|
| FLASH |
|
|||
|
I agree totally, a Ford "type" body whether it be fiberglass or not should have a Ford engine.
Anything else is just not cricket.
_________________ FALCAHOLIC |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Scaffy |
|
|||
|
So we don't call it a '33 Ford coupe then. It's just a hotrod. A '33 bodied hotrod. Maybe a '33 Chevroford? I guess there are many people out there who don't give a s**t. Happy to call their vehicle a Ford with Chevy running gear. It's crap and it s**t me... I might go and post my displeasure on another forum!
_________________ Trickflow Street Heat top end kit, 70mm BBK TB & EGR, 24lb injectors, Underdrives & 3.73s: 275rwhp - 13.15@105mph NA / 12.37@116mph N20 |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| RAM |
|
|||
Age: 39 Posts: 255 Joined: 21st Feb 2007 Ride: BA MkII XR8 and XE Sedan 351 Location: St Clair |
It is a shame so many rodders put chev in their Ford hot rods.Although in the last year or so i have noticed at car shows and drag meets more and more Ford motors put into Ford rods,which is good to see,people have finally seen the light.Ive also seen Chev rods with Ford motors and Dodge rods with Ford motors,its pretty common to mix and match combos like that.
When i went to the hot rod Nationals this year at Goulburn i noticed much more Ford motors sitting between the chassis rails of many 28's, 32's,34's and especially the t-buckets.
_________________ BRING BACK THE CLEVELAND!!!
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| green car |
|
||
|
Scaffy wrote: So we don't call it a '33 Ford coupe then. It's just a hotrod. A '33 bodied hotrod. Maybe a '33 Chevroford? I guess there are many people out there who don't give a s**t. Happy to call their vehicle a Ford with Chevy running gear. It's crap and it s**t me... I might go and post my displeasure on another forum! Hey dude theres no need to get your undies in a twist 
_________________ 165 Killer Wasps all packaged in a green kmart car, almost an explorer in a way... |
||
| Top | |
||
| XR9UTE |
|
||
|
Scaffy wrote: So we don't call it a '33 Ford coupe then. It's just a hotrod. A '33 bodied hotrod. Maybe a '33 Chevroford? I guess there are many people out there who don't give a s**t. Happy to call their vehicle a Ford with Chevy running gear. It's crap and it s**t me... I might go and post my displeasure on another forum! Too Right Scaff! Certain Ford magazines seem to think it's alright to show Fords powered by boatanchors too! THEY ARE NOT REAL FORD MAGAZINES!!!!! |
||
| Top | |
||
| elrob |
|
||
|
the reason i would go for a turbo six is so i could drive it everyday
i am probably being a bit biased on this subject (gm motors in fords)because i seen a ford anglia rodded out and had a toyota turbo 6 in it
|
||
| Top | |
||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
XR9UTE wrote: tickford_6 wrote: we're doing a long term rebuild on a 'ford' rod. not that ANY part of it ever came from a ford factory. It will have 350SBC in it. Why, because thats what was in it, the starter is on the passenger side and the trans is there to go with it. The only thing that s**t me about it is the dizzy placement and oil filter placement, the old engine had a blower on it and it made it very hard to get at the dizzy. the new engine will have a tunnel ram, so will make it easier. As far as i care, it's a hotrod, for never built any of it, so i see no reason why it should have a ford engine. Not all hotrods are fibreglass copies! So use a 351 with a gearbox from a 5.0 Falcon! Dizzy at front! Starter on passenger side! See....still no f**k excuse! It would mean having to buy an engine and a trans and getting a new tail shaft made. New headers new ignition system, it's not as simple as just an engine It's alreadt set up for a chev. |
||
| Top | |
||
| XR9UTE |
|
||
|
You said "the new engine" which means you had chance to buy a Ford engine and didn't.
NO MORE EXCUSES!!!! |
||
| Top | |
||
| bfhoon |
|
|||
|
i did the right thing with my 39 ford, i put in an au 5.0 and gearbox.
_________________ bf xr6turbo siemens injectors, full plazmaman 800 hp intercooler kit, 5 inch cat and custom dual 2.5 inch zorst, billet flywheel with mal wood clutch kit, braided hoses, big brakes, 3.2L surge tank/w twin 044's rebuilt motor with forged and billet everything 420+ rwkw on 98. holden killer. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Scaffy |
|
|||
|
green car wrote: Scaffy wrote: So we don't call it a '33 Ford coupe then. It's just a hotrod. A '33 bodied hotrod. Maybe a '33 Chevroford? I guess there are many people out there who don't give a s**t. Happy to call their vehicle a Ford with Chevy running gear. It's crap and it s**t me... I might go and post my displeasure on another forum! Hey dude theres no need to get your undies in a twist Haha... they're bunched so far up my a***, I think I may need a coathanger to get them out! I'm sure you'd agree with me Shannon. elrob - Why wouldn't you be able to drive it every day if it had an 8 in it? You want big power in either, then they're both going to have a pretty hefty fuel bill. If you intend on keeping them very mild, then I doubt an 8 would use much more fuel than a turbo 6. Personally, I think the hotrod would need that lumpy v8 sound to sound right.
_________________ Trickflow Street Heat top end kit, 70mm BBK TB & EGR, 24lb injectors, Underdrives & 3.73s: 275rwhp - 13.15@105mph NA / 12.37@116mph N20 |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
XR9UTE wrote: You said "the new engine" which means you had chance to buy a Ford engine and didn't. NO MORE EXCUSES!!!! it the new everything els to go with it thats the problem. Besides we've done CA18s, FJ20s, ford 2L ohc, iron headed clevo, alloy headed clevo, clevo headed windsor 428cu 1000hp is fun, (obviously none of them in hotrods) seems like playing with a SBC is the next step. There is around the workshop of tunnel ram, twin carbs and twin turbos. we'll see i guess |
||
| Top | |
||
| XCMUZ |
|
||
|
tickford_6 wrote: XR9UTE wrote: You said "the new engine" which means you had chance to buy a Ford engine and didn't. NO MORE EXCUSES!!!! it the new everything els to go with it thats the problem. Besides we've done CA18s, FJ20s, ford 2L ohc, iron headed clevo, alloy headed clevo, clevo headed windsor 428cu 1000hp is fun, (obviously none of them in hotrods) seems like playing with a SBC is the next step. There is around the workshop of tunnel ram, twin carbs and twin turbos. we'll see i guess Tickford_6, why would anyone use one of those boat anchor pieces or crap for their pride and joy? Is is a momentay lapse of judgement or just plain old fukwidditty? |
||
| Top | |
||
| Fitter |
|
||
|
I am building a 40 pickup with a blown cleveland in it and it is very tight!!
Everyone said put a chev in it and I have to admit it would have been easier mainly with the bump in the sump at the back on the chev motors giving a lot more room around the crossmember (HK in my case) for steering. I had to run a bronco sump and lift the motor a bit to clear my rack. Also old gmc blowers clear dizzys at the back better than at the front(I am having to do an angle drive dizzy which is a bit of mucking around!!). But at least my dizzy will be easy to get to!! I dont know about building them chevs used to be cheap not so sure now!! Fitter |
||
| Top | |
||
| elrob |
|
||
|
scaffy wrote:
elrob - Why wouldn't you be able to drive it every day if it had an 8 in it? You want big power in either, then they're both going to have a pretty hefty fuel bill. If you intend on keeping them very mild, then I doubt an 8 would use much more fuel than a turbo 6. Personally, I think the hotrod would need that lumpy v8 sound to sound right. my answer: you cant tell me v8 would use the same fuel as a turbo 6 off boost(cruising).the six would win hands down ,not to mention cheaper running cost eg:rego and general maintence why would the fuel bill be hefty with a turbo six just think of a xr6t motor and box in a car that weights at least 500-600 kg less than a ba/bf.wouldn't that be more fuel efficient not to mention alot fast down the quarter on the stock engine thats my 2c |
||
| Top | |
||
| Vic |
|
|||
|
elrob wrote: my answer: you cant tell me v8 would use the same fuel as a turbo 6 off boost(cruising).the six would win hands down ,not to mention cheaper running cost eg:rego and general maintence why would the fuel bill be hefty with a turbo six just think of a xr6t motor and box in a car that weights at least 500-600 kg less than a ba/bf.wouldn't that be more fuel efficient not to mention alot fast down the quarter on the stock engine thats my 2c Why would you own a hot rod if fuel usage was an issue? It's one of the least considerations when owning or driving a hot rod. The whole 70 year history of hot rods is sticking a V8 in it and rumbling about the place and as such sticking anything less in it invalidates the whole persona of owning and driving a hot rod.
_________________ 5.6L of carbon footprint. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 15 guests |
