2005 @ 05:38:12 PM |
| Posted By : Altima35se2003 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#14, not to bad, my friend xr7 is pushing about that. Wish he would get off his ass and fix it up.
|
|
| #16 |
2-22-2005 @ 05:55:52 PM |
| Posted By : stang392 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#14, not if its stock, 85 5.0s were only putting out 140, chances are your 79 was putting out more power
|
|
| #17 |
2-22-2005 @ 05:58:10 PM |
| Posted By : Hoopd87 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
From what I heard -and it's been a long time - is that he 302's in the T-birds and Cougars wasn't the same as the lo-po standard issue ones, nor were they HO's.
[Edited by Hoopd87 on 2-22-2005 @ 05:58:58 PM]
|
|
| #18 |
2-22-2005 @ 06:06:27 PM |
| Posted By : stang392 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#17, follow the tech link one the side, it has the year by year specs. 84 was Fords worst power output for a small block. after that it slowly got better, but it still took a few years as you can see by the chart. now given that the 79 mustangs had the 140 crap engine, I would go out on a limb and guess the much larger bird got a bit more. If not then they were the small other then one being carbed and one being CFI
|
|
| #19 |
4-01-2005 @ 02:37:17 AM |
| Posted By : Sensekhmet |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Wow, I love this. I'd fix it up to be in mint condition as far as mechanics go. Of course, some suspension mods would be necessary... also a stick shift. I'd leave the engine pretty much alone (180HP? Enough for me... for now). But the best thing would be this: I would do nothing to the extrerior... it looks simply badass.
|
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
