0657
<<
Message Index
>>
0659
Number: 0658
From: n20capri
Date: Mon Mar 11, 2002 10:23 pm
Subject: Re: 88 McLaren
Body:
Sandy,
also, you can see the proportioning valve in this picture (see link -
bottom right of the picture)
http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~st947g38/myfriends/MikeNewWeb/images/Moto
rFront.jpg
Thanks,
Mike
--- In ascmclaren@y..., n20capri <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> My Car had a proportioning valve on it when I bought it. I thought
> it was factory McLaren stuff. Could it be or did the previous
owner
> install it?
>
> -Mike
> 86 AscMcLaren Capri #26
>
>
--- In ascmclaren@y..., cigarsandy <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > AnThOnY:
> > Sometimes it's difficult, as the master listing of what was going
> to
> > be changed/altered does not always prove 100%. Further example:
> It
> > states that the braking system on the Coupes (asc/McLaren Mercury
> > Capri Hatchback Coupes of 1984, 1985 & 1986) was "modified" by
the
> > addition of a "Brake Porportioning Valve" as well as Sintered
> > Metallic Heavy Duty Pads, replacing "Stock" equipment. This
switch
> > was to be done BY asc/McLaren at the Livonia Avenue site.
HOWEVER,
> > after printed material was printed (Including mention of this in
> the
> > Coupe sales brochure) asc/McLaren found out that if they TOUCHED
or
> > ALTERED the braking system, they'd first have to crash test,
under
> > government eyes the actual testing, and it had better conform to
> all
> > requirements and it better improve the stock system, and blah,
> blah,
> > blah. So, in the 11th hour, asc scratched the idea, and carried
> all
> > the valves to the dumpster. So, anyone reading the materials
that
> I
> > have, or even just possessing the brochure, would swear it has
> these
> > items, when in fact...none ever did!!!
> > I think the 3:73:1 axle ratio in automatics might be the same
> scenaro!
> >
> > S A N D Y
> >
> >
> >
> > -- In ascmclaren@y..., asc88mclaren <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > Thanks Sandy for all your help. I was just curious on this! I
> > just
> > > like to know about these things, it is very interesting to me.
I
> > > really would have liked to have had the 3.73's!!! Quicker 0-
> 60!!!
> > > Oh well, guess I'll just live with stock, or eventually change
> > them.
> > > But thanks again for all your help.
> > >
> > > Anthony
> > > ***bE oRiGiNaL***
> > >
> > >
--- In ascmclaren@y..., cigarsandy <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > > This rear axle ratio is a "grey area". I do know that the
> 2.73:1
> > > was
> > > > standard equipment in the 5-Speeds, and that ALL cars with a
> D32
> > > code
> > > > (asc/McLaren Spec) that were 5-Speeds did get the 3.08:1
> ratio.
> > > NOW,
> > > > according to asc/McLaren paperwork dated 1/'87 it states that
> > > > the "normal" rear axle ratio for an automatic 5.0L LX or GT
was
> a
> > > > 3.23:1. It further states that D32 Spec Automatics would
> > receive
> > > AT
> > > > FORD the FORD AXLE RATIO of 3.72. Is it possible that this
> > didn't
> > > > REALLY take place? Yes, I guess so. Did it take place on
SOME
> > > cars
> > > > and NOT OTHERS? Possible! Was it 1987s only? MAYBE!? Was
it
> > > > planned, and not done? MAYBE. Perhaps yours was among SOME
> that
> > > did
> > > > not receive it?? Possibly!! I am not, never was mechanical,
> so
> > I
> > > > have never taken one apart as you have, and if I did, I would
> not
> > > > know what I was looking at, anyhow......so, I sure as heck
I'm
> > NOT
> > > > doubting your intelligence, as I am sure you are correct. I
am
> > > only
> > > > relating what I have found on asc/McLaren corporate work,
> > smuggled
> > > > out to me in the dead of night!! < grins >
> > > > S A N D Y
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
--- In ascmclaren@y..., asc88mclaren <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > > > I don't think they put 3.73 in the 88 automatics. The
reason
> I
> > > say
> > > > > this is because I recently had to pull my rear apart to fix
a
> > > leaky
> > > > > rear axle seal and leaky rear pinion seal, and while I was
in
> > > there
> > > > I
> > > > > counted the teeth and came up with 36 on the ring and 11 on
> the
> > > > > pinion, and that truns out to be around 3.27 when you do
the
> > > math.
> > > > > My rear has never been replaced, and these are the gears
that
> > > came
> > > > > with the car origionally. I was just wondering if this is
> > > > correct.
> > > > > I may be wrong and have miscounted, I am just curious.
> Anyone
> > > with
> > > > > an answer, thank you for your help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anthony
> > > > > ***bE oRiGiNaL***
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
--- In ascmclaren@y..., cigarsandy <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Anthony !
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some Rumor! No where close to 300HP, they do produce 225
> H.P.
> > > > > > They DID "hop-up" the rear end! In 5-Speed cars the
> standard
> > > > rear
> > > > > > was 2.73 & they upped it to 3.08. In automatic cars
> standard
> > > was
> > > > > > 3.23 & they hopped it up to 3.73.
> > > > > >