Search



Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > Classic Mustangs (Tech)
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search

Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-19-2011, 01:57 PM   #21
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 67 Mustang Coupe
Location: California
Posts: 10,328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozarks06 View Post
By driveability, I mean even a 347 making 500 HP is going to have a pretty lumpy cam and high-flow heads, which means less low-end torque, which makes the car less enjoyable to drive around town. I had a Chebby with a built 283 'back in the day' with the Z28 off road cam (.493/.512 lift, 257/269 duration) and that thing was a pain to drive. It made lots of high-end power (shifted at 8K, 5.57 gears, dual quads) but around town I had to downshift all the time to get enough torque to get out of my own way.

As Norm Peterson said, variable cam timing allows the ECM to change the closing and opening points of intake and exhaust valves (indepently) based on the load, RPM, etc. Thus, with the 5.0 motor, you get the advantage of a long duration cam (at high RPM) and the streetability of a stock cam for good low-end torque, smooth idle, fuel economy, and emissions. With a SBF you have a cam that is designed for torque or high-RPM power, or a compromise between the two. With ViCT, you have all the above (which is precisely why they can get 412 net HP and 390 lb torque [120 lb more than the 93 Cobra 5.0] and still get 26 MPG in a car that weighs about 600 lbs more than our old Mustangs).
Again, ignorance(no offense, it's just a lack of knowledge). Have you ever driven an honest 500hp 347? Talk to someone who has, usually their bottom end torque problem is way too much. I'm sure your small engine "back in the day" drove like crap, but that's because everything "back in the day" drove like crap....it was a lack of technology and understanding in engine design. They lacked power because they were built wrong(engineers hadn't figured out what they were doing).

Case in point take the 302(307) in my car. Based on weight and the mph in my sig in the given weather, calculate what the approximate power is. Comes out to around 380hp at the crank given reasonable drivetrain loss(going through a beefy transmission). That's out of a 302 with a long rod setup, which is an engine that doesn't necessarily favor low end power(the newer Coyote 5.0 runs a smaller bore with a longer stroke to help with that via stroke length to produce torque more easily). It now has a custom cam in it and makes more power and drives even better(peak power is prolly ~390-400 at 6k with broader power between 3-6.5k, maybe more but who cares).

I leave stops and am out of the clutch completely by ~1,300rpm on barely off idle throttle position(less than 10% I'm sure). And keep in mind that my 1st gear is the equivalent of a 2011's 2nd gear due to trans/rear gearing differences. If I leave a stop at 2k rpm and 1/4 throttle I'll blow the tires off the entire way across the intersection. Low rpm power and drivability is not a concern, and it has excellent street manners....even with a carb that has been giving me tuning fits and having AFR's that are off all over the place. In terms of power/weight ratio it's on par with the new 2011's, though due to suspension and gearing I'd expect a 2011 to launch better and run faster 1/4mi times. Gets around 25mpg on the highway, without even being tuned right.

In other words I've accomplished the same thing with a pushrod 5.0 that I could have with a new Coyote engine....but I didn't have to chop the front of the car up, convert the entire front suspension and install an entirely different fuel system and transmission. And that's just on a short stroke 302, not even a longer stroke 347(which make insane torque everywhere due to the stroke length vs port design of SBF's). Just because the engine design is older, doesn't mean you can't build it on a modern philosophy, and save a ton of money doing it.

The point I'm trying to stress is there is a ton of misinformation flying around these days, and it's imply untrue. Everyone bases how a pushrod engine or "older" engine will perform on how they performed 40 years ago. Sure, it's true if you build it like they were built 40 years ago with crap heads and crap cams and crap everything else. Or you run a modern head/cam etc setup like many of us have and get an effectively modern engine, for WAY less than trying to convert.
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!

Untested 331, lots of suspension, chewing up corners.
67mustang302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2011, 06:17 PM   #22
Norm Peterson
6th Gear Member

 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Vehicle: 2008 GT Premium
Location: state of confusion
Posts: 6,772
Default

But isn't the alternative to "crap heads" either profesisonally ported iron heads or aftermarket aluminum heads? And one alternative to tuning the induction side aftermarket EFI?

Neither of those are what you'd call inexpensive approaches, though they do work quite well. IOW, the expense gap between building up the pushrod motor and doing a relatively minor tweak on a newer motor is getting smaller.

Don't get me wrong - I have nothing against pushrod motors. I've built several different versions of the SBC for the Malibu in my sig, and a more or less stockish rebuild of a 302/5.0 for swap into my daughter's '66 C-code coupe. And folks are getting serious power out of the LS motors.


Norm
__________________
'08 GT/5MT (mine)
'10 Subaru Legacy 2.5GT/6MT (hers)
'95 626/V6/5MT (autoX, winter, spare)
'01 Maxima 20AE/5MT (other spare)
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2011, 07:44 PM   #23
THUMPIN455
5th Gear Member

 
THUMPIN455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Vehicle: Too many to list, 30+
Location: Marquette Mi
Posts: 3,566
Default

Everyone has an opinion... Mine tends to stem from being on a very tight and small budget, so I go for things that provide the best bang for my buck.

Well, we could do an apples to apples comparison. I have a 71 that came with a 2v 351C. I have a 4v HO sitting next to it on the floor right now, mild comp 270H cam in it. Now I know I can build mine cheaper, mainly because I have the parts I need and the block is relatively fresh but .040 over. I have been thinking about putting a 393 or 408 stroker kit in it. A balanced one runs about $1200-$1500 through Summit. All the heads need is springs, but they will probably get new valves too, since the stock ones are almost as old as I am. Figure another $1000-$1300 for machine work to get another Cleveland to where mine is. The cool thing is they dont need much in the way of aftermarket parts to run really freakin hard.

My car is in bare metal right now, still needs about $450 worth of sheet metal for the fuel tank, trunk, and tail panel. I would guess I can finish my 71 with a stroker Cleveland, an AOD or 4R70W trans, and get mileage near 20mpg with it cheaper than someone can put a new Coyote in another 71-73. Of course that doesnt include labor, because I do all the work on my cars, so that would be the only way to make it fair. Parts for parts I know I can build a faster better handling 71 with the Cleveland, for less money. I can probably have ti done sooner too, and i still have to finish my 65 GTO that is sharing shop space with the Mustang.

The biggest difference is that someone is going to have to do all that labor to get the Mustang II or some other front suspension under it so the mod engine will fit. Then they will have to do the wiring and the rest of the swap. Even a 71-73 isnt wide enough in the shock towers to fit a modular, its just too wide. Length in these cars is irrelevant, there is enough room for a straight 6 which is longer than most V8s anyway.

Norm mentioned the LS1, just so happens I have one. Its a pushrod engine, makes better power all through the rev range than the mod engines, gets much better mileage, and is quite a bit smaller so it fits in almost anything. So far even my 98 (slowest of all the 4th gen F bodies) has never lost to a mod Mustang that wasnt blown, and even some of those didnt fare too well. If I added just a stall converter to it then it would 1/4 better than quite a few modded 03-04 Cobras. Whats the point? The mod engines are quite expensive to build, even compared to the LS1, and the bang for the buck just isnt there. A bud of mine has a 99 Z28 that had 2.73 gears, never had the engine open, only bolt ons with a stall, and it ran 11.80s NA, with just the rear seat removed. I have yet to see a Mustang do that. Headers, lid, underdrive pulley, and a stall. That was all of his mods. Sorry the mod engines just dont make the power without a blower. Blower means more $$$$$$$$$.

Sure they are cool engines, and they drive ok nice, but if you are going to spend enough money to put one in, then why not have it make some power while you are at it? If I had enough funds to put one in, I would be going with EFI and an overdrive trans with my Cleveland and its stock heads.

Now if you want to do something sacrilegious and put an LSx engine in the Mustang, then at least you will not have to change the suspension, you would make better power cheaper, it would be lighter still, and it would get better mileage than the mod or the older engine. If I wasnt so deas set against stuffing them in non GM and in Muslce Cars like my GTO, I would probably put a 6.0 LS engine in my Mustang. THat just isnt me. I wont put them in my Trans Ams nor my GTOs either, but I want one in my 76 C10 shortbox...
__________________
POD and Cougar progress pics:
71 Pit of Despair Mustang
67 Cougar

THUMPIN455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2011, 09:31 PM   #24
ozarks06
2nd Gear Member
 
ozarks06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Vehicle: 1965 Ford Mustang
Location: MO
Posts: 439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by THUMPIN455 View Post

The mod engines are quite expensive to build, even compared to the LS1, and the bang for the buck just isnt there. A bud of mine has a 99 Z28 that had 2.73 gears, never had the engine open, only bolt ons with a stall, and it ran 11.80s NA, with just the rear seat removed. I have yet to see a Mustang do that. Headers, lid, underdrive pulley, and a stall. That was all of his mods. Sorry the mod engines just dont make the power without a blower. Blower means more $$$$$$$$$.
2011 Mustang GT - 10.97 N/A with bolt-ons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c62zJ-4Bo48

Their dyno test on the unmodified car did 368 RWHP. That was spending exactly $0 to 'build' a mod motor. How much does it cost to build a 5.0 SBF to do that kind of power? Stoker kit? Aluminum heads? Intake? Cam? That adds up to a lot more than $0 to 'build' a 412 HP 5.0 mod motor. It might cost a lot to put one in a classic Mustang, but building them isn't that expensive. A 4.6 4V N/A can make 400 HP with a set of cams - $1000. Yes $1000 for a set of cams is expensive (compared to $100 for a SBF) but that is all you need to hit 400 HP N/A on a little 281 - you don't need to buy heads, intake, and carb. That won't even buy you a decent set of heads for a small block. Mod motors are expensive to work on - a full set of gaskets will set you back about $300 (though most are resuable), but there really isn't much 'building' to them.

I don't think you need to replace the front end on a 71 for a mod motor. I've seen 67-70 cars with the towers trimmed with 4V mod motors.
__________________
Plain Jane 65 Coupe - 284 ci with virtual displacement enhancer
Feature Car in December 2010 StreetScene (the magazine of the National Street Rod Assoc)

Last edited by ozarks06; 01-19-2011 at 09:57 PM.
ozarks06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2011, 01:20 AM   #25
andrewmp6
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 8,162
Default

He wants 25k for this car
http://www.youtube.com/user/THRstang.../2/YgKCeo-LW1Q Or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Bccc4MbjM
I'll take this over any mod motor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgXJD...eature=related
But you forget to tell the, above 400hp is all a mod motor can do all motor most need a blower to break in the 500s.If you want to compare power look up a ls2 or ls6 or grab a lq4 from a truck its a 6.0 iron block swap the heads and use a car intake you got a ls2 cheap.

Last edited by andrewmp6; 01-20-2011 at 01:24 AM.
andrewmp6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2011, 02:38 AM   #26
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 67 Mustang Coupe
Location: California
Posts: 10,328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozarks06 View Post
2011 Mustang GT - 10.97 N/A with bolt-ons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c62zJ-4Bo48

Their dyno test on the unmodified car did 368 RWHP. That was spending exactly $0 to 'build' a mod motor. How much does it cost to build a 5.0 SBF to do that kind of power? Stoker kit? Aluminum heads? Intake? Cam? That adds up to a lot more than $0 to 'build' a 412 HP 5.0 mod motor. It might cost a lot to put one in a classic Mustang, but building them isn't that expensive. A 4.6 4V N/A can make 400 HP with a set of cams - $1000. Yes $1000 for a set of cams is expensive (compared to $100 for a SBF) but that is all you need to hit 400 HP N/A on a little 281 - you don't need to buy heads, intake, and carb. That won't even buy you a decent set of heads for a small block. Mod motors are expensive to work on - a full set of gaskets will set you back about $300 (though most are resuable), but there really isn't much 'building' to them.

I don't think you need to replace the front end on a 71 for a mod motor. I've seen 67-70 cars with the towers trimmed with 4V mod motors.
Perhaps you should look up info before you post things. That 10 second 2011 did it with bolt ons, revamped exhaust(including cat delete), tune, suspension, gears, tires and a 100 shot of nitrous. You think all that cost 0$ to achieve? It has thousands of dollars in mods on top of an already $30k+ car. And you're being completely ignorant of reality....spending $0 to "build" the engine? Did they get the car for free? No, they didn't spend the money to "build" the engine, they spent money to buy it....like most everyone does since they can't build engines.

Building 2 engines by hand, the Mod type engine will always be more expensive. The only reason Ford can offer it at the price they do is because it's mass produced.

And can you fit it in a classic by notching shock towers? Yes, but you still compromise the structural rigidity of the upper suspension mounting points, AND with just notching, trying to get headers on or off or spark plus in or out is all but impossible.
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!

Untested 331, lots of suspension, chewing up corners.
67mustang302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2011, 04:53 AM   #27
andrewmp6
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 8,162
Default

Hell try pulling a head on most mod motors in anything.Most you have to pull the engine to pull a head.I can give a list of problems and design flaws on the mod motor like the spark plugs blowing out and took ford 11 years to fix that one.Blow by is good one too i seen a crown vic come in with no oil it took 6 quarts to even read on the dipstick.The egr system is funny too good and causing problems and throw the car in limp mode.The coil packs are good for 100k replacing them is around 100 bucks up depending brand.The timing chain guides last about 150k before the chain eats past the plastic in to the metal on them which isn't good.The plastic intake on most crack and leak with some age.
andrewmp6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2011, 08:35 AM   #28
ozarks06
2nd Gear Member
 
ozarks06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Vehicle: 1965 Ford Mustang
Location: MO
Posts: 439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67mustang302 View Post
Perhaps you should look up info before you post things. That 10 second 2011 did it with bolt ons, revamped exhaust(including cat delete), tune, suspension, gears, tires and a 100 shot of nitrous. You think all that cost 0$ to achieve? It has thousands of dollars in mods on top of an already $30k+ car. And you're being completely ignorant of reality....spending $0 to "build" the engine? Did they get the car for free? No, they didn't spend the money to "build" the engine, they spent money to buy it....like most everyone does since they can't build engines.

Building 2 engines by hand, the Mod type engine will always be more expensive. The only reason Ford can offer it at the price they do is because it's mass produced.

And can you fit it in a classic by notching shock towers? Yes, but you still compromise the structural rigidity of the upper suspension mounting points, AND with just notching, trying to get headers on or off or spark plus in or out is all but impossible.
Actually, they ran the 10.97 ALL MOTOR - no nitrous. Yes it has bolt-ons (and suspension work). (They ran 10.58 with nitrous.) My post was to show Thumpin455 a non-supercharged bolt-on mod motor that would run with his friend's 11.80s LS since he has never seen one. The new Mustang runs 12.7s off the showroom and get into the 11s pretty easily (with a tune, tires, exhaust work [not headers]).

My $0 reference was to the stock 368 RWHP. And the point still stands - it takes some money to get a 5.0 SBF to make that kind of power, because they came from the factory 150-200 HP short of that. A guy on VMF put a new (stock) 5.0 crate motor in a 66 and it dynoed 400 RWHP with the FRPP tune - out of the box. That's 450 or more at the flywheel. Again, how much money does it take to add 200 HP to a 5.0 SBF? That 5.0 won't be 'stock' and it won't be a bolt-on motor either (unless you consider heads and a cam bolt-ons).

My point about 'building' the engine (and I believe Thumpin455's as well) was to what we have to do to get power of it it, not what it costs Ford to build it. It doesn't cost much to 'build' a 5.0 mod motor you have in your car to get 400 RWHP; it costs quite a bit to get a 5.0 SBF to do that.

Notching the shock towers might compromise strength, but Ford (or Car Craft) did it in the Boss 429s so it's probably not going to cause the car to fall apart. (And the spark plugs on mod motors are on top of the valve covers, like on a hemi.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewmp6 View Post
He I'll take this over any mod motor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgXJD...eature=related
Personally, I'd rather not have that as my daily driver (or at all for that matter).

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewmp6 View Post
But you forget to tell the, above 400hp is all a mod motor can do all motor most need a blower to break in the 500s.
That's not completely accurate. http://forums.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=515518

Sure these motors have a lot of work done to them but (for comparison) so does that 475 RWHP Fox in the youtube video. The top 3 5.4L motors on corral all beat the Fox by 125 HP with less engine (330 ci). The top motor probably makes 800 HP at the crank. Most of these are bigger than 4.6, but the top 4.6 made 501 RWPH (probably 575 FHWP). That's a little beyond 'all a mod motor can do' - 400 HP.

Yes, mod motors do respond to boost. That's probably because they come from the factory so good (heads, cams, intakes, EFI systems) that you can't improve them much with traditional small block mods. (Again, a new 5.0 that makes 150-200 HP more than an old 5.0 has some pretty good factory parts. A 4.6 N/A might have trouble going too far beyond 400 FWHP, but that is smaller than a 289 and it takes a LOT of stuff to get a 289 to 400 net HP, and it won't be nearly as well-mannered. Even the 4.6 2V PI motors made as much real HP as the 'Shelby 289 306 HP K code' back in the day, and that 4.6 is a motor they put in grandma cars.)

I'm not arguing that mod motors are the way (or the only way) to go. But given Ford's run with them (and yes they have had problems from time to time, as they have with all their motors), they aren't junk and are probably here to stay. I doubt Ford is going to bring back the small block for new cars any time soon. (And one of the Mustang magazines referred to the new 5.0 as the best motor Ford has ever made.)

Are there fast SBF's - sure. I can show you fast Hondas! If we're talking about a daily driver (as the OP said), a 5.0 is not a bad motor if he wants to do the work and spend the money. Will it be cheaper and easier to put in a 351C or SBF crate motor -certainly. Would I (personally) want to drive a 475 RWPH 347 as a daily driver, probably not. I'd rather sit at the light with a car that purrs like a kitten and then let the other guy watch my taillights when the light turns green (that is, if I were still inclined to do that sort of thing at my age ). But to each his own.
__________________
Plain Jane 65 Coupe - 284 ci with virtual displacement enhancer
Feature Car in December 2010 StreetScene (the magazine of the National Street Rod Assoc)

Last edited by ozarks06; 01-20-2011 at 09:36 AM.
ozarks06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2011, 01:27 PM   #29
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 67 Mustang Coupe
Location: California
Posts: 10,328
Default

Jeez....where to start...


First, dyno numbers are complete BS 99% of the time. There are actually very few dynos on the PLANET that are properly calibrated and certified to be accurate.... most plain aren't. All these 300this and 400that rwhp numbers are complete garbage in nearly every case. Ignore them, dynos are a tuning tool, nothing more. Case in point the Z06 Vette is an honest 505hp, SAE certified. In a ~3,100lb car it can run deep into the 11's off the show room floor with a good driver. They're ~450rwhp. The 2011 is ~400-500lb heavier which means with an honest 450rwhp it should be going into the mid 11's with ~1.90 60's......and they're not. Not without significant mods at least(ie, getting into the engine with cams etc). Much more than a few bolts ons and a tune.

Second....they did not run 10's on the stock motor. I can guarun-f'g-tee you they did not. They were observed running 10's on the bottle...but later STATED they ran 10.97 on just the engine. By that point the car had been gutted, and had a bunch of other mods, and no one knows what was really up with it. Could it be done n/a? Sure, I've seen a n/a 302 run low 9's on a Powerglide(shifting at over 9k). But it's not anything close to a stock, streetable engine at that point. You're looking at the very least, full bolt ons(easily streetable), a lot of gutting, and a highly aggressive tune that would need race fuel to avoid blowing the engine apart. Yes, the Coyote is an impressive engine, yes the stock 2011's are quick, yes with mods they're quicker. That's true of any car. But to get one into the 10's on just the motor you're looking at close to $10k in mods(or more, so now you're into the car for over $40k) and making it no longer what many would consider streetable.

Third, as far as cost....a SBF 5.0 is cheaper to build, even with heads and everything else. My engine is totally custom with a different rod ratio, lighter internals, heads, custom cam etc etc etc. To have it built by hand it would be close to a $10k crate engine. The Coyote is a mass produced engine where cost is a concern....to build one up by hand to the same level(I will absolutely guarantee you my engine will survive where a Coyote will not) would cost well over $10k. The only reason Ford offers it at the price they do is because it's mass produced, and it's made with cheaper parts(PM rods, hyper pistons etc etc). It was designed from the factory to run as it is....not faster(like the 03/04 Cobra powerplants were....being able to take 2x the power they made). The engine isn't free to build up....you buy the car with it, which is a $30k+ car.

It's far FAR cheaper to build a SBF in a Classic than it is to put a Coyote in one. For the cost of swapping a stock Coyote into a Classic, you could build a rock sold, injected, blown 347 and make and easy 600hp at the crank that would be completely streetable.

And who cares about purring like a kitten at idle? Do you drive the car at idle? What matters is how it runs when you drive it. My car idles with a rumble/chop at ~800rpm. On ~11" of vacuum. At 4,200ft of elevation it idles at ~800rpm....at sea level it idles at ~800rpm.....there's less than a 50rpm idle speed difference across 4k ft of elevation with a carburetor. Hardly poor idle quality or unstreetable. Off idle power is superb. And again, it's on a long rod 302, where a 347 making even more power would be just as streetable or more.

Can a Mod/Coyote be put in a Classic? Sure. Will it run great? Sure. Is it worth the cost involved? Not even close.
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!

Untested 331, lots of suspension, chewing up corners.
67mustang302 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2011, 02:23 PM   #30
ozarks06
2nd Gear Member
 
ozarks06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Vehicle: 1965 Ford Mustang
Location: MO
Posts: 439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67mustang302 View Post
Can a Mod/Coyote be put in a Classic? Sure. Will it run great? Sure. Is it worth the cost involved? Not even close.
I guess that depends on how one defines 'cost involved' and 'worth'.
__________________
Plain Jane 65 Coupe - 284 ci with virtual displacement enhancer
Feature Car in December 2010 StreetScene (the magazine of the National Street Rod Assoc)
ozarks06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2011, 02:23 PM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
1971, 50, 66, 71, bullitt, coyote, engine, mach, mustang, rims, sale, shock, suspension, swap, towers, width

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:52 PM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup