Learn Me Ford Maverick

So I emailed a guy about a '72 Ford Maverick last night. Can these cars be made to handle at all (for challenge budget)? It has a inline 6 (200?). Does that share anything in common with the 300?

My girlfriends dad said he fit about 50 cases of beer in one once. I don't think he was exaggerating.

Sure, if you have the skills anything can handle, remove the leaf springs, build a 4 link with coilovers, custom mount coilovers to front, gain camber, beef up spring rates, increase sway bar diameter, depends on how far you want to go.

I have access to a welding shop so I can make changes like a four link. I would prefer not to go that crazy but I could. Can they be made to handle with simple bolt ons or am I going to have to into fabrication mode?

5.0 fits in just fine as well.

PS Aren't you tired of that avatar yet? It's like watching a train wreck.

jstein77 wrote: 5.0 fits in just fine as well. PS Aren't you tired of that avatar yet? It's like watching a train wreck.

Actually I kinda am I just have been to lazy to change it.

Leaf springs are seriously flawed as a locating method, you can retain them if you want but still need the 4 link, therefore it makes sense to add the coilovers at the same time. It is what I did to the S10.

Not aware of the front end geometry of the Maverick so can't say too much about tune-ability of it.

Seriously, they can look really cool. Like a little '69 Camaro.

aussiesmg wrote: Leaf springs are seriously flawed as a locating method, you can retain them if you want but still need the 4 link, therefore it makes sense to add the coilovers at the same time. It is what I did to the S10. Not aware of the front end geometry of the Maverick so can't say too much about tune-ability of it.

Maverick should have the same basic suspension as the Mustangs of the same years, so there should be parts out there for it. Leaf springs can work pretty good, in Trans Am racing the cars in those years all had leaf springs. They did add panhard bars or watts links to help with lateral location.

81cpcamaro wrote:

aussiesmg wrote: Leaf springs are seriously flawed as a locating method, you can retain them if you want but still need the 4 link, therefore it makes sense to add the coilovers at the same time. It is what I did to the S10. Not aware of the front end geometry of the Maverick so can't say too much about tune-ability of it.

Maverick should have the same basic suspension as the Mustangs of the same years, so there should be parts out there for it. Leaf springs can work pretty good, in Trans Am racing the cars in those years all had leaf springs. They did add panhard bars or watts links to help with lateral location.

You can add a 3rd upper link on the passenger side upper part of the rear axle. Arguably, this will do a better location job than the 4 link, since it can be tuned to off set torque wedge. Plenty of articles about that out there.

http://jimmeyerracing.com/mustang.html

eliminates shock towers, kinda pricey tho

FIXED

pinchvalve wrote: FIXED

Better, but it is still a Maverick.

You can get front disc brakes from a Granada (if you can find one these days...) Or front and rear disc if you are lucky enough to find a Lincoln Versilles (boy did I mangle THAT) which was a fancy Granada. As for handling, look to write ups on how the old Shelby Mustangs were set up with relocated front upper arms ect. That should point you in the right direction low buck wise... As for the 200. No it does not share any parts with a 300 except maybe an oil filter... Could be a fun build... After all, it is not a Mustang or Camaro...

leafs with slapper bars to eliminate spring windup, and a panhard for lateral location should be just fine.

up front, "shelby drop" the UCAs for better camber gain, increase spring rates a bit. balance the car with bars and call it a day.

oh, almost forgot:

noddaz wrote: You can get front disc brakes from a Granada (if you can find one these days...) Or front and rear disc if you are lucky enough to find a Lincoln Versilles (boy did I mangle THAT) which was a fancy Granada.

Don't the later ones have front disk brakes anyway?

Do the early small bumpers bolt right onto a late one?

Don't the later ones have front disk brakes anyway?

I think so, but I do not know which year that would be... I was guessing a 72 with a 6 cyl has front drums...

Some great sites on the web about turbo'ing the Ford I6. I had a thread on this months back that would have links and pics. The 200 is limited but if you're just looking for fun a turbo would definitely turn the volume up a bit.

You also might be surprised at how well a stock suspension on an older car will handle with decent tires, stiff springs, and good shocks.

It could also be a 170 or 250. I am just guessing. So a 300 will not bolt in in place of a 200 or 250 correct?

5.0 in '72 Maverick

build article here:

http://www.mustangandfords.com/featuredvehicles/maverick/mufp_0601_1972_ford_maverick/index.html

93EXCivic wrote: It could also be a 170 or 250. I am just guessing. So a 300 will not bolt in in place of a 200 or 250 correct?

Bolt in? Don't know. The 300 was a truck engine. Bigger. Longer. Heavier. Built for low RPM use. More torque than a 5.0... Back in the day circle track racers in part of the SE US used to run them with success.....
But for your use you might want to look up just how heavy one of those lumps is...