[Shotimes] MT5

[van Oss]

I'll be a 3-minute egg timer would do.   :-)

If the curb weight of a MT5 was 3118 pounds, and the 2.5L made 132
pound-feet of torque and 90 HP, could somebody plug that into some
pretend-racing software and give us a predicted 1/4 mile?  Thanks.

Joseph



----- Original Message -----
4000 pounds and minimal HP made for a dangerous car that could be timed in
the 1/4 mile by an hourglass.
Don Mallinson

Don McKinnon (AST) wrote:
> "...Ford assumed that 20 percent of Taurus's would be sold with the 2.5
> liter engine, but by 1989 the figure was actually only 5 percent."    HA,
> Ford was doing then and is still doing it today (Marauder!)
>
> When I rode in that the one I mentioned, it sure was a dog.  I recall the
> guy short sifting compared to my 86 T-bird TC. What was the power band
<3000
> rpms <LOL>
>
> Joseph, if you find one you have to dyno that thing.  I bet it will be up
> there on the all time dyno dog list, if there is such a list!  A quick
> google search and I found this Scirocco site, look at those older Scirocco
> dyno results!
>
> Don McKinnon
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net
> [mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Kevin M. Bisch
> Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 1:52 PM
> To: shotimes@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [Shotimes] MT5
>
>
> Joseph is correct. Page 121 of "Taurus" by Eric Taub... "To cut the
sticker
> price, a smaller, four-cylinder, 2.5 liter engine became the standard
power
> plant for the base model and for a sporty, MT5 maual transmission version
> that would be sold in limited numbers."
>
> "In terms of power and accelleration, the four-cylinder was terrible.
'It's
> primarily for fleet operators,' Howard said, designed for rental car
> companies and corporations desiring to minimize their transportation
costs.
> It's cheaper, it was developed for plain economic reasons. The engine is
> very marginal. It's not powerful enough for the car. Ford assumed that 20
> percent of Tauruses would be sold with the 2.5 liter engine, but by 1989
> the figure was actually only 5 percent."
>
> Man, my 3.0L 1987 GL was a dog.... this thing must have been awful to
> drive. Nonetheless, I think it is great that Joe wants to restore one...
it
> might very well be the only one of it's kind!!!
>
>
> --Kevin
>
> At 08:28 AM 6/21/2003 -0500, van Oss wrote:
>
>>I think the MT5 had a 2.5L, while the others you mention had a 2.3L.
>>
>>Check out:  http://members.tripod.com/~TaurusSHO/specs.html
>>
>>Scroll down a bit to read about the engines.  The 2.5L had only 90 HP, but
>>130 pound feet!
>>
>>Joseph van Oss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
>
> .
_______________________________________________
Shotimes mailing list
Shotimes@autox.team.net
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes