Does a 1965-1970 Mustang make a better Road racer, than a fox stang?
Hey guys, I know both classic and fox stangs have suspension issues, as well as brake issues, when building up a road racer. WHich is better? 65-70 are easier to work on, and companies like Mustang plus, sell complete racing suspension packages. However, fox mustangs are more abundant, and lots of performance parts are available. I'm guessing fox may be a bit lighter but 65-70 are probably stronger. Plus, a classic mustang made into a road racer would probably sell for more money, and give you a better return on your investment, than a fox road racer.
You are still not going to make any money regardless of which platformyou use. You are going to have to put a lot of money into the suspension of each car not to mention the performance aspect too. To have a complete road race car is a lot of money.
If money is not an object then I would choose the 65-70, if money is an object then the foxbody. I have seen a few of the classics with a modern road race suspension and it is awesome but they are expensive too. lol
You are still not going to make any money regardless of which platformyou use. You are going to have to put a lot of money into the suspension of each car not to mention the performance aspect too. To have a complete road race car is a lot of money.
If money is not an object then I would choose the 65-70, if money is an object then the foxbody. I have seen a few of the classics with a modern road race suspension and it is awesome but they are expensive too. lol
I was guessing he was not planning on building a $50,000 car.
__________________
Under Construction. Better, Stronger, Faster than it was before.
Yes, you are correct... money is an issue. My idea was to keep the car a street legal car, so other than some safety items like a roll bar, and suspension upgrades... the car will remain resonably stock. That is why I was concerned with resale value. I'm thinking a classic mustang, that has that Trans-am racer look to it, yet is still street legal, may get me back a portion of my investment, whenever I decide to hang-up my helmet. I'm thinking a fox mustang, converted to a road-racer, might just appear as a worn out mustang. Mustang plus, sells a on-track suspension kit for a classic mustangs, that runs about $1500.00. I'm sure its not as competetive as a Griggs kit for a fox, but I don't have $20,000 to spend. And to be honest, at my level... weekend racer / hobbist... I doubt I could justify that kind of money. I don't expect any sponsors to be knocking down my door. If i wanted to race at that level, I'd purchase a race chassis & hang mustang sheet metal on it. I think the fox platform is a great bang for the buck car, but its not a race car, and hanging $20,000 of suspension components on it, is like chrome plating the under-carriage of a daily driver. i have to ask why?
I would still stick with the Fox. The 65-70 will be a lot of money just updating the car. Most people I have met are not too interested in an old 1st gen Mustang that can handle, they want a classic that is fast in a straight line or to drive around town in. You would have to pay a pretty decent price for a classic Mustang that is in good shape and then you could worry about the suspension, traction, and braking updates.
Fox's are cheap to mod, Cheap. I think you would be surprised by how easy it is to make a Fox handle great. You do not need the entire Griggs or Maximum Motorsports catalog for the Fox to handle like it is on rails.
Really just fixing the steering, traction, and braking issues on the Fox and it would be a decent handler. Lowering Fox's is easy as well as throwing on some SFC's. Mix all of those together and you would be spending 10-12k on the entire car, that includes a GT40 update as well , with the mods included and it would be quick as hell around the turns and you could still sell it for a decent amount of money. When people look for a Mustang that can handle they look at the Fox's that were built for road racing, not a classic.
Either way you are going to be losing money on the project, you always do. lol
I agree with you, but the same issues such as braking, steering, suspension, are the same issues with vintage cars. As far as price, you can still find 65-69 coupes at a decent price. I'm thinking dollar wise, the money is going to be pretty close. I also don't agree that you will always lose money. I've always turned a profit on 65-73 stangs. Sure, I probably wouldn't if I figured in my labor, but that is part of the enjoyment for me. I guess I'm thinking... long as the car remains "street legal" it will always have some market value. If I'm only going to spend 5-10K, on my car... I'm not going to be building a trailer'd race car. It will be a street legal, hot rod. Improved suspension & steering with 4-wheel disc, a roll bar with competition seats, upgraded gauges, with some suspension mods. Basically, a vintage trans-am looking racer. I'm thinking, that car may not appeal to everyone, but it would be a car that a vintage racer or performance guru would like to own. Not to many of us older guys, have much interest in Fox bodies, other than the drag racers.
Just my .02 worth,
Mach
lol If you already had your heart set on the classic why did you make a thread up about the fox vs. classic? lol
We all gave you our opinions on what would be cheaper and easier to fund. Go with the classic if that is what you want to do, after all it is your car.
lol If you already had your heart set on the classic why did you make a thread up about the fox vs. classic? lol
We all gave you our opinions on what would be cheaper and easier to fund. Go with the classic if that is what you want to do, after all it is your car.
LOL, I think he posted this so we would back up the decision he already made.
__________________
Under Construction. Better, Stronger, Faster than it was before.
Not really, the reason I asked was because I wanted input on both sides of the issue. I have never been a fan of the fox cars, but you can't argue with their success at the tracks. I was curious if most people race fox stangs because they are cheap and plentiful, or are they actually a superior platform? I presently own a 79 indy pace car, which is way too nice to race, but I do enjoy driving the car. i have also owned a 65 fastback, a 69 mach-1, and a 73 convertible. My only gripe with the fox car is working on them. I 'm a pretty big guy, and my hands just don't fit under the hood of a fox car. Compared to working on a 65-73... its almost torture at times. But both old platform & new have the same issues... chassis flex, poor brakes, bad suspension geometry... so maybe their isn't that much difference after all?
How much do you know about fox body cars? Other than the front suspension is better suited for a fwd car. They are the lightest platform and just about everything from the Fox4(sn-95) will fit. Old man or not most people start in stock classes. Sometimes I wonder if it's worth racing a outdated car when you've got that road<b>hog</b> pwning damneer everything.
__________________
Foxy lady Roxanne 1981 2.3 hatch
Jax Rhapsody his life as a...
Not sure I'm following what you mean? Yes, I know the fox is a light platform, but the chassis is fair at best... unless you start adding parts to remove flex, and improve suspension geometry. From what I've read... both old and new chassis have the same issues. I would imagine a stripped down 65, would get pretty close to the weight of a fox, especially if you go with fiberglass hood & fenders. There are plenty of people who campaign classic iron, and run very competitive.
Does a 1965-1970 Mustang make a better Road racer, than a fox stang? 
I think you would be surprised by how easy it is to make a Fox handle great. You do not need the entire Griggs or Maximum Motorsports catalog for the Fox to handle like it is on rails. 
