|
edit: He said he'll take $5,000. Hes been driving it for 6-7 years, wants to sell for some farm equipment. He mentioned there was an oil leak at one point that he fixed, it was some loose bolts at the valve cover. No issues that arent cosmetic. He said that someone else came to look at the car and thought that the grab point for the clutch seems a little higher than usual. Said it might be adjustable, but that it still grabs just fine. H2SO4 posted:WHY HAVENT YOU BOUGHT THAT CAPRI YET Cage fucked around with this message at 20:36 on May 10, 2017 |
#
?
May 10, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
Hell yeah. Just looked at the pics on my PC instead of my phone and it looks awesome. I picked up my Maverick for a bit under that.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
replace the whole transmission for $2k https://lmr.com/item/M7003ZK/1983-93-Mustang-T5-World-Class-Transmission-Kit-M-7003-Z
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Rolo posted:Oof that's pretty. If you have trouble working around a fox body engine compartment then you'll have trouble working on pretty much any car in the world. It doesn't get much easier.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:If you have trouble working around a fox body engine compartment then you'll have trouble working on pretty much any car in the world. It doesn't get much easier. Shoulda just GIS's the engine compartment. Derp!
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Told the guy I would take it, pending a satisfactory test drive. Unless someone offers him $5,500 I suppose.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
Is that the same four speed they used with the 2.3 contemporary? If so, I had fun with it. It's not like greatest gearbox in the world or anything, but I wouldn't imagine you're expecting that in this car. It worked well, has a decent if heavy feel.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
And it's not like you can't get a T-5 in fair condition for $150 on craigslist if you hate the 4-speed. It's a dead simple swap.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
Cage posted:He said that someone else came to look at the car and thought that the grab point for the clutch seems a little higher than usual. Said it might be adjustable, but that it still grabs just fine. That's pretty common on the foxes. I bought a BBK adjustable clutch cable kit and it was easy to adjust.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
I figured, thats good to hear. The plan is to see him on Sat and take it for a test drive. As long as everything seems okay Ill take it. Anything specific to these cars I should look at closely? It will have to make the 1.5 hour trip back home which doesn't sound like it'll be an issue. Ive never delt with drum brakes before either but the car doesn't go that fast so not too worried. I know there will be a bunch of rear disc conversions out there anyway. Other notes: 4 lug wheels and 14 inch wheels. 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Cage posted:Ive never delt with drum brakes before either but the car doesn't go that fast so not too worried. I know there will be a bunch of rear disc conversions out there anyway. I was going to say, modding any Fox car is pretty much easy-mode because they're simple and insanely well supported in the aftermarket. In terms of braking performance, rear drums are fine for that car as it sits. You'll cook the front discs long before you toast the rears. They are just enough of a pain to maintain to be worth getting rid of.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Possible danger? Found this old fordmuscle.com "classified of the day" type article for this car and it looks like it was from August of last year when he was trying to sell it for 10k. It mentions something that isnt quite in todays ad: http://www.fordmuscle.com/news/dare-to-be-different-with-this-1983-mercury-capri-rs-5-0/ ebay ad posted:“It would be fair to call this car ‘restored’ however there is still a little work to do. The motor has been rebuilt, the body has been professionally worked and painted, the list of new parts is endless. Reputable local shops have done all the work. Kirkum Engine and automotive built the engine. It’s a mild build, but a very stout runner. I would estimate the engine to be in the 275 HP range. Definitely an upgrade from stock. The paint is awesome, Done by Crosby Creek collision. I have pictures of the car stripped to bare metal and the motor on an engine stand being redone.” So either its a typo, hes bullshitting the hp by 100 (175 stock), or he added power somewhere which is exactly what I heard was bad for this transmission. Ill have to ask him about that. relink of ebay at to compare: http://www.ebay.com/itm/1983-Mercury-Capri-RS-/172668142357?hash=item2833d2c315:g:CEcAAOSwlMFZEnmT&vxp=mtr Cage fucked around with this message at 03:09 on May 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
I think there is some legitimate concern, but I also wouldn't remotely believe the power figure the seller gives. Dude is almost certainly intentionally inflating his "estimated" numbers.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Well I was straight up (in a text) to him and told him what I found, we'll see what he says.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
   
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
I would block you as a seller.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 10:00
|
|
|
275 is hardly a fanciful number for a mildly built 302.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
I doubt its 275 but I also don't really see any issue there either.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 13:25
|
|
|
Elephanthead posted:I would block you as a seller. What?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
After talking with the guy I still feel pretty good about it. He seems to know his stuff, just got a little showboaty when he was trying to make more money off it last year. Meeting him at 9 am tomorrow. edit:  me
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
An SROD apologist‽ I've seen everything now. I fully appreciate the irony of this post coming from me.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:An SROD apologist‽ I've seen everything now.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Guess this thread is as good as any to ask, and it's kind of on transmission chat now, how are AOD transmissions?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
Cage posted:Anything specific for the transmission I should look for beyond noise/clutch friction? Getting rid of that useless third pedal is a good start.  Actual answer: not really. It will either last the life of your ownership or poo poo the bed rapidly. As Nero Danced posted:Guess this thread is as good as any to ask, and it's kind of on transmission chat now, how are AOD transmissions? Garbage. Either go C4 or 4R70W depending on what body it's in. You can make AODs not suck, but the cost to do so would get you a better transmission to work with.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
frozenphil posted:Getting rid of that useless third pedal is a good start. It'd be going in a 65 comet, which is kind-of-sort-of-but-not-really a 65 mustang mechanically. I think it already has a C4 in it, but Mercury liked the name merc-o-matic and put it on a couple different transmissions so I've been a bit confused. Guess gas mileage is just gonna suck on the interstate, but it's gotta move under its own power before I worry about that.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Didn't buy it. You had to really slam the doors to get it to latch, and there was a trick with the door handle. You couldn't just pull it, you had to pull it and pivot. The hatch doesnt stay up without holding it, its missing a piece of flex hose from both sides of the intake. The gas pedal was very stiff and almost impossible to feather, clutch was fine but the shifter felt like mush. Brakes were barely there. Sounded neat though. Too bad it was an hour and a half away.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Bummer. Sounds like it would've taken a good amount of cash to rehab it into proper working order though, so you made the right call.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
That's a shame and I probably would have been pretty upset with that dude if the car was actually that bad.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
It is a shame because the guy was super friendly and seemed to know a lot about the car. He wanted to give me his number if I bought it so that I'd give him first dibs on it if I wanted to sell it. He really hated to sell it. Oh and even with the seat back I was too tall for the car. It was super awkward to drive. I know seat extensions exist but at that point I knew I didn't want the car. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
I suppose this isn't too high for a year and a half of ownership.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
I'm at 1 year, 6k miles and like 17mpg, but I also have a stretch of highway with no places for the fuzz to hide between me and work  Assuming that's the 5.0. How do you like it?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
2015 with the 5.0 and a manual, I loving love it.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Q_res posted:I suppose this isn't too high for a year and a half of ownership.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Lifetime mpg on my EB is like 22 I think. I do a lot of city driving though, and the tune sucks a lot of fuel rip.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
I get about 22-24 on the highway and about 14 in the city with my 5.0.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
I average 22 and some change
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
It warms my heart to see 5.0's getting better mileage than my old Duratec Escape.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
I have to remember to hit one of the no-Ethanol stations next time I fill up, be interesting to see if I still get as large a gain in mpg using that. With my previous mustang it was good for jumping from 13->16ish mpg around town.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Wistful of Dollars posted:It warms my heart to see 5.0's getting better mileage than my old Duratec Escape. Yeah, I'm not at all pissed at my MPG's especially since I have a performance pack car and Ford says it's good for 23 highway. I only got 25ish in my focus ST when I had it.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
Gwaihir posted:I have to remember to hit one of the no-Ethanol stations next time I fill up, be interesting to see if I still get as large a gain in mpg using that. With my previous mustang it was good for jumping from 13->16ish mpg around town. As someone who has a no ethanol 91 station and an ethanol 91 station both around the corner from me, i can say I have never noticed a huge difference in MPG. Maybe 1-2.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2017 22:23
|
|