What about early model rangers with the 8.8's? I was thinking that not much had to be done to the spring perches to put one under a maverick. Like,, 1-3/4 inches difference inbetween the drums,,,,, Ive got a 95 out here, just have to go measure em both again,,, one of these days I git some time to play. LOL Chad
Well the GT500 is 500 NET HP .... which is more like 625HP GROSS of the 60's and early 70's ratings ... not even a BOSS 429 or any of the SCJ cars approached nearly that ... BOSS 429 was 375 GROSS ... maybe 290 NET ..
Keep in mind that horsepower ratings in the late '60s up until '70 were under-rated for insurance reasons. Everyone thinks the LS-6 454 was the most powerful American V-8, but in fact Ford and Chrysler under-rated their engines. A 426 Hemi comes close to those numbers of the new GT-500... I know they (8.8s) work. 'Just saying I'd rather have a 9-inch any day.
69 Hemi Cuda 4-speed ran a 13.6 1/4 ET at 107 ... Shelby GT500 runs a 12.9 @ 127 .. The Shelby weight 4100lbs .... not sure about the Cuda but I'm guessing 500lbs less .. The 9" is defintely easier to put in a Maverick though ...
