FoxRod

Ummmmm.................. no offense but do you realize that 4 cyl back in 89-93 only had like 90 hp. In fact, Honda just broke the 90 hp range a few years ago. Our cars (foxes) are anywhere from 13 to 17 years old. Back then 225 was a pretty decent amount. A stock Fox would keep up with stock Porsche's back then. THat's why police used them for highway patrol. So don't turn your nose up on the 225 because back then it was a pretty good number. Not to mention that our cars take mods very good.

odogg88

maverick771

Very few mustangs with MINOR changes will run with the 60's and 70's Mopar cars with the 426 hemi or the 440... Mopar was the best of the best back in the old days.. its like that commercial said to beat one you had to own one.... LOL before someone says something about my age (i saw this commercial on a flashback thing on speed tv)

myshifter

I wouldnt go that far

JD1969

Tires were a huge limiting factor back then. Those Hemi cars and other legendary big block cars were mostly 13 second cars with a few special cars that ran faster ( the 68 Hemi SS Dart comes to mind). So a slightly modded fox could have run with your average 60's era muscle car, now put a good tire and a few mods on the old car and it's a different story. But a warmed over fox in the 13's was not uncommon

Twisted

Yeah, I realize that. I was exaggerating for dramatic reasons. My real question was: Why not 350hp from the factory like the old musclecars. By the way, thanks for all the replies folks. And thanks for the good info. Yeah, 225 was a lot for the 80's--but ironically not for the 60s. I guess emissions did have a lot to do with the power cuts of the 70s and 80s. Fuel economy as well. I asked because I started thinking about the musclecars of the 60s, and got a little *****-shy over my 5.0. But no doubt, those cars were hard daily drivers. I guess since I can't afford heads and a cam, I'm mad that my car didn't come with hot ones from the factory. Anyway, thanks again for the insights.[sm=smiley20.gif]

Ecstasy

you also forgot to mention that mustang has its unique sound like none other. also a stock fox HO has 290 tq i believe? correct me if im wrong. plus the gas issue in the 70's and keep in mind this is years ago. not to mention yea the new 4 cylinders have 100-180 hp but whats their tq? 125? 90? not to mention that the new gts have 270+ if im not mistaken.

P Zero

All of you think thats bad lemme give ya a lil history lesson about the Foxbody. 1979 First year of the fox,302 149hp stock along with a 2bbl,single exhaust and a 4spd. In 1980 and 1981 there were no 5.0's at all, they used a 255 in its place. In 1982 they brought the 302 back, I believe the hp stayed @ a pathetic 149 or so. In 1983 they upgraded the cosmetics of the car added a 4bbl, a better cam and the first gen of T-5 trannies, I think this upped the hp to 205. No change for 1984. In 1985 they redesigned the body again, changed the 4bbl to a holley/motocraft carb, better cam, header style exhaust manifolds, dual exhaust, upped the HP to 215 for the 5spds, automatics came with CFI, different heads, worse cam and the HP output was only 205. In 1986 all GT's came with CFI and really crappy heads HP across the board was 205.
So the 225 number that stayed with it form 1987 -93 was not a bad figure at all considering the first one only had 149.
-P.

anthonydalrymple

Because the old muclecars were rated differently. Some were under rated to avoid the "new for the time" higher insurance rates due the rapid increases in horsespower of factory vehicles. The rating system of the time was basically flywheel horsepower without any acessories. Think engine dyno....
In '71; the BHP rating system was instigated; full acessories on the motor horsepower rating. Keep in mind that the factory can rate the motors or fudge the numbers to an extent in any manor they choose in thier attempt to sell cars & keep the insurance companies at bay(even too this very day).....IMHO

Twisted

Thanks for the history, Pzero and Anthony. Good info.[sm=smiley20.gif]