Search results

As I mentioned in another thread, it will be interesting to see who is the first to drop in the 2.3 crank….. 15% bump in torque is a great way to start.

Yea but that was a V6

No. some of the back pressure can be lost depending on the size of the crack

There was no EB a decade ago

Yes I agree. But droop is t always limited by the strut.

I heard they are coming out with a new model called Goose

Right. As with a longer spring

on a conventional truck - yes. Maverick is essentially fwd with an auxillary output to the rear, similar to the Focus RS, STI, EVO etc

i do that too….. definitely 3.81 (42/11) is the way to go in case you plan on going with bigger tires later. looks like Ford stuck with the 11 tooth pinion for all ratios (32,40 and 42 ring gear)

with no increase in ground clearance

The same amount of lift with a spacer or a spring are going to have the same effect on CV angles and droop. The difference is the spring will give you more theoretical compression and will have a better ride as long as it was tuned correctly. With only an inch or 2 lift, its going to be mostly...

Its gonna be a LOT more complicated (not impossible) to replace the diff unit inside the transaxle than a conventional FR layout. I would like to know what can be done for the rear though…

I hope its nothing like the Evoque or the Focus RS

Numerically higher

The transaxle difference could just mean one gets an external oil cooler, one does not. Look at the differences in F150 rear ends - you can get same ratios but different size ring gear (9.5 vs. 8.8 I believe).

I mean even Ranchero is better. At least it was kind of a truck… Could you imagine naming a van Mustang in 20 years?

everything works! its been proven over and over again. the 2.0 ts block is a lot stronger than the 2.3 and guys are getting over 700 out of that combination.

or …wingman

Nothing they just proved that we are getting ripped off on all the other vehicles

Seems weird they brought a car name back instead of a trucks name.