Latest Addition...

http://bham.craigslist.org/cto/4149832957.html

If I can find someone to help me out tomorrow... I should be bringing it home tomorrow!

Awesome dude. Foxes are fun, and getting harder to find.

Any plans for it? You know who to ask if you need any help.

Thanks stalker!  Only plans are to address the noisy fuel pump and drive it!  The carb might need a little tuning too as the power doesn't come on until about 4k, but that might just be the cam or intake manifold.  Either way it was fun to drive as is and seemed pretty clean for the age.  It has a stroker 302 (347 ci) motor with only about 5k miles on it.  Paint could use some attention but the body was straight and the interior was one of the best I've seen on a fox.

I saw that. A 347 stroker shouldn't have low end power issues. Could be the carb, but honestly it seems that the biggest problem with SBF's is that people choose horrible cams for them.

It could be the Cam.  I've had a 302 that was bored over a little before and the power delivery was a whole lot smoother then this one.  It had aluminum gt40 heads with a holley 600 carb (and a big cam but I don't remember the specs).  This foxbody has aluminum edelbrock heads (I'm not familiar with them on sbf's) with an edelbrock intake a demon 750 carb.  The carb seems kind of big for this motor which could be why the power deliver isn't as smooth, or it might not be tuned right.  At any rate something to tinker with. 

What weight oil would you run in a stroker 302?  I haven't read up on it yet...

The edelbrock heads are very similar to the GT40 heads, they are just a traditional style wedge head. You can get them in either 1.90/1.60 valves or in 2.02 intakes.

I don't think the 750 is too much for a 347, but the cam and whole set up would need to be right for it to work. Did you find out what the cam was?

I think 10w30 would probably be ok. Can't really know for sure unless you know how they set up the tollerances in the motor.

I like that your car has a Stalker fascia; did you guys just become BFF? [I'd have to say the same thing if any of you were to buy an Avanti, II or original].

A 7,000 RPM capable, 100% efficient 347 only requires the carb. deliver ≈700 CFM.
Lower it to ≈650 CFM if it's 92% efficient OR capable of 6,500 RPM.
Lower it to ≈600 CFM if it's 92% efficient AND capable of 6,500 RPM.
http://www.csgnetwork.com/cfmcalc.html

People generally do have a tendency to install excessively sized carburetors and/or they are wishfully thinking their engine needs that much air.
For comparison, I used a Holley 600 double pumper on my Corvette's 350 and it was adequate to 6,500 where I visited on more than one occasion. It wasn't any special 350 build and was nowhere near 91% efficient.

It is a sexy front end.....

I'm probably a ways away form starting to invest/repair cosmetic issues but the lights on mine need to be replaced (to include the marker and fog lights)... any good places to buy em cheap (aside from the normal ebay and amazon)?

http://www.latemodelrestoration.com/products/79-93-Mustang-Headlights

Plus they have a shit ton of other stuff for Mustangs.....

Thanks Stalker!  They have better prices then Amazon has...  Do you use them a lot?  I'm surprised how cheap headers are for fox's.  A set of long tubes for my F-body cost 600 minimum.

I get a lot fo stuff from LRS, their prices are pretty good, and most of the time their products are good.

Be carefull with headers for foxes. If you want a set that are just a step above stock, then the $200-$300 are ok, but if you are looking for a good set of headers with the proper primary lengths and well designed collectors, then expect to pay $600+.

I'm looking at a set of 1 7/8 Accufab LT's, and they are around $700. I would still need to get them coated too, so probably another $150 on top of that.

Stalker,

What are the best forums for fox's?

Thanks,
Brad

http://www.corral.net

Probably the most info. Sometimes the guys there are Richards, but there is a lot of info there.

I thought all Mustang fans are Richards?  *ducks for cover

Thanks Stalker!

Sold the Mustang and picked this up a few weeks ago:

Get in, sit down, shut up and hold on. Nice! The other one I like (seen in a race car) is "Don't hit shit" in 1" white letters stuck on the dash.

Why did they kill Pontiac and not Buick???

Shtoopid....

My biggest complaint about these cars? The seating position is way too low in the cockpit. You have very little vision out of those things. They are fun to drive though! Good call on getting the GXP version!

Sim,

Actually there is a great article somewhere on the web (autoblog maybe?) about how GM didn't want to get rid of Pontiac.  The gov't actually forced them to get rid of Pontiac.  The gov't tried to do the same with GMC but GM showed them the profit margin and they backed off.

Actually I know the GXP's (not sure on the regular ones) have power height adjustment.  I'm pretty tall so I have it all the way down and I fit okay.  It's still a tight fit though no doubt about that.  I just had GMPP stage 2 tune flashed and I put on a CAI.  Should be around 290hp and 340lb/ft of torque at the fly.

http://jalopnik.com/the-feds-killed-pontiac-bob-lutz-says-1452735716
http://blog.caranddriver.com/feds-demanded-pontiac-be-killed-in-exchange-for-bailout-money-former-gm-exec-says/
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2013/10/bob-lutz-the-government-forced-the-shutdown-of-pontiac-video/ [interview video contained].

http://jalopnik.com/gm-knew-pontiac-was-on-the-ropes-before-the-feds-ordere-1453820705

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/11/the-feds-didnt-kill-pontiac-i-did/

I'd like to see Oldsmobile, Plymouth, Pontiac, and Mercury make returns. Actually I'd like more than that, but we can start there after American sheeple decide it's okay to upgrade our country to the next version.

Great choice Sorta!  I always liked those cars.

While I'd love to see another Road Runner, 'Cuda, and Duster out there, it ain't gonna happen, and it shouldn't.

In the 60s, Dodge and Plymouth were fighting each other to be the performance brand. When Dodge finally won out (in the 80s), Plymouth became the economy option. Where would they fit now? Chrysler doesn't want to be a niche automaker anymore, they want to go mainstream. They're aiming to be the mainstream brand, allowing Alfa a place in the American market as the upscale, niche brand. Chrysler is aiming for everyone from Hyundai and Kia to Ford and Toyota, but they're not going after Mercury, Cadillac, or the Europeans, at least not directly.

Dodge is now solidly the performance brand. They're dropping the Caravan, upgrading the Journey and Dart for more performance, and keeping the big muscle cars, as well as absorbing SRT.

Where does Plymouth fit? If it goes for performance, it will compete directly with Dodge. If it goes for the inexpensive mainstream market, it'll compete with Chrysler. Neither brand needs that right now, and unfortunately, the last few years of Plymouth gave people very little to brag about. (Except for Prowler, which is bad-ass and way ahead of it's time.) Plymouth is seen as "cheap," and not in a good way.

The ONLY way Plymouth could return is if they became something like Scion or Saturn, where there are few models, even fewer options, and pricing is set for an simpler buying experience. And that strategy would most likely rule out any hope of anything other than a new "Duster," a cheaper, stripped version of Dart with fewer options. No beepers or fishes...

And, if the people get what they want from SRT (stripped-down, performance-first models, rather than grand tourers or best-of-everything models), that's another nail in any Plymouth's coffin. All other options being equal,would you buy a stripped-out Duster with a 200hp 2.4L for $15K, or a base Dart SRT model with 300hp for $20K?

Plymouth was great, but it is dead. RIP, Plymouth.

It takes a concerted effort but it can be done. A corporation's rule #1 must be, "Don't fight yourself." There are plenty of ways to style a car that each brand under any parent corporation could select types to make which their siblings aren't.

For a bit of time domestic General Motors had: Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Buick, Saturn, GMC, Hummer, and Chevrolet; more marques than FoMoCo and Chrysler were balancing. GM did flirt with red ink in the early '90s but turned it around by summer '99.

Mix one from first column with any one from second column; third column sometimes not applicable.

	Two-seat
	Sedan
Luxury	Coupe
Sport	Wagon	Convertible
Economical	Hatchback
Base	Truck
	Van
	Minivan

Mixing of the first column is possible, a good example is sport-luxury … right in the wheelhouse of makers like BMW and Mercedes-Benz. Related side note, of those two, BMW places more focus on the sport aspect while MBZ places more focus on the luxury aspect. An example of two similar makers producing slight variations of one concept.

An issue arises when parent corporations badge engineer (rebadge) similar cars. When that is the case an option is to have one company absorb the other car (a la, Ford builds Mustang and absorbs Cougar, Dodge builds Challenger and absorbs Barracuda, Chevrolet builds Camaro and absorbs Firebird). The company may then fight itself on the sales floor but the money only flows up one channel. The brand who lost the platform moves on to build a different style.

Either that or we go all deregulation on the parent corporations and it becomes a free-for-all, a la 1900s. There's also the way race cars are made, chassis makers and engine builders. To some extent this used to be available to the car buying public. There are solutions; some gentle, others more harsh. I guess my bottom lines are: people love choices and it's possible.

TuxTshirt wrote:Great choice Sorta!  I always liked those cars.

Thanks Tux!  I actually drove an N/A one way back around 2006 in Vegas on a make shift track.  It may not be quite as sharp as a Miata but it's damn fun and gets way more attention then I ever anticipated (I already got a speeding ticket   ).