This is why the 3.8 is a good engine for a starter car. - TCCoA Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-26-2006, 12:21 AM Thread Starter
Veteran Poster
 
Kelsey Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: M.L., WA
Age: 30
Posts: 844
Send a message via MSN to Kelsey Smith
Post This is why the 3.8 is a good engine for a starter car.

The 3.8, though usually considered a hinderance, is really a beneficial engine to start out with. Why? Well, let me explain.

The 3.8 is the lightest engine, as far as I know, oftered in the MN-12. Not enough of a diffrence to affect the power to weight issue, but enough to keep the front just a bit lighter than the S/C or 5.0/4.6. This means better handling. And because of the lack of power, the driver is forced to compensate in a road course type run, with improved technique in the corner. Where the driver of the more powerful versions may be able to compensate for a slightly more lacking technique with brute force, the 3.8 driver doesn't have that luxury. So, after a time of driving with the underpowered 3.8, when the switch is made to a S/C or V-8, after a time familiarising themselves with the diferent handling propreties caused by the extra nose weight, they'll be a better, quicker driver than someone who started out right with a more powerful version

I typed this in class. This is what I do when I get bored. Perhaps I should concentrate on school more?

"WHAT CONE?!?!

1997 T-Bird Sport, 'Interceptor' (12 ESP 2008-2012)- CAI, 2.25 duals, Flowmaster 40 series, Clear corners, BBK 70mm Throttle Body, TrickFlow upper intake, PI Intake, BBK adjustable fuel pressure regulator, LE stripes, Bullitt-style gauge faces. 18x9 wheels, Sniper tuned, 3,620 pounds


1991 Ford F250 - Air restrictor delete. Cat delete.

1991 T-Bird 'Interceptor II' (12 CP 2013-) - Race-prep, Full custom "interior", Carb'd 302, Trick Flow twisted wedge heads, stage 1 cam, Custom Koni coil-overs front, Koni yellows rear, Cobra front brakes, fuel cell, 18X9 wheels, 275/30 Hoosier A6, 4.11 T-Lok. 3000 pounds

2004 Toyota Solara SE - V6, Sport package, Muffler delete, 17X7 wheels, 235/50 Conti ExtremeContact DWS
Kelsey Smith is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-26-2006, 09:40 AM
It is nice
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Arizona
Age: 37
Posts: 885
Iv'e owned both; having my 3.8 cougar for nearly 7 years I can say it does handle turns better then the 4.6 and can take corners easier. The only disadvantage is there is no power to get out of the turns half way in so you kinda just plow through them if there isn't enough time for the engine to build power, and the 3.8 does take some time (hesitation) lol.

1997 Ford Thunderbird LX 4.6L (WT): Removed Air Silencer. PBR Brake Upgrade. J-MOD. Silverstar Headlights. Vogtland Springs 1.6". Front Sport Shocks/ Back KYB's. PI Cams. Xcal2 by Lonnie.
1991 Mercury Cougar LS 3.8L: SOLD
91CougarLS is offline  
post #3 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-26-2006, 11:28 AM Thread Starter
Veteran Poster
 
Kelsey Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: M.L., WA
Age: 30
Posts: 844
Send a message via MSN to Kelsey Smith
And there lies the necessity of manual shifting of the AOD, which I hope isn't hard on it. Through trial and error I think I've figured out controling the...ultra quick shifting AOD.






That, or I'm ending it's life sooner

"WHAT CONE?!?!

1997 T-Bird Sport, 'Interceptor' (12 ESP 2008-2012)- CAI, 2.25 duals, Flowmaster 40 series, Clear corners, BBK 70mm Throttle Body, TrickFlow upper intake, PI Intake, BBK adjustable fuel pressure regulator, LE stripes, Bullitt-style gauge faces. 18x9 wheels, Sniper tuned, 3,620 pounds


1991 Ford F250 - Air restrictor delete. Cat delete.

1991 T-Bird 'Interceptor II' (12 CP 2013-) - Race-prep, Full custom "interior", Carb'd 302, Trick Flow twisted wedge heads, stage 1 cam, Custom Koni coil-overs front, Koni yellows rear, Cobra front brakes, fuel cell, 18X9 wheels, 275/30 Hoosier A6, 4.11 T-Lok. 3000 pounds

2004 Toyota Solara SE - V6, Sport package, Muffler delete, 17X7 wheels, 235/50 Conti ExtremeContact DWS
Kelsey Smith is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-26-2006, 11:41 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
VicRattlehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: RT66 Raceway Channahon IL
Posts: 6,213
yea but it still cant get out of its own way.

CMP Drag Racing
best ET: 12.410 -- best MPH: 107.61
NMRA MM7270 -- NMCA EFI/? ????
Thank you to the CMP Drag Racing team: Tony, Doug, Maryann, Dale, Paul and Chris.

VicRattlehead is offline  
post #5 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-27-2006, 04:53 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
The_Ghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Los Alamitos, CA
Age: 34
Posts: 2,055
it's called manu-shifting... lock the car in 1 for low speed turns, 2 for higher speed turns. It will respond to it and keep the car more stable.
Learning proper shift technique to maintain a nice line and keep it real smooth-like is positively crucial in maintaining a good line with an automatic, and massaging the throttle so that the tranny will behave how you want it to is a lot more challenging than it is with a stickshift, that, and you're short a gear...

anyhow, doing it that way, you can maximize the outright minimal power output of the 3.8L.

Honestly, I think the best way to learn superior technique is to start with a ****tier car, but I disagree with the automatic bit.
Yes, the 3.8L will be the most difficult platform to work with because the brakes aren't as good, the car is underpowered, and has all of ZERO go-power (reminds me of that stupid taurus I had), but... yes, it forces the driver to either compensate, or crash.

Coming from a stickshift SC over to a 4.6L LX (w shift kit), there is a definite difference in handling between the SC and the 4.6L, but the 4.6 is smoother in power delivery and more willing to rev, but the key feature is that it is easier to work on than the pain-in-the-*** 3.8L... split port 3.8's are nice, though..

I find the 4.6L is easier to drive and handle than the 3.8L SC because I ACTUALLY HAVE TRACTION, whereas with the SC, it was a wild, angry BEAST of a car, much like the RS200, that had to be manhandled around corners and beaten into submission.
I think the 4.6L is a much better starter car than the SC, while I find the 4.6L's understeer happy handling orientation to be less forgiving than that of the SC.

Perhaps it is all the extra weight on the nose.
The downside to the 3.8L is that there weren't any of them that were offered with ABS, so far as I know, and I haven't seen any with 4-wheel disc brakes.

96 Laser Red 4.6L - Custom
Custom Nascar-Inspired Bodykit - 55* Rear Spoiler - J-modded Trans - 80mm MAF - One-Off Diablosport Chipmaster Revolution Chip/Tune W/Toggle - ScanGaugeII Diagnostics & Data Readout - PBR Brakes - Drilled/Slotted Rotors - SC Wheels & Springs - Falken Tires - KYB GR-1 Shocks/Struts - FSTB - RSTB - RTLB - LECB - 60/40 Split Rear - SC Seats - SC Vac/Boost Gauge
The_Ghost is offline  
post #6 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-27-2006, 06:05 AM
The Parts Guy
 
racecougar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Imperial, Missouri (near St. L
Age: 36
Posts: 7,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Ghost
The downside to the 3.8L is that there weren't any of them that were offered with ABS, so far as I know, and I haven't seen any with 4-wheel disc brakes.
ABS/4 wheel disc was optional on the 3.8L MN12's (at least for the 94-96's, maybe other years as well).

-Rod

Rod @ AzzKicker Cars
[email protected]
90 XR7-The Meth Addict-KB SC'd 5.0L DOHC Stroker
2004 Mustang GT-The Driver-Intake/Exhaust/3.73's
1995 F150 4x4-The Mud Toy-5.0L/4R70W/33's/Warn 8274 Winch
94 LX w/Splitport 3.8L from 2000 Mustang - SOLD
2 - 90 35th Anny Ed SC's
And a TON of parts cars!
racecougar is offline  
post #7 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-27-2006, 08:14 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
bad93bird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Needville, Texas
Age: 50
Posts: 2,876
Send a message via MSN to bad93bird
Slow down going into turns??? I never do that. I've got a 5.0 and speed up when going through them. That's how I keep all the Mustangs, Camaros, and other sports cars off my arse.

QUADSQUAD MEMBER
bad93bird is offline  
post #8 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-27-2006, 09:58 AM
PostSkank
 
StupidFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tempe, AZ
Age: 37
Posts: 3,231
Send a message via AIM to StupidFly
If you're speeding up for the turns, you obviously didnt go fast enough through the straights

math > pasta
StupidFly is offline  
post #9 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 09:57 AM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by racecougar
ABS/4 wheel disc was optional on the 3.8L MN12's (at least for the 94-96's, maybe other years as well).

-Rod

I'm with rod on this one, My 96' is 4 wheel disc and I have 94' cougar parts car thats 4wheel disc also. ALL Midyear 96 and ALL 97's had 4 wheel disc with or without ABS.

Also N/A V6 cars should run the same size tires front and rear since the car is pretty much balanced. When I had 275's out back and 245's up front my car had a bad habit of pushing in corners no matter which combo of swaybars I tried. 255's on all 4 corners and she corners like a dream now. Also swapping an aluminum explorer 02-03 4.6L into a 4.6L MN-12 gets you close to the balance a 3.8L car has.
rancherlee is offline  
post #10 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 10:05 AM
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,180
I went back and forth with the parts guy at autozone when buying rear rotors for my '97. He was absolutely positive '97's came with rear drums in base trim. He got somewhat arrogant about it when I didn't take his word for it, I just laughed and dropped it.

I'm not buying it that these are good reasons to have a 3.8L MN12 as a starter car... perhaps you should concetrate on school more instead.

Last edited by Southpaw; 11-30-2006 at 10:10 AM.
Southpaw is offline  
post #11 of 24 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 11:47 PM Thread Starter
Veteran Poster
 
Kelsey Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: M.L., WA
Age: 30
Posts: 844
Send a message via MSN to Kelsey Smith
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southpaw
... perhaps you should concetrate on school more instead.
Eh, I'm getting a 'A' in the class I did that in anyways...
...it was auto tech

And maybe it's not. Maybe that's just my minds way of rationalising having the 3.8 for at least another 11 months (Just had to put that $1900 in the bank)

"WHAT CONE?!?!

1997 T-Bird Sport, 'Interceptor' (12 ESP 2008-2012)- CAI, 2.25 duals, Flowmaster 40 series, Clear corners, BBK 70mm Throttle Body, TrickFlow upper intake, PI Intake, BBK adjustable fuel pressure regulator, LE stripes, Bullitt-style gauge faces. 18x9 wheels, Sniper tuned, 3,620 pounds


1991 Ford F250 - Air restrictor delete. Cat delete.

1991 T-Bird 'Interceptor II' (12 CP 2013-) - Race-prep, Full custom "interior", Carb'd 302, Trick Flow twisted wedge heads, stage 1 cam, Custom Koni coil-overs front, Koni yellows rear, Cobra front brakes, fuel cell, 18X9 wheels, 275/30 Hoosier A6, 4.11 T-Lok. 3000 pounds

2004 Toyota Solara SE - V6, Sport package, Muffler delete, 17X7 wheels, 235/50 Conti ExtremeContact DWS
Kelsey Smith is offline  
post #12 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 12:43 AM
6th Gear Poster
 
rednsilver94sc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Trenton Michigan
Age: 32
Posts: 523
Send a message via AIM to rednsilver94sc
how would a stock 3.8 have better handling then the sc with the autoride suspension???

not to mention they both have the same size motor with the sc having aluminum heads and the supercharger intercooler and extra goodies only adding about 150lbs to the front of the car?


it seems hard to believe that my sc could be out cornerd by a base 3.8 lx
rednsilver94sc is offline  
post #13 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 02:49 AM
Seasoned Veteran Poster
 
4.3Lcougar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ricelake WI
Age: 38
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by StupidFly
If you're speeding up for the turns, you obviously didnt go fast enough through the straights


1985 THUNDERBIRD CFI 5.0L..
h-pipe, shorty headers, stock everything else


DEDICATED TO THE SURVIVAL OF COUGARS AND THUNDERBIRDS
4.3Lcougar is offline  
post #14 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 04:55 AM
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelsey Smith
Eh, I'm getting a 'A' in the class I did that in anyways...
...it was auto tech

And maybe it's not. Maybe that's just my minds way of rationalising having the 3.8 for at least another 11 months (Just had to put that $1900 in the bank)
eh whatever, your the one that suggested it might be a good thing in the first place. You do seem to be trying to do alot of rationalizing though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelsey Smith
The 3.8 is the lightest engine, as far as I know, oftered in the MN-12. Not enough of a diffrence to affect the power to weight issue, but enough to keep the front just a bit lighter than the S/C or 5.0/4.6. This means better handling. And because of the lack of power, the driver is forced to compensate in a road course type run, with improved technique in the corner.
One) The weight distribution might be a bit different but I don't buy it for a second that my '89 3.8L LS actually handled better then my '97 4.6L XR7 Sport. The '97 will out accelerate it in the straight aways and out handle it in the corners.

Two) That aside, even a non-sport 4.6L doesn't necessarily handle worse. More so they just handle a bit differently over the 3.8L. The spring rates are different on the two. It's not as simple as one it lighter and that's an automatic plus.

Anyway, how does the driver reaching the corner first equate to him not taking his cornering technique as seriously as someone who's losing? Being ahead usually isn't good enough for competititve road racing types. Perhaps he's motivated to leave you even further in the dust coming out of the corners as well.

Your premise seems to be that the slower car will force him to improve cornering technique so as not to fall even further behind, not that the lighter front end will give him the advantage in learning better cornering technique. If he has to take time readjusting his driving technique to a new faster / heavier car then isn't he actually at a disadvantage having learned to road race in the other car?

Last edited by Southpaw; 12-01-2006 at 05:02 AM.
Southpaw is offline  
post #15 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 07:52 AM
Street Freekz
 
96_Cougar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Point Pleasant, WV
Age: 32
Posts: 754
Send a message via MSN to 96_Cougar Send a message via Yahoo to 96_Cougar
Quote:
Originally Posted by racecougar
ABS/4 wheel disc was optional on the 3.8L MN12's (at least for the 94-96's, maybe other years as well).

-Rod
My '96 Cat has 4-wheel disc brakes w/ ABS along with some other options.



Quote:
Originally Posted by StupidFly
If you're speeding up for the turns, you obviously didnt go fast enough through the straights
Haha.... . I don't have that problem....just ask some police officers around here ;-)

In Memory of FD 420

"This will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave" ~ Elmer Davis, American news commentator (1890-1958). God bless all veterans: past & present.
96_Cougar is offline  
post #16 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 08:52 AM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
bad93bird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Needville, Texas
Age: 50
Posts: 2,876
Send a message via MSN to bad93bird
Too darn heavy to go fast through the straights. Need more torque. I'm trying to put a 418 ci in it. Just need to find a 351 to start.

QUADSQUAD MEMBER
bad93bird is offline  
post #17 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 11:15 PM
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 32
3.8's are horrible starter cars. So far, I can only find two positives on my 93 T-Bird.

It's reliable, and it's not a cop magnet. Other than that, it sucks. I have to floor it just to keep up with traffic. I raced my cousin in his 95 Aerostar, and got killed. That's just pathetic.

Luckily I just bought a 94 Camaro, going to pick it up tomorrow. Hopefully I'll see better performance from that and I can bid my Thunderbird farewell - it's not that I don't like the car, it's just way too ill-powered, especially for today when they're making mini vans with 250hp.
mwood88 is offline  
post #18 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 11:29 PM
Seasoned PostWhore
 
Nativedetroiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In my own world.
Age: 44
Posts: 6,195
Garage
Send a message via AIM to Nativedetroiter Send a message via MSN to Nativedetroiter Send a message via Yahoo to Nativedetroiter
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by mwood88
3.8's are horrible starter cars. So far, I can only find two positives on my 93 T-Bird.

It's reliable, and it's not a cop magnet. Other than that, it sucks. I have to floor it just to keep up with traffic. I raced my cousin in his 95 Aerostar, and got killed. That's just pathetic.

Luckily I just bought a 94 Camaro, going to pick it up tomorrow. Hopefully I'll see better performance from that and I can bid my Thunderbird farewell - it's not that I don't like the car, it's just way too ill-powered, especially for today when they're making mini vans with 250hp.

Why did you buy a 3.8L Thunderbird in the first place? I bought it cause I couldn't afford the high rollers at the time, and you are what? 18, In my eyes, you are still wet behind the ears for anything with more than 150HP. Really. My first car was an escort, and I am a better driver because of it. I think you wanted a camaro and a mullet all along, are you sure you are from Waterford? Or Taylortucky.... Just joking. I just don't understand where you are coming from.....

Ya, its funny, Funny like a Clown.
Nativedetroiter is offline  
post #19 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-01-2006, 11:41 PM
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 32
I didn't buy it. My parents bought it for me. It was only $500 from eBay. 49,000 miles at the time and a blown head gasket. My dad fixed it, and I've put on 15,000 miles since. It's been a really good car (except for the balljoint breaking and the wheel coming off), but I'm 18 and want something with a little more power. The Camaro only has 20 more horsepower, but it gets moving a lot quicker and it looks hotter.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Thunderchicken, I just hate the engine. Whatever engineer at Ford that decided a car the size of a small tank should get such a low powered engine deserves to be shot.

And for the record, my brother has an Escort. We raced. He kicked my ***. Both stock.
mwood88 is offline  
post #20 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-02-2006, 12:16 AM
6th Gear Poster
 
94mncougar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: St. Paul
Age: 33
Posts: 680
Send a message via AIM to 94mncougar
When I had my 92 3.8L V6, it moved way better than my friend's escort, both stock. We never raced because we both had slow cars and being reckless is not good in the cities either

- Stephen

Winter mods included:
- Developing Rocker Rust
- Saggy Suspension - fixed!
- Chipped paint
- I'm sure more to come... TOTALED
94mncougar is offline  
post #21 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-02-2006, 06:23 PM
Moderator
Iowa Chapter Director
Uber Luber
TCCoAAC Member
Moderator
 
Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ames, Iowa
Age: 35
Posts: 8,978
well I will comment that my v6 handles better than my v8 bird, but thats only because the v6 has Eibach springs, Tokico shocks, 17's (less sidewall flex) and lots of weight reduction. But I think once I get the all aluminum 4.6 DOHC swapped into the v8 bird, if I were to do the suspensions the same, they would handle just as equally. It's all in how you build the vehicle. Once I get the ADDCO bars, shock braces, subframe supports, and poly bushings installed it should be track worthy.

Stock for stock, the SC blows the NA 3.8 out of the water in power AND cornering. The adjustable shocks and stiffer springs on the SC handle surprisingly well. That combined with the options of a 5spd in the SC's makes it far superior.

And just for the record, ALL 3.8's have aluminum heads, not just the SC.

-Thomas

1988 Notch Mustang: - 438W, direct port n2o, t56
2003 SVT Focus: - SCT X3 tuner
Thomas is offline  
post #22 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-10-2006, 08:41 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 709
in my 4.6 I could control every gear on the 4R70W. 1, 2, 3 and OD are all selectible from the shifter. on my 3.8 w AOD only 1, 3 and OD are. the SC has better springs, shocks and sway bars as far as handling goes. my V8 even felt like it handled better. it had a differant stearing feel all together. differant ratios perhaps? my V8 also had 4 wheel disk ABS and LSD rear end. wider tires from factory and more power. Are you just finding excuses for owning a V6? I drive an NA 3.8 now. it steers easier in parking lots and is cheeper on insurance than the V8. also the AOD IMHO is more reliable that a first gen 4R70W. less stuff to break = cheeper to drive.
MN12BIRD is offline  
post #23 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-10-2006, 08:54 PM
Baby Huey
 
warmaster259's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Houston,TX
Age: 31
Posts: 3,210
V8/SC FTW lol

Jim

1995 Thunderbird LX: Vortech S-Trim(12psi), Forged PI 4.6, T-45, SCT Tune, Eibach Pro-kit, Magnaflow DI/DO Exhaust, 3.73 TL, and 17" Cobras

1995 Thunderbird SC: Bone Stock
warmaster259 is offline  
post #24 of 24 (permalink) Old 12-11-2006, 07:33 PM
Moderator
Iowa Chapter Director
Uber Luber
TCCoAAC Member
Moderator
 
Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ames, Iowa
Age: 35
Posts: 8,978
unless you had 16" wheels on your v8 car, they all came with 215/70/15 tires. Except for the steel wheels, they had 205/70/15's. And in the case that your 95 did have 16's, they were not factory in that year. Just sayin..
-Thomas

1988 Notch Mustang: - 438W, direct port n2o, t56
2003 SVT Focus: - SCT X3 tuner
Thomas is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TCCoA Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome