Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again) (Read 2496 times) previous topic - next topic

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #15 –
yeah but the escort is slow. Now they have a 190 hp civic 1.6 where your escort got what,... 120? out of a 1.9? I think that that is a H.O. 1.9 too.
Quote from: jcassity
I honestly dont think you could exceed the cost of a new car buy installing new *stock* parts everywhere in your coug our tbird. Its just plain impossible. You could revamp the entire drivetrain/engine/suspenstion and still come out ahead.
Hooligans! 
1988 Crown Vic wagon. 120K California car. Wifes grocery getter. (junked)
1987 Ford Thunderbird LX. 5.0. s.o., sn-95 t-5 and an f-150 clutch. Driven daily and going strong.
1986 cougar.
lilsammywasapunkrocker@yahoo.com

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #16 –
My Escort with the 1.9/5-speed was fine for what it was. It got out of its own way, and it got me where I was going for ten years.

A stock Fairmont/Zephyr would be fine in a similar role.. but if I'm going to build up a car for a specific purpose, I might as well give it a bit more than stock. I don't need to run around screaming at 100 mph with my ass on fire.

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #17 –
Another question I forgot: Are there any problems with an .030 overbore on the 2.3Ts? I would guess no, but it never hurts to ask. If I'm going to rebuild a 2.3T, might as well do it while I'm in there.

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #18 –
Quote from: Bird351
1) Do you recall whether or not there was a lot of clearancing work involved on the short-rod 2.5 approach? Also, was the rod ratio found to be acceptable?.



Again I'd have to dig up the info.  I don't recall any clearancing


Quote from: Bird351
3) Standard to a TC, you mean? Not sure what a F/Z comes with.. and I know I have nothing in the front yard numerically higher than 3.27s.


The "std" 2.3T 7.5 diff ratio was 3.45.

Quote from: Bird351
4) Can always find another donor car if nothing else. What about the '88 LSC's K-member? Is that as oddball as the '86 Tbird V6?


Not certain about the Mk7 K-member.


Quote from: Bird351
6) OK, well are there any Fox Mustang seats that are worth pursuing, for someone who needs something a little more comfortable than whatever I'm likely to find in the F/Z? I don't *have* to have power seats, necessarily. What I have to have are seats that aren't going to make things much worse for me with this back problem.


Seats from up to an '04 Mustang will fit.  I dropped a set of '98 GT seats into the old '79 Pace car I had.  Ive got Mustang-tracked Recaros in my 80 Z-7.

There are no issues with a .030" overbore on the 2.3T, but like I mentioned earlier, most likely they will not need it.  Bore it only if you NEED to, not just because.
Long live the 4-eyes!  - '83 Tbird Turbo - '85 Marquis LTS - '86 LTD Wagon-  '81 Granada GL 2dr

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #19 –
http://www.automart.com/vehicledetail/adid-22541403

*sigh* They want $2450 for this. Would've been a great start for the project, even if I had to make arrangements for my family near Buffalo to go pick it up for me.. but .. $2450.. ain't happening on my paycheck.

Think I'm going to have to get in touch with old friends everywhere and ask them to be on the lookout for more granny-cars like this.

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #20 –
OK, Baumann lists all these transmissions together, so I have to ask:

Does the 5R55E share the bellhousing bolt pattern of the A4LD? (another Baumann page makes it sound like it does) If so, would this be worth tracking down, or is it a piece of garbage too?

http://www.becontrols.com/tech/ch7a4ldinfo.htm

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #21 –
There's a Fairmont wagon for sale over at Ford-Fox that would ALMOST do it for me for a project vehicle for this. (the wagon only seems a bit more than 100 lbs. heavier, if that chart I linked to is correct) Unfortunately it has no A/C.. which would be murder for me down here. (esp. since it's a black car) A wagon might even save me from having to get a truck. (although I still wouldn't be able to haul the riding mower around, it)

http://www.ford-fox.org/viewtopic.php?topic=2438&forum=2  (no pics tho, unless you Email him or convince him to post it for sale here with pics in the thread)

OK, on another note, I went back and found Carmen's post on transmissions.. so any tranny on the 4.0 2WD Ranger should work? What about the 5R55E or any of these other 5R55# transmissions I've seen mentioned? There's a wide ratio one, 5R55W, apparently. Are they all junk, or are they to the A4LD what the 4R70W is to the AOD? (upgraded over time, more evolved, whatever) Obviously I would need some sort of electronics solution for it, and Baumann doesn't sell TCS units for those yet.

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #22 –
If you don't care if it's a ford, get an old VW or Mercede's diesel. 

If you want it to be a ford, get an 80's Escort with the 2.0L diesel.

If you need it to be a fox, find a Mark VII with the BMW diesel.

Diesels are great on milage, run forever, and with you living in florida, there's no worry about cold weather. 

:2c:
Nick

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #23 –
No thanks, no thanks, and no thanks. If I wanted to "just get" anything solely for the sake of more fuel efficiency, I'd get another '94 Escort like my last one.. or a Honda.

Besides.. diesel down here is now as expensive as premium. Only way I'd go with a diesel is if I turned right around and converted it to propane.

This thread is about taking a lighter Fox body and making it more efficient. Doesn't have to be THE most efficient possible, but significantly more efficient than my '89 LSC. Have to go with the slushbox so that everyone in the house can use it, or the project might be even more efficient. Being that I currently own four Fox bodies and have owned seven of them total, (if you include the donor Fairmont for an old engine swap I did) I'd say I'm a fan of the platform.

Sorry if I sound frustrated, but I am. "just get this" kinds of comments tend to irritate me when I'm trying to plan out something out of the ordinary.
 

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #24 –
Find a wrecked Mark VII with a diesel and put that engine in a Fairmont/Zephyr  :)

Re: Fox Fuel Efficiency, part 2 (long post again)

Reply #25 –
Not sure it would be so easy (or cheap) to get replacement parts for that. Also not sure on the performance of those. I'd like something that's reasonably fun to drive, and not be a total slave to fuel efficiency.