how many camaros, corvettes and t-birds do we have to look at?

[Harry P.]

Based on the fact that there are no listings of a Thunderbird (or a derivative of one) in any other country other than the US. Are we supposed to believe that a Thunderbird never made it outside of the US? Chrustian has already proven that they were available outside of the US regardless of whether or not his is a factory 5.0 Super Coupe. I just recently saw an add for a late '80s Ranger for sale with a factory diesel engine. Never saw or heard of one in my life,but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

You just made my point! The site lists all the factory variants, not all the various versions that were done by individuals or independent companies. There's no way that anyone could possibly catalog all the various aftermarket and conversion versions done by independent entities. According to the site, Ford Motor Company never made a 1991 T-Bird SC 5 liter. That's not to say that a 1991 T-Bird SC 5 liter doesn't exist... just that Ford never made one. And that's what people here have said... that Ford never made a 1991 T-Bird SC 5 liter.

[Chuck Most]

And Chrysler never made a four-door PT Cruiser convertible, nor did they make a convertible Charger or 300. For the US or any other market. But they exist.

GM never made a 4-door Corvette or a t-top pickup, but in the 70's they were available.

What am I saying? A British firm could have swapped a V8 into a Super Coupe, especially considering the 3.8 supercharged V6 did not pass Euro specs.

[whale392]

Roger, as I stated earlier, the first time the COBRA (read: not COBRAII) name made it to the Mustang nameplate was 1979. I know well the CobraII and King CobraII monikers, so do not try and lecture me on them. You are stepping into my area of cars. They also made a Mach1 version in those years (74-76 if memory serves me right) and it was just a sticker package. As to FOX engine choices; 2.3na, 2.3Turbo (both draw-through carb and EFI), inline-six, 4.2L V8 (80-81), 2.8L V6, 3.8L V6 (83-86), and carbed/cfi/SEFI 5.0s FROM THE FACTORY. 5.8s never made it into production FOXes as they would not clear the stock hoods. Now, the Crown Vic got the 351s for police duty, and can be used in a FOX (because of the double-sump pan). Also, 88 Cali and 89-later SEFI MUSTANGS went Mass Air, while the 5.0L Vics, Birds, and Lincoln MKVIIs stayed Speed Density.

As to the 'Special Overseas Export' garbage.................yes things have been done to appeal to European markets. BUT, most times, we had our cars adapted to fit European tastes (See the SVO). Funny that it didn't get a big engine, and instead was fitted with a 2.3L Turbo4. Why? Weight, balance, and fuel economy. Ford Europe had the Focus RS, a 2.0L Turbo Zetec car that NEVER made it to America. So why would America make a special 5.0L T-Bird for Europe when we were getting the 3.8L Supercharged to fit European tastes? Sounds a little dumb in that light doesn't it?

As to the battery location: Ford did some weird things with these FOX cars. My 83 GLX V6 is on the drivers side, my 84 TurboGT 4cyl is on the drivers side, and my 86GT is on the drivers side. Somewhere in the 82 year, Ford moved the battery from the passenger side to the drivers side, but not on all models. The GTs had the Dual-snorkel air cleaner, and so the battery could be on either side (look at any 82-93 FOX and you will see two round holes, one in each fender apron. This was for the Dual-snorkel set-up). The 83-84 Turbo4 cars drew air in from the passenger fender apron (the hole on the drivers apron will be plugged on all 83-up cars) and for the reason of air cleaner clearance, the battery was moved to the drivers side. Now, the SVO had the same arrangement as the TurboGTs, so again drivers side battery. The CFI and Carbed cars could draw from either side, but more often that not were from the passenger side. Once 1986 SEFI hit, all Mustangs drew from the passenger side.

Interior for the 84 Annys was one color...........Red. It was to correspond with the Red decaling on the White car. Also, the Annys got the SVO treatment as to the thin body moldings as well.

Edited November 10, 2011 by whale392

[Chuck Most]

Roger, as I stated earlier, the first time the COBRA (read: not COBRAII) name made it to the Mustang nameplate was 1979. I know well the CobraII and King CobraII monikers, so do not try and lecture me on them. You are stepping into my area of cars. They also made a Mach1 version in those years (74-76 if memory serves me right) and it was just a sticker package. As to FOX engine choices; 2.3na, 2.3Turbo (both draw-through carb and EFI), inline-six, 4.2L V8 (80-81), 3.8L V6 (83-86), and carbed/cfi/SEFI 5.0s FROM THE FACTORY. 5.8s never made it into production FOXes as they would not clear the stock hoods. Now, the Crown Vic got the 351s for police duty, and can be used in a FOX (because of the double-sump pan). Also, 88 Cali and 89-later SEFI MUSTANGS went Mass Air, while the 5.0L Vics, Birds, and Lincoln MKVIIs stayed Speed Density.

As to the 'Special Overseas Export' garbage.................yes things have been done to appeal to European markets. BUT, most times, we had our cars adapted to fit European tastes (See the SVO). Funny that it didn't get a big engine, and instead was fitted with a 2.3L Turbo4. Why? Weight, balance, and fuel economy. Ford Europe had the Focus RS, a 2.0L Turbo Zetec car that NEVER made it to America. So why would America make a special 5.0L T-Bird for Europe when we were getting the 3.8L Supercharged to fit European tastes? Sounds a little dumb in that light doesn't it?

And what about the Merkur Scorpio? About the same thing happened to that car when it was 'Americanized' for the US market. (The Focus RS SHOULD have been sold here, if you ask for my humble opinion! )

I don't see Ford producing a V8-powered SC for the Euro market, but an aftermarket concern very well could have done it.

[whale392]

Let's look at that Scorpio, Chuck. In Europe, it could have the 2.0L Cossie based powerplant, but was saddled with the 2.3L non-turbo here. The XR4Ti here got the 2.3L turbo, in England/Europe it got the 2.0L Cossie mill. Europeans WERE NOT getting the bigger engines.

Edited November 10, 2011 by whale392

[Chuck Most]

Not from the factory, at least. Come to think of it- was the 2.3 turbo ever available anywhere else but the US? Ford got some pretty good mileage out of that engine, used it in quite a few vehicles, but I've only ever seen it installed from the factory in North American-market products. Now that I think of it, same goes for the normally aspirated 2.3.

[whale392]

This is true Dave. The reason I bring the CV up was the double-sump pan, making a 351-into-FOX swap easier. The CVs still had a cam cut for torque versus HP, and had the smaller E6 intake throughout their SEFI days. Those two factors pretty much relegated the CV 351 to boring taxi/LEO duty. Now, drop in a 302 H.O (as it shared the 351 firing order) cam, a better set of heads (E7TE or GT40-40P factory goods), and the 87-up intake and she started to come alive! Throw in some 1993 Cobra 1.72:1 roller rockers and go. However, due to deck height differences (9.5" for the 351 versus 8.2" for the 260/282/302), you would need a different header OR use the 1993 mustang Convertible motor mounts to drop the engine 3/4" in the chassis and still have to finagle the 302 headers in. SEFI 351 lowers were pretty much only the GT40/Lightning piece or the 'truck' square-port set-up (great for an aftermarket upper/box-type intake set-up).

Chuck, funny thing about the 2.3........it was designed as an implement/field pump drive to begin with. Early blocks had material issues that caused it to get a bad name. When Ford did the RF- castings and subsequent 1979-up castings, they used better materials and cured the cylinder tapering issues. Later turbo blocks are easily identified by the oil return boss cast/drilled on the passenger side center of the block. As far as I have found, the 2.3L LIMA block was used in the North American market only (Canada, States, Mexico).

[57peppershaker]

In May of 1990, I bought a new Mustang GT from "Bill Brown-Truck Town"> Ford dealership on Plymouth Rd. in Livonia MI

It was Ultra Blue with silver panels on the bottom. It had a 5.0 w/5spd. rated at 225 hp. out of the box. Within a year and 5 thousand dollars later it was making WELL over 300 hp. The most costly up grade was the frame connectors to keep the body from twisting-the cheapest up grade was a few washers behind the throttle cable to get full travel out of the gas pedal.

That Mustang could/would eat the SVO's and SC's lunch !! ...in it's class-the only thing that gave it a good run was an un-marked Dearborn Police 1992 Cougar with a 5.8... I gave it a good try until he turned those lights on !!

My '91 Fox was those colours when it left the factory, till somebody resprayed it yellow !

[FASTBACK340]

Well if you had a Bowtie instead of that Barracuda and went to the show, all you would have is another nice Chevy in a SEA of Chevys.

Yeah, your right. I wish had a "nice" Chevy.

Instead of a Bitchin Mopar!

[Junkman]

In many European countries, the break for the taxation is 2.0 Litre. Hence a 2.3 will not appeal to many buyers, since for a mere 300cc you end up in a higher tax bracket. So it's usually up to 2.0, or much over 2.0 what appeals to most buyers. Ford Germany for example learned this lesson, when they started to offer the Taunus and Capri with 2.3 Litre V6 engines. This was no big deal with the German taxation system, but rendered the cars very expensive to tax in BeNeLux and Italy, where they promptly failed to sell. You might have wondered, why many large European cars are available with 2.0 Litre engines despite those actually are too small for them. Now you know the reason for it.

As for the 5.0 V8 vs. the 3.8 Supercharged, I repeat it again: The 3.8 Supercharged was unsuitable for European driving habits, hence Ford did not offer the model in Europe. And they had made the right decision, many grey imported 3.8 supercharged cars ended with severe engine failures, which usually resulted in write-off, since a new engine, plus shipping, plus tax, plus customs excise, plus profit margin, plus installation usually exceeded the economical feasibility.

On the other hand, a European EXPECTS a US-Car to be V8 powered. This is one of the main reasons why some people in Europe opt to buy a US Car at all.

[Guest]

You just made my point! The site lists all the factory variants, not all the various versions that were done by individuals or independent companies. There's no way that anyone could possibly catalog all the various aftermarket and conversion versions done by independent entities. According to the site, Ford Motor Company never made a 1991 T-Bird SC 5 liter. That's not to say that a 1991 T-Bird SC 5 liter doesn't exist... just that Ford never made one. And that's what people here have said... that Ford never made a 1991 T-Bird SC 5 liter.

No,you missed the point. That site doesn't list ANY Thunderbirds of ANY type outside of the US. Regardless of whether or not Ford made a 5.0 Super Coupe for the European market, no one can be expected to believe there were no Thunderbirds sold in Europe at all. With the millions of cars produced every year,it's impossible for anyone or any website to know about every car ever made. There are those that think they do,but that's total BS. Just because we haven't seen one,doesn't mean one didn't exist. Ford did produce V-8 Thunderbirds,so it is quite possible that someone with the means or connections could have ordered a Super Coupe with a V-8.

[Junkman]

Don't forget that a lot of US-Cars imported into Europe were COPO to begin with and built in batches. In the late Eighties I was the purchasing agent for the largest Corvette dealer outside the US at the time (we sold ca. 400 new Corvettes per year). They all were COPO. One of the things they did for us is leave the top speed restriction out of the software. Any potential customer who would have test driven a demonstrator restricted to 120mph (as the domestic models often were) would have walked straight to the Porsche dealership across the street. We also had to specify ours with EEC-spec taillights, H4 headlamps, no third brake light, no side markers, and 160mph speedometers. We always specified the lowest rear axle gearing available, and heavy duty everything. In lieu we always ordered them without A/C, because nobody in Germany deemed it necessary at the time, and without radios, because American radios wouldn't pick up European broadcasting frequencies.

I know for a fact that Opel Häusler, a huge German GM dealer, also ordered his Caprices, Malibus, Camaros, Trans Ams, Blazers, etc. on the COPO scheme. All of them were thus built to specifications not generally available to the American customer.

Edited November 10, 2011 by Junkman

[Harry P.]

A British firm could have swapped a V8 into a Super Coupe, especially considering the 3.8 supercharged V6 did not pass Euro specs.

If Christian has the paperwork from the sale of the car, he can de-code the VIN and get the information that way.

http://www.tbirdregi...om/see/vinc.htm

That will tell him what engine the car left the factory with.

[Harry P.]

No,you missed the point. That site doesn't list ANY Thunderbirds of ANY type outside of the US. Regardless of whether or not Ford made a 5.0 Super Coupe for the European market, no one can be expected to believe there were no Thunderbirds sold in Europe at all.

The question is not whether or not Thunderbirds were ever sold in Europe. Obviously if Christian had one, then they must have been sold there. Nobody is questioning that.

The question is whether the Ford Motor Company ever made a 1991 SC 5 liter, regardless of which country it was sold in. And according to that site, no such car was ever made by Ford. Once again, I don't claim to vouch for the site's accuracy, I just posted the link as an FYI. The general consensus here seems to be that Ford did not produce a '91 SC 5 liter, and so far nobody has offered any proof that they did. The fact that Christian bought one does not prove that it was a factory-made car. It might have been an aftermarket conversion.

[Guest]

The general consensus here seems to be that Ford did not produce a '91 SC 5 liter, and so far nobody has offered any proof that they did.

Of that "general consensus",how many have actually worked on a Ford assembly line that built the '91 Super Coupe? How many of those installed the engines? So far,no one has provided proof that Ford didn't build any with a 5.0 whether inside the states or abroad.

Here's a similar case: Totally different in nature,but somewhat similar. In '95 I went to my local Ford dealer to order a new F150. I knew exactly what I wanted and what I didn't want. I wanted the single cab 2wd XL with vinyl seats,floor mat,straight 6, shortbed and a 5 speed. What I didn't want was dual fuel tanks because I didn't like the way the shortbeds looked with two gas doors. I was told by the owner of the dealership that Ford didn't make the F150s with only one tank that dual tanks were now standard equipment. I told him I didn't believe that. He told me to go out into his lot and if I could find an F150 with one tank,he would give it to me. I checked his lot,plus three others that day and couldn't find one anywhere. I was also told the same story that they didn't make them with one tank. So,I resigned myself to buying one from my local dealer with with dual tanks believing that Ford just didn't make them with a single tank.

Fast forward to 2005. I see an add for a '95 F150 4X4 shortbed with the same straight six and five speed for sale at a price I couldn't pass on! I go to the guys house to check it out and lo and behold!! It only has one gas tank!! First one I had ever saw in the ten years since I had bought my first one. In that ten years,I looked at thousands of F150s on the road,parking lots etc. looking for one with one tank to no avail. I bought it and still have it. I guess Ford did make F150s with one tank after all.

Just because we haven't seen one or read about one,doesn't mean it never existed. Unless, of course, you're talking about Bigfoot. But there's a lot of people who have claimed to have seen him too.

[Chuck Most]

I dunno- Bigfoot is probably more common than a single-tank '87-'96 F-Series!

And I HAVE seen single-tank Ford F-series trucks of that vintage, by the way. Exceedingly rare, but they do exist.

[mistermodel]

Just reading this thread,these cars were /are popular and it makes sence the model manufactures built lots of them also

I personaly like the Tbirds,especaly the sc

In Canada you could get a ranger diesel,along with nissans,toyotas,chevetts,and volvo cars,I dont know if the US got them

I drove a ex police ltd bodied fox once and swear that thing had 351ho just like the trucks and vans in it

[Abell82]

There was an aftermarket company that put diesel engines in Mercury Capri's and Mustangs, but they were not factory.

[Chuck Most]

Ranger diesels have been gone in the US since the late '80's. You're just now starting to see increased availability of diesel engines in light-duty pickups and passenger cars again.

[highway]

If Christian has the paperwork from the sale of the car, he can de-code the VIN and get the information that way.

http://www.tbirdregi...om/see/vinc.htm

That will tell him what engine the car left the factory with.

Heck, we can even get a pic of this mythical 5.0L SC, you REALLY think he'll produce a VIN!?!? :lol:

At least if he does though, it would prove that it is probably a fake, since even if it arrived in Europe with a 5.0L, it would still have the VIN code for the 3.8L SC engine, which is VIN code "R". You know, "R" as is Rivet counter!! :lol:

Of that "general consensus",how many have actually worked on a Ford assembly line that built the '91 Super Coupe? How many of those installed the engines? So far,no one has provided proof that Ford didn't build any with a 5.0 whether inside the states or abroad.

Here's a similar case: Totally different in nature,but somewhat similar. In '95 I went to my local Ford dealer to order a new F150. I knew exactly what I wanted and what I didn't want. I wanted the single cab 2wd XL with vinyl seats,floor mat,straight 6, shortbed and a 5 speed. What I didn't want was dual fuel tanks because I didn't like the way the shortbeds looked with two gas doors. I was told by the owner of the dealership that Ford didn't make the F150s with only one tank that dual tanks were now standard equipment. I told him I didn't believe that. He told me to go out into his lot and if I could find an F150 with one tank,he would give it to me. I checked his lot,plus three others that day and couldn't find one anywhere. I was also told the same story that they didn't make them with one tank. So,I resigned myself to buying one from my local dealer with with dual tanks believing that Ford just didn't make them with a single tank.

Fast forward to 2005. I see an add for a '95 F150 4X4 shortbed with the same straight six and five speed for sale at a price I couldn't pass on! I go to the guys house to check it out and lo and behold!! It only has one gas tank!! First one I had ever saw in the ten years since I had bought my first one. In that ten years,I looked at thousands of F150s on the road,parking lots etc. looking for one with one tank to no avail. I bought it and still have it. I guess Ford did make F150s with one tank after all.

Just because we haven't seen one or read about one,doesn't mean it never existed. Unless, of course, you're talking about Bigfoot. But there's a lot of people who have claimed to have seen him too.

I'm just wondering Roger, what is your fuel capacity in the one tank?? The only reason I ask is that if it only has a 19 gallon tank (guessing the tank is still original) it may have once been a dual tank setup and the previous owner may have took a little time and effort to bodywork out the extra filler door. I'm not saying or doubting you, because it could have been specially ordered that way. The 1993 Ford F150 my friend owns, ironically a 300 I-6 with a 5 speed like yours, also has just one tank, but that is because the front tank fell out of it before he bought it!!

I actually like the dual tanks on my 90 F350 though, it's nice to know I have another week or so of fuel, since I don't drive it very far, when the fuel guage hits "E". The only time I hate them is when both are dry and the over $100 price on the pump after filling both!