1981 Ford Mustang Cobra 4.2L - $300 (oakland hills / mills)

[shaolinfox30]

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/cto/2207846992.html


1981 Ford Mustang Cobra 4.2L Hatchback
Automatic Transmission
Needs carburetor
Body is pretty straight
Needs work
restore or parts car
$300 as is

[capri50asc]

Body looks ok, But that 4.2L engine scare's me!

Chris

[shaolinfox30]

I hear ya!

[#67 Black Mac']

I'm curious, what is it that's scary about a 4.2 V8?

[negusm]

Nothing too much if you like your cars stock. Although I think a water pump may be hard to find anymore.

If you want to mod it, you can't do anything with the engine. Can't stroke, bore it, or put better heads on it. I don't even think the exhaust manifolds are the same as the 5.0.

-Mike

[capri50asc]

If you Google FORD MOTOR COMPANY 4.2L Engine you will see it was one of the worst engines made . Consumers reports also stated that the engine destroys itself because it has a very small crank and has a very thin crankcase.

Chris

[Kentennis]

Unlike the almost indestructable 3.0L V-6 or the 4.6L V-8. Both have been in our vehicles for an awful lot of miles.

[capri50asc]

Kenny you are right! Here are some of Fords BEST engines!


1) 5.0L
2) 3.0L
3) 4.6L
4) 289 cid
5) 351W cid
6) 390 cid
7) 428 cid
429 cid
9) 300 cid (truck)
10) 351 C

Chris

[KHummel66]

Kenny you are right! Here are some of Fords BEST engines!


1) 5.0L
2) 3.0L
3) 4.6L
4) 289 cid
5) 351W cid
6) 390 cid
7) 428 cid
429 cid
9) 300 cid (truck)
10) 351 C

Chris

What, no 427 SO ?? Cobra! Cobra! Cobra!

[Kentennis]

That old inline 6 300 CID was a fantastic engine. Couldn't kill them with normal maintenance. They quit making it to shorten the engine bay by going to a V6. Then they went and made a V-10!!

[#67 Black Mac']

The 400ci was a good one too.
I bought a 72 Galaxy with one in it that already had 125,000mi.
At about 235,000mi the car rusted out from under it so I put it in a 74 Merc & drove it another 60,000mi.

The best $100 car I ever owned

[Kentennis]

The '97 Expedition I gave my stepdaughter has over 300,000 on it and nothing ever goes wrong with it. 4.6L V-8. And it gets just under 25MPG on the highway.

My new one gets 17.5-18.2 around this area (5.4L, 6 speed auto) but doesn't do much better on the highway. We went to Fanning Springs, which is pretty much open road, last week end and only got 19.2 for a 200+ mile trip.

Had so many good cars I don't really have a favorite. Worst mileage?

1988 Chevy 3+3 4 door dually with 454. On 1 tank I got 10 MPG, on the flatland of Georgia with the cruise set at 60. Never got that good again. Beautiful truck though. Black and Chrome. People would gather around it and look at rest stops, and want to know all about it.

1959 Ford Retractible. 352 V-8. Not sure but it sucked gas.

[negusm]

Those old inline 6s were nearly indestructible.

From your list above, I would lump the 260/289/302 together. They are all pretty much the same engine. Those engines were always super reliable and just ran well.

-Mike

[Kentennis]

260 cubic inches = 4.2L.

My very first brand new car was a 1966 Ford Fairlane 500 XL 2 door hardtop. 289, 3 speed automatic with 'Select shift.' I bought it then Ford came out with a 5/50,000 mile extended warranty for $25.00. I bought it. I was driving back and forth between Grand rapids, Mich and Warren, Mich. (North of Detroit). 165 miles each way, every weekend.

I was disconnecting the speedometer for months at a time and at the end of 5 years it showed 50,000 miles. Never had a problem with the car. Hooked it up and when I traded it in 1974 it showed 156,000 miles! Guess that's why I prefer Fords. Never any problems. My '07 F150 had 1 problem and it was the rear end. They replaced the entire rear end assembly. It was MADE IN JAPAN!!

[negusm]

260 cubic inches = 4.2L.

Yes, but I'm talking about the 260 of 1963/64.

-Mike