Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > MotorSport > Drag Racing

Drag Racing Discuss Drag Racing here be it dirt or tarmac. Sponsored by Sydney Dragway.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13-01-2008, 06:54 PM   #31
dave289
Banned
 
dave289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: new south wales
Posts: 1,153
Default

Just how good was the e49 r/t charger.A very underated car.To post those times back then from what i beleive is a six cylinder car is very very impresive.
dave289 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 06:56 PM   #32
Campo81
Regular Member
 
Campo81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Kilsyth
Posts: 472
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffo
FPV F6 Typhoon - 13.5 (magazine) 12.7 (real life at the strip)
FPV GT - 13.7 (magazine) 13.3 (real life at the strip)
HSV GTS 307 VE - 13.5 (magazine) 12.9 (real life at the strip)
HSV GTO VZ - 13.0
HSV SV300 - 13.2
Ford Falcon XR8 BA/F - 13.8 (magazine) 13.6 (real life at the strip)
Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo BF - 13.7
Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo BA - 13.9
Ford TE50 AUIII - 14.2 (magazine) 13.6 (real life at the strip)
Ford TE50 AUII & XR8 220kW - 14.3
Ford TE50 AU & XR8 200kW - 14.5
Ford Falcon GT EL - 14.9
Holden Commodore SS VX - 13.9
Holden Commodore SS VY - 13.8
Holden Commodore SS VZ LS1 & 6.0 - 13.7
Holden Commodore SS VE - 13.4

All I can think of for now... will post more when something pops into my head... haha
Did you remember them all or look em up?
Campo81 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 06:56 PM   #33
MethodX
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
MethodX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,198
Default

Ya it was a six. Triple webber Carbs.
On modern rubber they have recorded times in the 13's.
MethodX is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 07:10 PM   #34
Sorted
OzEcruisers PRESIDENT
 
Sorted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbz
Posts: 15,761
Community Builder: In recognition of those who have helped build the AFF community. - Issue reason: For all the contributions you make to the AFF community. 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave289
Just how good was the e49 r/t charger.A very underated car.To post those times back then from what i beleive is a six cylinder car is very very impresive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MethodX
Ya it was a six. Triple webber Carbs.
On modern rubber they have recorded times in the 13's
I can vouch for that
__________________
1994 Ford Fairmont EF NA 6cyl Man 3.9 diff Sedan
PROEF 13.46 @ 105.78mph

Tuned by DYNOMOTIVE

200BUX - AFF Drag Nats 2019 EF Wagon
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednose View Post
Common knowledge that the more weight you take out of the car the less power you need to run the time.
Sorted is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 07:23 PM   #35
dave289
Banned
 
dave289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: new south wales
Posts: 1,153
Default

like i said very underated the e49.look at that 225 kw and 433 nm .0-96 km in 5.1.or is that 6.1?

0-160 kph e49 -14.1
e55-21.2.
dave289 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 07:36 PM   #36
xbgs351
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vic/NSW
Posts: 2,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MethodX
The Corvette ZL1 - With the all aluminium big block.
low 11, high 10's.

http://www.autofacts.ca/classics/FAPC/ZL1Corvette.htm

The Yenko and Baldwin Motion Chevs.
Fast, and worth a packet.
I was going to mention the Yenco 427 Nova. 13.2 seconds for 1/4 and 10's with slicks.
xbgs351 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 07:42 PM   #37
mcnews
Trev
 
mcnews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Was Perth, now country Vic
Posts: 8,017
Technical Contributor: For members who share their technical expertise. - Issue reason: Trev has owned several boosted fords and has really contributed a lot of info on them. His posts in the bike section are also very helpful. I think he should be recognised as a technical contributor. 
Default

I have a Sports Car World magazine from 1972 that said the E49 could get to 100mph and stopped again before a 350 Monaro could get to 100mph :-)

----
paste below
-----


Road Test - Valiant Charger R/T E-49 (Sports Car World October 1972)

The stopwatches don't lie - but it's pretty hard to believe. A 0-100 mph time of 14.1 seconds! That's really flying - and the engine's no thumping V8 nor four cam V12.

It's Chrysler Australia's 4.3-litre in-line six, in a stormer called the Charger RT E49. Chrysler managed to scrape through the supercar furore that killed the phase four HO and Torana V8.

It had the first batch of its Bathurst contenders built before the storm broke, and in the hullabaloo over the GMH and Ford cars somehow the Charger was overlooked. So few people, us included, were prepared for the phenomenal performance of the E49.

It seems incredible that mild (mainly cam grind) changes to last year's E38 engine and the addition of the new four-speed gearbox can have done so much for straight line performance without sacrificing tractability.

The three-speed E38 was a brilliant enough performer, running the standing quarter in 15 seconds with a best of 14.8 and to 100 mph in 16.5 seconds. A Porsche 911S, generally acknowledged as the worlds best six-cylinder performer couldn't even match this time to 100 mph, putting down 17.1 seconds and getting over the quarter in 14.7. So the E49, which is utterly untroubled to lay 14.4 second quarters and record those 14.1 times to 100 mph is in a realm on its own.

Has there ever been a six that went like this? God knows, we thought the Phase Three HO was quick, and its time to 100 mph was 15.2 seconds. What would the Phase Four have done?

With such fantastic performance and with the restrictions that the three-speed gearbox placed on cam work removed, it would not have been unreasonable to expect the E49 to be a fussy, snorting sort of mill, with a power peak that came in like an elevator in the Empire State building.

But not so.

The most immediately noticeable thing about the engine is its tractability. We were hopping from an E38 into the car and getting backwards and forwards while we had it on test, and for low-speed ability there was nothing in it. The only difference came in peak hour traffic jams when the E49s plugs oiled up much more quickly.

On cold mornings it fired consistently with the first twist of the starter, not needing nor having a choke, and pulled smoothly and easily, with never a trace of falter. In fact, so willing was the engine from cold we had to keep reminding ourselves to let it warm up before opening up a bit.

Naturally, the hot six isn't as smooth nor strong at the bottom end as a V8, but it is still alarmingly steady down low. For instance, you can drive round town at a steady 1500 rpm - 30 mph - and never feel the need to change down unless you want hard acceleration. In fact the engine needs to come down close to 1000 rpm before it grumbles at all. Even then, with gentle throttle pressure it will still pull away smoothly enough and still with more strength than most drivers will ever feel.

But in terms relative to this engine, its real oomph begins from around 3000 rpm. That's where you really start to know you're flying, and can see the tacho needle starting to flash around the dial. The engine's maximum 302 bhp is developed at 5400 rpm, with the 320 lb/ft of torque at 4100 rpm.

We picked 5500 rpm as a Working limit, though the car will run past this quite easily if you want to go well into the red. At 5500 the gear maximums are 40, 61 and 85 mph, with a top speed of 112 mph. For the race track, with blue-printed engines, another 1000 rpm can be added to this, so that the car will easily top 130 mph.

Now, with such low maximum performance speeds you can see that in conjunction with the new gearbox Chrysler has used a lower diff ratio. It is 3.5 to one, and quite obviously it's a major reason for the E49 going so hard. This means that as long-legged touring car the Charger has lost some of its appeal but in mountain country and on the race track it's much better than the E38. The new Borg-Warner four-speed box suits the engine very well. The ratios feel particularly pleasant for full-bore performance, bringing the power on a smooth consistent zoom.

The shift itself is nice to use, still a little notchy, but with short throws. Location is excellent, and since the knob must be pushed down before you can slide the stick across to the left and forward for reverse there's no chance of picking it up accidentally.

With the well-spaced ratios and the totally instantaneous performance of the mill, the Charger is a hard-driving motorist's dream on the road. So strong is the top gear pull - take a look at our overtaking times - that down-shifting to power out of corners or overtake isn't necessary unless you really want to fly. That is, take 3.3 seconds (in third) to blast from 70 to 90 mph instead of top's mere 4.9!

I find it difficult to convey just what it's like to drive a car like this really fast. But I believe that unless you are an extremely experienced, capable driver you should not try. That doesn't mean that the Charger is difficult to drive at moderate speeds - it isn't. In fact, it's so fuss-free your mother could puddle back and forwards to the supermarket in it.

By the same token, it's not a particularly pleasant car to meander along in, especially on a winding road. Without the power being squirted on to make the car respond the way it is built to - as a racing car - the steering feels vague and sloppy and you tend to get frustrated because you think you're wandering around on the road too much.

But when the power is wound on hard, either in second, third or top the car responds. It responds beautifully, like a Ferrari or Lamborghini Miura. But you'd better know what you are doing because you will be going so hard you'll get few second chances. You need to know exactly why and how much you should back off the throttle coming into a bend, and what happens when you do.

You need to link gentle throttle movements - remember, you're controlling 302 bhp - to minimal steering wheel movements, and to have the whole lot set up on exactly the right line.

You need to know how and when to brake, and how to use the brakes to advantage to set the car up with the tail kicked out coming into a bend, because there is just so much power hard acceleration out of a 90 mph bend will have you going into the next one at 110, perhaps without realising how rapidly you've accelerated.

In short, you need to understand and be able to manage a big motor car very, very well. If you can't, you'll have little pleasure because it will scare the hell out of you and you'll only be aware of the wasted potential.

However, for someone who does know, the motoring is just magnificent. The car is a racing machine and it acts that way, responding to throttle, brakes and steering quite superbly. We ran 32/30 psi front to rear in the Goodyear Grand Rallies on the wide 7-inch ROH mags and found the selection perfect for the road.

The mildest understeer was detectable on tame or trailing throttle, with power evening this up to neutrality, and then mild power oversteer coming on during full-bore driving.

Roadholding, stability and safety is brilliant - as it should be.

As a test, we backed off sharply in a fairly tight bend at 90 mph. Doing this in some cars would produce an instant spin, or at best require desperate correction. Not so the Charger. The tail moved out fractionally and the nose tucked in to a similar degree, but that was it. Simply, it's just superbly stable and safe from this point of view.

Brakes on our car were not good. To make the pedal easier to push for road use, Chrysler had fitted the test car with a power booster. But the linings and pads had not been uprated accordingly and they were flat out to stop the car in 145 ft from 60 mph. They faded badly too. We'd have preferred the standard, unassisted picks even though they require big pressures to work.

To go with the new performance Chrysler has uprated the Charger's rear springs from 120 psi to 160 psi. This has stiffened the ride slightly, but it is still quite good for open road touring, and the benefits instability and handling are obvious.

There is some axle hop over heavy bumps but you quickly learn to allow for that.

The driving position annoys many people because the wheel is big and slopes slightly towards the right. Pedal layout is good except that the toe-and-heeling should be improved. And the dipswitch location is poor.

The Chargers instruments are small, but easy to see. The tacho, from normal production models, is red-lined unrealistically at 5000 rpm - 4000 below maximum bhp. Once again we noticed that the oil pressure gauge was unreliable, often oscillating furiously. The tacho on our car was also dangerously inaccurate, reading 4500 rpm at a genuine 5500 rpm.

The Charger does have spotlights mounted in its grille, but they're not good enough for the performance.

Trumpet horns are a sensible fitting, though.

Personally, we dislike inertia reel seatbelts in a performance car - you want to be held infirmly. The upper belt location is poor in the Charger too, so that the belt cuts into the back of your neck. The seats both front and rear are very good.

This particular Charger was the second we have had with a badly out-of-balance tail shaft, too. This set up a frightful vibration above 100 mph. Chrysler has a problem with them. Let's hope it's sorted out soon - a dropped shaft in such a high performer could be disastrous.

The fuel tank in the test car was the small 17.5 galloner, not the 35-gallon race job. Fuel consumption was surprisingly low for the performance. Running the test track figures dropped it to a worst of 13.8. On the open road you easily get 15 mpg.

Such is the incredible E49, a road-going racer and a damned good one at that.

It's excitement to the extreme, a high-performer that will probably set the outright six-cylinder performance standards for a long, long time.

Specifications

Make Chrysler
Model Valiant Charger E49
Price $4300
Weight 3010 lb
Fuel Consumption
Overall 13.8 mpg
Cruising 15-17 mpg
Acceleration
0-60mph 6.1 sec
0-100mph 14.1 sec
Quarter Mile 14.4 sec

P.S. The best 'drivers' car I have ever driven.
__________________
Trev
(FPV FG II GT-E thus the fully loaded burger with the lot as standard +Alpine/Dynamat fitout - 2 of only 4 ever made GT-E factory 9" rear rims - Michelin Pilot Supersports - Shockworks Suspension)
mcnews is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 07:42 PM   #38
4Vman
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
4Vman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14,654
Default

I wish they tested the Phase 3 with the 3.9 ratio diff, its an easy 13 second car with the short ratio. Still, 14.1 from the 3.25 rear wasn't bad considering the aweful traction problems it had with the aquaskids..



__________________
335 S/C GT: The new KING of Australian made performance cars..
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 07:44 PM   #39
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Campo81
Did you remember them all or look em up?
Remember them all.

That's just the tip of the iceberg... :
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 07:52 PM   #40
Falc'man
You dig, we stick!
 
Falc'man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Vman
I wish they tested the Phase 3 with the 3.9 ratio diff, its an easy 13 second car with the short ratio. Still, 14.1 from the 3.25 rear wasn't bad considering the aweful traction problems it had with the aquaskids..
Is it true that a forum member did 12.9s with with his Fairmont that had an HO spec motor?

Can't remember where, but I read it here somewhere.
__________________
"....You don't put the car through engineering" - Rod Barrett.
Falc'man is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 08:01 PM   #41
4Vman
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
4Vman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14,654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Falc'man
Is it true that a forum member did 12.9s with with his Fairmont that had an HO spec motor?

Can't remember where, but I read it here somewhere.
A friend has done a 13.8 with his phase 3 with 3.5 rear and std spec HO Motor, the only difference was modern tyres.
The HO is deceptively heavy too, at 3600lbs its nearly 600lbs heavier than the E49, that's like carrying 3 extra people in the car.



__________________
335 S/C GT: The new KING of Australian made performance cars..
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 08:14 PM   #42
Sorted
OzEcruisers PRESIDENT
 
Sorted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbz
Posts: 15,761
Community Builder: In recognition of those who have helped build the AFF community. - Issue reason: For all the contributions you make to the AFF community. 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Vman
A friend has done a 13.8 with his phase 3 with 3.5 rear and std spec HO Motor, the only difference was modern tyres.
The HO is deceptively heavy too, at 3600lbs its nearly 600lbs heavier than the E49, that's like carrying 3 extra people in the car.
Your forget to mention the HO has:-
2 extra cylinders
86 more Cubes
1.46 more Litres

if 100kgs is .1 of a second what is 600lbs? I am not that old so I dont understand lbs..........
__________________
1994 Ford Fairmont EF NA 6cyl Man 3.9 diff Sedan
PROEF 13.46 @ 105.78mph

Tuned by DYNOMOTIVE

200BUX - AFF Drag Nats 2019 EF Wagon
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednose View Post
Common knowledge that the more weight you take out of the car the less power you need to run the time.
Sorted is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 08:15 PM   #43
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRHEMI
Your forget to mention the HO has:-
2 extra cylinders
86 more Cubes
1.46 more Litres

if 100kgs is .1 of a second what is 600lbs? I am not that old so I dont understand lbs..........
600lbs = 272.72kg.
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 08:26 PM   #44
4Vman
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
4Vman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14,654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRHEMI
Your forget to mention the HO has:-
2 extra cylinders
86 more Cubes
1.46 more Litres

if 100kgs is .1 of a second what is 600lbs? I am not that old so I dont understand lbs..........
600lbs or 270kgs is an enourmous handicap to carry.. but really the Charger was more a mid sized coupe, the Falcon is a Large 4 door sedan.
Allot of people also forget that the true year of manufacture model competitor to the Phase 3 was actually the 1971 E38...
The 1972 E49 was Chryslers answer to the Phase 3, the Phase 4 would have been the correct 72 model for comparrison, but as we know it didnt really eventuate.



__________________
335 S/C GT: The new KING of Australian made performance cars..
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:12 PM   #45
Bossxr8
Peter Car
 
Bossxr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
Default

112 mph top speed. Thats not really that high is it compared to the HO. What was the HO's top speed, 225 kph I think. Whats that in miles.

Anyone know what the power to weight ratios are between them.
Bossxr8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:19 PM   #46
CAT600
I miss my wheelbarrow
Donating Member3
 
CAT600's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bluestreak Performance
Posts: 11,500
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: Always willing to help out fellow AFF members... Technical Contributor: For members who share their technical expertise. - Issue reason: Daniels knowledge of modular engines and superchargers is extremely valuable to the AFF community. I have learnt quite a bit just reading his build threads. His contributions are often utilised by other members. 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnews
I have a Sports Car World magazine from 1972 ..............
$h!t, Who pushed Mr Hedges button? Now we'll never hear the end of it.

Just joking Trev.

Daniel
CAT600 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:25 PM   #47
GTPete
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
GTPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 1,026
Default

This is Ford Forums Aus could we at least have the PH3 first on the list.
GTPete is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:28 PM   #48
HEMI POWER
N/A BOSS 390+
 
HEMI POWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,648
Default

Best recorded times for the PHASE 3 was 14.7, but it wasn't geared for the 1/4 when tested .The Phase 2 was the quickest down the 1/4 in the Ford camp with a best time of 14.4.The Charger ran a best recorded time of 14.2 making it the quickest car down the 1/4 mile out of any Australian muscle car in it's time.A friend of mine also has an RPO 83 with similiar specs as a Phase 3, gearing at the time of testing was 3.5's he could only manage a best time of 14.5 on pretty good rubber.Maybe in the best conditions and a perfect launch a 13 sec pass might of been achieved by the mighty HO's.


Alex.
__________________
WOOOOOOOOOO
FPV GT 03 /341 RWKW OF N/A POWER.
XB GT 73 /OLD FORD MUSCLE
ALL AUSSIE MUSCLE

Last edited by HEMI POWER; 13-01-2008 at 10:38 PM.
HEMI POWER is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:36 PM   #49
HEMI POWER
N/A BOSS 390+
 
HEMI POWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossxr8
112 mph top speed. Thats not really that high is it compared to the HO. What was the HO's top speed, 225 kph I think. Whats that in miles.

Anyone know what the power to weight ratios are between them.
The Chrysler 6 never really had much punch up top but it was a weapon down low.My youngest bros has a VG Pacer with a E-49 spec engine 3.9 gears and runs 13.0 sec over the 1/4 in full street trim.By memory his MPH was very low though but had a great 660 time.
__________________
WOOOOOOOOOO
FPV GT 03 /341 RWKW OF N/A POWER.
XB GT 73 /OLD FORD MUSCLE
ALL AUSSIE MUSCLE
HEMI POWER is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:36 PM   #50
SPK-250
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
SPK-250's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Christies Beach
Posts: 964
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTS_300_Coupe
America had all the fastest muscle cars, I remember reading somewhere there were 3 muscle cars from 1969 -1975 that ran 10 second 1/4 miles from the factory stock.
The 1970 Chevelle SS 454 LS6 was the most powerful and fastest at 450hp and was capable of 13.7 on the standing 1/4 mile. If only the Monte Carlo of the Same year had the same engine it would have been a gun as they are some 200-300 lbs lighter than a Chevelle.

Actually the Plymouth Road Runner had 440ci and weighed only around 3400lbs and could do the quarter in 13.5 secs.
__________________
What would forum's be without post whoring know it all's.........
SPK-250 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:36 PM   #51
Bossxr8
Peter Car
 
Bossxr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HEMI POWER
Best recorded times for the PHASE 3 was 14.7, but it wasn't geared for the 1/4 when tested .The Phase 2 was the quickest down the 1/4 in the Ford camp with a best time of 14.4.The Charger ran a best recorded time of 14.2 making it the quickest car down the 1/4 mile out of any Australian muscle car in it's time.A friend of mine also has an RPO 83 with similiar specs as a Phase 3, gearing at the time of testing was 3.5's he could only manage a best time of 14.5 on pretty good rubber.Maybe in the best conditions and a perfect launch a 13 sec pass might of been achieved by the mighty HO's.


Alex.
The Phase 3 had the quickest time of 14.4, not the phase 2.
Bossxr8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:40 PM   #52
HEMI POWER
N/A BOSS 390+
 
HEMI POWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossxr8
The Phase 3 had the quickest time of 14.4, not the phase 2.
Don't think so.The phase 2 was better geared than the phase 3 for any 0-100 or 1/4 mile figure out of the factory.Thats why the Phase 2 was marginally quicker.
Most p3's had the 3.25's fitted.By memory 200 units were fitted with these and 50 fitted with the 3.5's and the other 50 was with the 3.9's.
__________________
WOOOOOOOOOO
FPV GT 03 /341 RWKW OF N/A POWER.
XB GT 73 /OLD FORD MUSCLE
ALL AUSSIE MUSCLE

Last edited by HEMI POWER; 13-01-2008 at 10:48 PM.
HEMI POWER is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 13-01-2008, 10:55 PM   #53
56L
a.k.a PAULY
 
56L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: southern highlands
Posts: 1,112
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HEMI POWER
Don't think so.The phase 2 was better geared than the phase 3 for any 0-100 or 1/4 mile figure out of the factory.Thats why the Phase 2 was marginally quicker.
Most p3's had the 3.25's fitted.By memory 200 units were fitted with these and 50 fitted with the 3.5's and the other 50 was with the 3.9's.
Correct me i am wrong but the phrase two had no rev limiter so it could punch past the phrase 3,s 6150rpm or there abouts rev limiter
__________________
2002 silhouette pursuit 250 manual,brembos, 3.73,s
2002 blue print pursuit 250 in restoration
1995 WMW250(CR250) dirtbike fully road registered
1947 ford thames tipper V8 21 stud flat head
1939 ford beer barrel truck V8 24 stud flat head
HZJ diesel ute
HJ47 diesel ute
56L is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 14-01-2008, 05:26 AM   #54
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossxr8
The Phase 3 had the quickest time of 14.4, not the phase 2.
Phase II did 14.4.
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 14-01-2008, 07:55 AM   #55
merlin
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
merlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,974
Default

I don't have any link to back this up but I do recall a magazine article where they tested some of those 12-13 second cars back from the 60's and 70's and found the main thing holding them back was the tyre technology. Fitted with today's tyres many of them managed 10's.
__________________
1966 Ford Mustang coupe. 347 stroker, PA reverse manual C4, TCE high stall converter, B&M Pro Ratchet, Edelbrock alum heads, Edelbrock intake manifold, MSD ignition, Holley Street HP 750 CFM carb, gilmer drive, wrapped Hooker Super Comp Headers, dual 3" straight through exhaust, Bilstein shocks, custom springs, full poly suspension, American Racing rims, Open Tracker roller spring saddles and shelby drop.

Still to go - Holley Sniper EFI with integrated fuel cell.
merlin is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 14-01-2008, 08:36 AM   #56
4Vman
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
4Vman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14,654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossxr8
112 mph top speed. Thats not really that high is it compared to the HO. What was the HO's top speed, 225 kph I think. Whats that in miles.

Anyone know what the power to weight ratios are between them.
225kph is 135mph, that's with the 3.25 diff and 6150 rev limiter that was its top speed (due to the limiter), they disconnected the rev limiter at bathurst and i think from memory they were around the 240kph (145mph) mark down conrod in 71, by 72 (improved production rules) i think they were closer to 160mph..



__________________
335 S/C GT: The new KING of Australian made performance cars..
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 14-01-2008, 08:47 AM   #57
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Vman
225kph is 135mph, that's with the 3.25 diff and 6150 rev limiter that was its top speed (due to the limiter), they disconnected the rev limiter at bathurst and i think from memory they were around the 240kph (145mph) mark down conrod in 71, by 72 (improved production rules) i think they were closer to 160mph..
But wrong with the miles per hour there.

225km/h is 140mph

240km/h is 149mph
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 14-01-2008, 08:48 AM   #58
4Vman
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
4Vman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14,654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffo
But wrong with the miles per hour there.

225km/h is 140mph

240km/h is 149mph
First day back at work... coffee hasnt kicked in yet!!!



__________________
335 S/C GT: The new KING of Australian made performance cars..
4Vman is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 14-01-2008, 09:00 AM   #59
Steffo
LPG > You
 
Steffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4Vman
First day back at work... coffee hasnt kicked in yet!!!
Mmmm... coffee...
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1.

:
Steffo is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 14-01-2008, 10:05 AM   #60
sleekism
1999 Ford Fairmont Ghia
 
sleekism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NSW
Posts: 1,162
Default

Does anybody know what the XE Falcon Turbos ran???

What about the GTHO Phase5????

From memort the Plymouth Roadrunner with the 426 Hemi ran low 13's and then with modern tyres ran low 11's.

My mechanic has a Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS454 I wonder what times it ran??
sleekism is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Reply


Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 09:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL