Some "Dime Rockets" for the 4TH!

[cicero819]

Grassroots Motorsport Magazine has had a challenge for the past few years called the Grassroot challenge and depending on the year this challenge falls upon you can not spend more than the year, this year the participants cannot spend more than $2011 for their build. We should start the same Challenge called build a stocker for less than $5.999.99. I'm sure that we could get enough sponsors to make it a fun event. Claude

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by cicero819

Grassroots Motorsport Magazine has had a challenge for the past few years called the Grassroot challenge and depending on the year this challenge falls upon you can not spend more than the year, this year the participants cannot spend more than $2011 for their build. We should start the same Challenge called build a stocker for less than $5.999.99. I'm sure that we could get enough sponsors to make it a fun event. Claude

Cool Thread Here !

Be kind of cool to see if someone could build a Stocker for under 5-6K.

I just bought a 4 cyl. 90 Mustang Coupe with the intent in turning it into a N/SA 5.0 stocker. I am going to claim it as an '89 tho.

I paid a bit too much for it @ $ 1,800, but it all there and clean, so I have 4K to go.....LOL
As posted earlier, 8.8 rears are cheap for these cars, as well as engine components.
I have everything already (used parts of course). Just need to freshen up the shortblock.

I looked at the '86 T-Bird 5.0 combo, but as posted earlier, the heads are restictive and it is factored too high @ 205. The 89 Mustang factored @ 215 is a better choice considering the heads and upper intake are better. Cam too I think, but not sure tho.

[mtkawboy]

Me & 2 buddies built a P/S 59 Chevy Biscayne 283/185 4 speed 45 years ago in 1966 for $600 including the $45 car which amounts to $4484.52 today. That took home made headers & max scrounging back then. It sounds like a tough challenge to me. Id love to see someone do it

[goinbroke2]

Jason, DO IT!!!
(I'll have to live vicariously through you hehehe)

Almack, tried and true yes a 89 notch is a good choice. I could swap noses on my 83 and go fuelie but I like carbs...yeah that's a dumb excuse but it's all I got.

Speaking of which, the earlier foxes are lighter than the later, would it bounce in tech if the 89 nose and tailights are on it but the interior and vin are 83? Just thinking, lighter body so I could swap weight around better than a true 89.

I just picked up a 460 last weekend but it's a 79...not in the guide. I was told it was out of a 78, and was thinking S/GTB for IHRA. Getting so damn many engines in the garage I'm going to have to do SOMETHING! LOL

Originally Posted by goinbroke2

Jason, DO IT!!!
(I'll have to live vicariously through you hehehe)

Almack, tried and true yes a 89 notch is a good choice. I could swap noses on my 83 and go fuelie but I like carbs...yeah that's a dumb excuse but it's all I got.

Speaking of which, the earlier foxes are lighter than the later, would it bounce in tech if the 89 nose and tailights are on it but the interior and vin are 83? Just thinking, lighter body so I could swap weight around better than a true 89.

I just picked up a 460 last weekend but it's a 79...not in the guide. I was told it was out of a 78, and was thinking S/GTB for IHRA. Getting so damn many engines in the garage I'm going to have to do SOMETHING! LOL

I don't think I have a choice now...If its bound to be then its up to me....

I pick up the car in two weeks from the Friday, already called him, the pistons "cp" and now pondering clutch set up for an effecient set up per the 320 HP I plan to make @ 6100 rpm.....That will do the trick..

All other avenues are covered cause I'm a cnc machinist programmer with all the machines available....
I'm not a Ford guy at all but, the thread is too inspiring... Billy knows what he is talking about too..

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by goinbroke2

Jason, DO IT!!!
(I'll have to live vicariously through you hehehe)

Almack, tried and true yes a 89 notch is a good choice. I could swap noses on my 83 and go fuelie but I like carbs...yeah that's a dumb excuse but it's all I got.

Speaking of which, the earlier foxes are lighter than the later, would it bounce in tech if the 89 nose and tailights are on it but the interior and vin are 83? Just thinking, lighter body so I could swap weight around better than a true 89.

I just picked up a 460 last weekend but it's a 79...not in the guide. I was told it was out of a 78, and was thinking S/GTB for IHRA. Getting so damn many engines in the garage I'm going to have to do SOMETHING! LOL

Your 83 would be legal as long as the interior and exterior looked like an '89. They don't check vins.

Last year, I bought a rolling chassis '91 Mustang Coupe with a 10 pt cage, spooled rear, and drag suspension and picked up parts to build a 1974 460 (the best 460 year choice) with a Thermoquad.
Got the correct intake and fitted the 460 to fit under the stock hood using the stock k-member.
Since I want to go combo racing in the 1/4, the closest 1/4 mile track won't allow IHRA Stock GT cars to run.
So, the project has been put on hold.
Thus the idea for the N/SA 89 coupe.
My 95 H/PS I will run combo races at the 1/8th mile track near here.

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by ALMACK

Cool Thread Here !

Be kind of cool to see if someone could build a Stocker for under 5-6K.

I just bought a 4 cyl. 90 Mustang Coupe with the intent in turning it into a N/SA 5.0 stocker. I am going to claim it as an '89 tho.

I paid a bit too much for it @ $ 1,800, but it all there and clean, so I have 4K to go.....LOL
As posted earlier, 8.8 rears are cheap for these cars, as well as engine components.
I have everything already (used parts of course). Just need to freshen up the shortblock.

I looked at the '86 T-Bird 5.0 combo, but as posted earlier, the heads are restictive and it is factored too high @ 205. The 89 Mustang factored @ 215 is a better choice considering the heads and upper intake are better. Cam too I think, but not sure tho.

It's 200 hp.
I think you are succumbing to street or internet forum thrash talk about the 86 motor.
Look at it this way: The later 215 has to carry 240 more pounds in it in P/SA .Do you think the later improvements will carry that much extra weight with same short block, cam and throttle body?
I don't.

[ALMACK]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

It's 200 hp.
I think you are succumbing to street or internet forum thrash talk about the 86 motor.
Look at it this way: The later 215 has to carry 240 more pounds in it in P/SA .Do you think the later improvements will carry that much extra weight with same short block, cam and throttle body?
I don't.

My fault. I was looking at an old classification sheet. You are correct, right now it is 200 hp.

[goinbroke2]

74 is the best year Alan? figures, I got a 76 and a 79.
How did you get the BB to fit under the stock hood? Did you shim the k-frame? (another question would be, is that legal even if you didn't do it?)

[Hemiparts]

this is by far one of the best threads i have ever read on here. It's got my mind going, we have several old Grand Cherokee's around the dealership that have been abandoned, and we just pulled out a 6 cylinder last week that is right for a build up. A 98 Grand 2wd with a Dana 44 posi-trac rear with a "Hot" 6cyl... Look out Piedmont Stk/SS here we come!!!

Chris