W-O-W - THAT IS interesting!!! Where'd you ever find THAT info???? I have no clue as to the answer!!! I don't think it had anything to do with the ascMcLaren end of things, my hunch is the Ford end of things! But.....WHAT ??
S A N D Y
--- In ascmclaren@yahoogroups.com, "ecstacycustomz" <ecstacycustomz@y...> wrote: > weights of all years > > 1984 coupe--3063, 84 rag--3124, 85 coupe--3113, 85 rag--3165, 86 > coupe--3189, 86 rag--3269, 87-3214, 88--3341, 89--3333, 90--3327 > thats 127lbs difference from 87 to 88. seems very odd to me.. these > weights are non option weight. but less thatn 20lbs difference for > all other year mustang asc's.. so i guess my original question > should have been why did the 87 weight so much less? there was 104 > lbs difference from 85 to 86, this was probably due to the addition > of the fuel injection and other engine changes in the capri. but im > still baffled by the stang numbers.... anyone anyone > jdawg > > > > >
--- In ascmclaren@yahoogroups.com, "Sandy Block" <cigarsandy@c...> > wrote: > > I don't know that it is. I have never seen any weight figures > > released from ASCMcLaren on the weights between the years, but it > > would seem that they'd all be within say 20 pounds of each other. > > I'd say that the Recaro Seat Option in 1987/1988 might be good for > an > > additional 10 pounds (5 per side); but other than that, I > personally > > don't know of any reason. What did you find out??? > > > > > > > >
--- In ascmclaren@yahoogroups.com, "ecstacycustomz" > > <ecstacycustomz@y...> wrote: > > > ok who can answer this.... > > > why is the 88 asc heavier than any other year asc? coming in at > > > 3341 lbs????? > > > jdawg