I was interested because I thought that it might be similar to the McLaren mustang. I don't care much for the mustangs these days,but I really like the McLaren version with the 4 cylinder turbo engine. I know that it's not that fast,but I would like to have one. I came across one of these Capris for sale,but it is optioned in Brown and tan and it is a convertible.
smithraymond09029 The McLaren Capri convertibles are actually more common than their "Coupes". They made 557 ragtops and only a little over 300 coupes. The ragtops were only two seaters and the windshield was laid back at more of an angle than a Mustang convertible making them look like a "chopped top".
By 1993, FWD Mazda 3's were being shipped from Japan to Australia and made into convertibles and sold in USA as Mercury Capri convertibles... with a 4 banger...
I bought a '86 Capri 5.0 with 5-speed in 1989 at a Ford dealership in Simi Valley, Cal. It had a full body aero kit and surprisingly, air conditioning delete. Loved it! There were a few ASC McLaren convertibles running around the L.A. area at that time, but no one had a regular ol' Capri 5.0. There were plenty of 3.8 V6 Capris from 1979 to 1986 (I don't believe the Mercury version ever had the Mustang 2.3 4 cylinder option in the years the Mustang-based Capri was available), but no one seemed to have a Capri. Wish I never got rid of that car...
Great Video and information! I still have my 1984 Mercury Capri RS with a 5.0 V8 that I got from my father! He bought the car new in 1983. It still has the factory oxford white paint with the tri-color stripe kit and pace car air-dam.
lol. Never understood the appeal/point of Mclaren Mustangs. Just put bigger tires, a stiffer suspension, and some cheesy decals, and expect buyers to pay a premium for something they could do themselves. Probably why they became extinct in the 90s.
The MKV GTI DSG I used to have did a best 0-60 of 6 seconds flat with a 1/4 of 14.2 at 98mph, so yeah something isn't right. A 90mph trap is typically in the 15s; maybe it was a typo?mistake and it was supposed to be 15.2 @ 90mph, which would be on par for the 7.7 0-60.
I am always surprised that this channel hasn't got enough subscribers that it actually should have. Motorweek and the old TopGear for me are of the same league.
I will always say. Motorweek and the Old Top Gear were my English teacher, it doesn't have subtitles back then, and I used to record the episodes in my vcr and watch over and over, till I get it, next week, same thing. I've got to a point that was needless to watch again.
@2:15 The driver missed the opening for the lane change cones and turned between the narrower cones after the assigned opening of the lane change cones. The car performed quite awesome.
Those of us who tune/race cars will recognize the 1/4 time is more like 15.2 and not the 14.2 @90mph. The 7.7 0-60 times don’t add up. That being said for 86 those were good times.
These cars are beautiful all Fox Body car's are beautiful. I was looking for a 93 Cobra SVT they're asking 75,000.00 it's not even the Cobra R model. Those are going for over 100,000.00
Something is not quite right. E/T 14.2 but traps only 90mph and 0-60 took 7.7sec! I call it B.S. Probably the editor messed the numbers. That is 15.2 sec car
I remember the cover story in Autoweek (back when they published on newsprint) on the ASC McClaren and what a big deal it was. Never saw one in person, don't think many were sold. Amazing how our concept of fast changes over time. Most modern minivans will smoke this thing on a dragstrip.
3:05..........I REALLY wish MotorWeek had made a cold start/drivability evaluation part of their road tests of carbureted & early fuel-injected vehicles back in the day. 4:47........$22,700 & it STILL has a buzzer for the key-in-ignition reminder/warning?!!!!!!!!
$15,200 was really expensive back then. In today's money, $15,200 would nearly $36,000. Compare that value to today's equivalent. A stock 2019 Mustang Ecoboost turbo 4 cylinder would blow this thing out of the water for ~$10,000 less, and a stock 2019 Mustang GT would absolutely vaporize it for $35,000.
@@nukewiller4083 well this was a special edition Mustang. So if it's equivalent to 36k in today's money that's still a good deal. You only get a bare-bones Mustang GT for that price today, that's if they even exist at the dealer. I've never seen one under 40k. I'm sure they're out there somewhere.
@@easycomeeasygo8901 Just because it was "special" doesn't mean it was a good value. And there are plenty of new Mustangs below $40,000. You can even find stripped GTs and Ecoboost Premiums for under $40,000 easily. Half the Mustangs at my local dealer are for around $40,000 or less.
@@nukewiller4083 the internet, youtube, and you can try all day to convince me that a 50k mustang or camero or Challenger is an affordable bargain. But my pocket as well as the pockets of many other people disagree. Yes they are faster and better built than the old ones, and 700 wheel horsepower capable with a supercharger from the factory. If you have another 10 to 15,000 laying around for the supercharger, tune, and supporting mods. they're all very nice Vehicles just not affordable that's all I'm trying to say. The Mustang in this MotorWeek didn't have any less value than say a California special Mustang today. The Mustang GT in 86 was about 10,500. New Mustang GT today is about 3 times as expensive, at base price, no big brakes and skinny on this car 255s i believe. Mustang sales of the fox era were double of what they are today. I've talked to many people at the Mustang shows I've gone to. And while Everyone likes the gains the Mustang has had, most will agree the price is getting out of hand. And I'm not even going to get into $70,000 Raptors and hundred-thousand-dollar Navigators. Car loans are stretching out to 84 to help people afford to pay their payments. A record amount of people are three months or more behind in payment. But im sure you're going to disagree with all of this, but that's your prerogative.
@@easycomeeasygo8901 Vehicle purchasing power is virtually unchanged over the last 30 years, and dollar per performance is the best it's ever been. Ecoboost Mustangs are sub-$30,000 cars all year long, and provide more eye-watering performance than anything you could get back in the day. If you can't afford your trill at that price, it's a purely personal issue.
These worth big bucks now? I don't think the ASC Mclaren Grand Prix from the 90's being worth much but is the ASC Capri worth something? I see it being pretty rare? Were there any other ASC Mclaren versions?
They got something or some things wrong. 0 to 60 in 7.7 is more like a high 15 at 90. A 14.2 at 90 isn't possible..... there simply isnt enough traction on stock tires for a time/trap speed combo like that! A 14.2 would equate to more like a 98 mph trap speed with the traction available on the stock tires. My 86 5.0 Mustang when stock managed a 14.4 at 96 with no spare tire and minimal gas. A typical run with a full tank and spare would have been closer to a 14.6 at 94.... and a 0 to 60 in 5.9 or 6 seconds. Most magazine times were in the low 15s in the low 90s. Motorweek has had more than 1 really sketch batch of performance numbers over the years... this being one of them!
@Joe Mamma mine did many a time. 2.2 60 foot and shifting at 5,000 rpms yield consistent 14.4s at 96 with cool weather near sea level at Cecil County drag way... which is known to be one of the fastest tracks in the country. Mine was a LX so it was light and as I said this was with no spare or jack and not much fuel in the tank.... Went 14.3 at 97 with pullies and no mufflers.
My neighbor has the Mustang convertible version of this car. Justs sits in his garage and he hasn't driven it for at least ten years. Been bugging him to sell it to me but he always says no.
Didn’t see, but one cool blue/green with orange trim ASC back then. But I latter bought 86 5spd. Conv. Mine had Cobra t-5 swapping. My was a put back together wreaked. Clear title. Wish it hadn’t lost its stiff engineering. It was Charcoal & charcoal
Something doesn’t add up. 7.7 to 60 yet still pulled a 14.2 quarter mi? Any car doing 14.2 is gonna have a mid 5 second 0-60 and any car doing 0-60 in 7.7 is gonna have a quarter mile mid to high 15s
TREVOR THE BALD MINGE chill out dude, it's friggin 1986. They didn't mod the engine, more bodywork and suspension. It may not be nearly as fast but I'm sure it's a hell of a lot more reliable than the supercars they build today.
@@sidefx996 different company that make the supercars, they are British called McLaren Automotive and part of the McLaren Group based in England which is also has the F1 team. There is no connection to ASC McLaren in the States.
Pretty much everything in the seventies and eighties I was way under powered like that so no shock there they didn't perfect smog systems such as catalytic converter smog pumps and all that and it really diluted the power of the engine
So I get the ASC part, American Sunroof Company, they did the conversion. But where did the "McLaren" part come in?? As far as I can research, the McLaren F1 race team(they were only a race team in the 1980's, this was before they ventured into road cars with the McLaren F1) had nothing to do with these hopped up Capris.
My uncle had an 87 Mustang asc McClaren, and the only upgrades were the convertible mechanism, body kit and rims. Didnt know they did hardtop Capris with upgraded suspension
McLaren Engines is an American company that did the tuning. They are now called McLaren Engineering a subsidiary of Linamar (Canada), now mostly agricultural and industrial drivetrains.
Perhaps MW used the automatic convertible's 0-60 and the 5 speed coupe's 1/4 mile times? Seems that when MW has tested the automatic foxbody 5.0 the 0-60 is always in the high 7s, but the 5 speed 1/4 times seem to be in the 14 second range. Just a highly speculative guess :-)
From the calculators I can see online, a 14.2 quarter would need at least a 96 mph trap speed. A poor launch would need to be even quicker. I think there's a typo.
@@kokocostanza2036 Yeah, I agree. Unless the vehicle is super light with low hp(which would allow a fast ET with a so-so trap speed), this video is a wrong.
@@05gtdriver Even then, I don't see how the trap could be that low outside of being a rocket off the line and running out of steam towards the end, but the video doesn't show it launching all that well
@@kokocostanza2036 Gearing makes acceleration and hp makes mph. A lightweight car, like a Caterham 7 with 130ish hp, but 1200lb of weight could run a low 14 but not exceed 90mph.
Want to help keep our weekly Retro Reviews alive? DONATE NOW: mptevents.regfox.com/motorweek
I remember watching MotorWeek on PBS every Saturday back in the 80s. Love watching these old reviews.
I do also :)
It's still every Saturday for me. Ever since the 80’s. I'm 43.
Same
I did also but I miss the opening on these retro episodes. Wish those were on these as that was to the best opening till about 2002.
Just like me.
This was the better looking Mustang of that era IMO.
These had the wide body and bubble rear hatch glass.
Better tail lights too. An SVO Capri would've been awesome.
I was GLUED to the tv back then when motorweek came on!
Me to I use to watch road test magazine
Me2 every sunday!
Love old Motor Week‼️ Especially the obscure cars.
Gotta love the 80s. It’s a GT with a bigger price tag.
My thoughts exactly. 1987 ‘stang GT
I was interested because I thought that it might be similar to the McLaren mustang. I don't care much for the mustangs these days,but I really like the McLaren version with the 4 cylinder turbo engine. I know that it's not that fast,but I would like to have one. I came across one of these Capris for sale,but it is optioned in Brown and tan and it is a convertible.
@@chriswheeler6092 Get it..
"_ I bought the cheapest MacLaren Mercury Capri in the US..."
Hoover, Tyler.
Did this sell in America!?
@@surfside75
Yep
The Mercury brand was North America only I believe.
He bought an ASC McLaren Grand Prix. I don't remember what he did with it.
I made it :)
Still love ❤️ that Capri!! I still want one ☝🏿
I love these retro reviews!
I have never ever seen a Capri convertible. Didn't know anyone made them. That coupe looks sharp.
It's the same company that made all mustang convertibles. Ford would ship them to asc to be made in to ragtops
Uncle Eddie Cars & Concepts made the Fox Mustang convertibles NOT ASC/McLaren (they did make the 3rd Gen Camaro convertibles though starting in '87).
smithraymond09029 The McLaren Capri convertibles are actually more common than their "Coupes". They made 557 ragtops and only a little over 300 coupes. The ragtops were only two seaters and the windshield was laid back at more of an angle than a Mustang convertible making them look like a "chopped top".
*Actually, I think it may have been LESS than 300 coupes.
By 1993, FWD Mazda 3's were being shipped from Japan to Australia and made into convertibles and sold in USA as Mercury Capri convertibles... with a 4 banger...
I've always thought the Fox body looked best in the Capri form. That front end on the McCleren ASC coup just looks mean af!
I want one so bad
@@bandccoresohio fuck yeah!
I bought a '86 Capri 5.0 with 5-speed in 1989 at a Ford dealership in Simi Valley, Cal. It had a full body aero kit and surprisingly, air conditioning delete. Loved it! There were a few ASC McLaren convertibles running around the L.A. area at that time, but no one had a regular ol' Capri 5.0. There were plenty of 3.8 V6 Capris from 1979 to 1986 (I don't believe the Mercury version ever had the Mustang 2.3 4 cylinder option in the years the Mustang-based Capri was available), but no one seemed to have a Capri. Wish I never got rid of that car...
Great Video and information! I still have my 1984 Mercury Capri RS with a 5.0 V8 that I got from my father! He bought the car new in 1983. It still has the factory oxford white paint with the tri-color stripe kit and pace car air-dam.
the coupe looks really nice
Love the retro reviews!!! Been watching since the 80s!!!! Keep them coming!!!!
The McLaren mods also added one extra hamster-power which was good for a .00000009 second improvement 0-60.
lol. Never understood the appeal/point of Mclaren Mustangs. Just put bigger tires, a stiffer suspension, and some cheesy decals, and expect buyers to pay a premium for something they could do themselves. Probably why they became extinct in the 90s.
Uh yeah, If he don't fall off his wheel..
They need to bring this show back! I watched it every Saturday in Detroit! Loved this show as a kid!
14.2 second 1/4 mile, but a 0-60 of 7.7 seconds? Something doesn't add up.
It shows you how poorly it launched. Imagine if you could get it to hook up and match the mustang's 6 second 0-60.
I was thinking the same thing with that low trap speed
There's no way 90 mph equaled 14.2 in the quarter. My suv's times new were 0-60 in 6.9, the 1/4 in 15.4 at 90.
Tool0GT92 wasn’t it funny how they said it wouldn’t hook at full throttle or something like that 😂
The MKV GTI DSG I used to have did a best 0-60 of 6 seconds flat with a 1/4 of 14.2 at 98mph, so yeah something isn't right. A 90mph trap is typically in the 15s; maybe it was a typo?mistake and it was supposed to be 15.2 @ 90mph, which would be on par for the 7.7 0-60.
When I watch these videos I am transported to the late '90s on a Sunday morning watching Speed TV
Hey guys I got a McLaren!
*shows this Capri*
You wouldn't be lying! LOL
True Story..
Like my buddy back in the day.
“Dude, I got a ‘Vette. A Chevette.”
Hey, me too! (shows his '90 Grand Prix McLaren).
😅😅😅
I am always surprised that this channel hasn't got enough subscribers that it actually should have. Motorweek and the old TopGear for me are of the same league.
I will always say.
Motorweek and the Old Top Gear were my English teacher, it doesn't have subtitles back then, and I used to record the episodes in my vcr and watch over and over, till I get it, next week, same thing.
I've got to a point that was needless to watch again.
@@DIZAZZO Hahaha same here man !! Exactly !!
Ah those 80's 0-60 times.
iSlandeRon 0-60 in 1 hour 2 minutes and 30 seconds! Wow!
@@ForgottenReasons Pervert
@@rodmunch69 Pervert
My mom had a 5 speed coupe!
I remember your mom. We had good times in that car. 😏😏 ooo yeah
Yeah...your mom...what a great gal.
Yea Your mom had good times in that car 😯
I’m so glad I was a kid that watched Motorweek growing up! John Davis Is The O.G.‼️
I wonder how many Capris convertibles they produced. And how many have survived.
Sounds like the ideal rare F Body enthusiasts would love to own..
Man still a great looking car! Always loved those!
5:16 John: PERFECT FOR A WIND THE FACE SING-ALONG! LOL
There are a lot of urban legends about these cars.
Interesting. I never heard of these cars.
Let's see my parents 1994 buick skylark next 😅
I would love a black coupe like the one in this video and either turbo or supercharge it to get it up to 250hp. It would be a sleeper
😍love that black Capri!
I have an 1988 ASC McLaren Supercharged its got 850hp its one of a kind
wow, thats awesome
I had a friend who had one. It was a cool car.
@2:15 The driver missed the opening for the lane change cones and turned between the narrower cones after the assigned opening of the lane change cones. The car performed quite awesome.
Those of us who tune/race cars will recognize the 1/4 time is more like 15.2 and not the 14.2 @90mph. The 7.7 0-60 times don’t add up. That being said for 86 those were good times.
I definitely raised an eyebrow at 14.2. Last time I looked at stock Foxbody times the fastest was about 14.8 for a 5.0.
Bad ass car right here!! Capris are very rare anyways, let alone the Mclaren
Ual amigão que sensacional 👏👏👏 esse canal é nota mil 👍👍👍🇱🇷🇱🇷
👏👏👏🇱🇷🇱🇷🇱🇷 muito da hora
I like this black 3 door.
Larry June bought me here, im a Chevy guy but nice ass whip
I love these retro review
Probably the rarest fox bodies built
I believe that the ASC Eurocoupe was probably the best looking Fox Chassis. Second is easily an Oxford White 85/86 GT.
5:16 seats with speakers , godamn 👍👍👍
These cars are beautiful all Fox Body car's are beautiful. I was looking for a 93 Cobra SVT they're asking 75,000.00 it's not even the Cobra R model. Those are going for over 100,000.00
Not to be confused with the British McLaren!
Lincoln MkVII LSC still the best foxbody
Looks like a swooped up mustang foxbody 👍🏼
All it is
Love the rear end of the coupe - never knew these existed!
I bet yours looks better
@@eltonjohn3236 😉
Speakers in the head rest!? Way ahead of its time....
Is the Capri a FoxBody car, just like the mustang ?
I believe so.
First car I ever drove when I was still just fifteen. The one that made me a car guy.
Something is not quite right. E/T 14.2 but traps only 90mph and 0-60 took 7.7sec! I call it B.S. Probably the editor messed the numbers. That is 15.2 sec car
Solid axle cars made up ETs with 60 foot times.
No it's 15.2 for sure
When 0-60 in 7.7 seconds was considered to be "very fast"... something between cute and awkward nowadays :3
I remember the cover story in Autoweek (back when they published on newsprint) on the ASC McClaren and what a big deal it was. Never saw one in person, don't think many were sold. Amazing how our concept of fast changes over time. Most modern minivans will smoke this thing on a dragstrip.
@Frank White - I think you missed the point.
Good looking car
3:05..........I REALLY wish MotorWeek had made a cold start/drivability evaluation part of their road tests of carbureted & early fuel-injected vehicles back in the day. 4:47........$22,700 & it STILL has a buzzer for the key-in-ignition reminder/warning?!!!!!!!!
i use to record the reviews on V.H.S , the watch them over and over.
Hearing 7.7 seconds to 60 mph is very fast in 2020. 🤣
Always wanted one of these😔
And that was also the last year of the Fox body Capri. I've seen the ragtops, but never a coupe version of this car.
15K for Pony car now that's what I'm talkin about? 👍 I like these old foxes
$15,200 was really expensive back then. In today's money, $15,200 would nearly $36,000. Compare that value to today's equivalent. A stock 2019 Mustang Ecoboost turbo 4 cylinder would blow this thing out of the water for ~$10,000 less, and a stock 2019 Mustang GT would absolutely vaporize it for $35,000.
@@nukewiller4083 well this was a special edition Mustang. So if it's equivalent to 36k in today's money that's still a good deal. You only get a bare-bones Mustang GT for that price today, that's if they even exist at the dealer. I've never seen one under 40k. I'm sure they're out there somewhere.
@@easycomeeasygo8901 Just because it was "special" doesn't mean it was a good value. And there are plenty of new Mustangs below $40,000. You can even find stripped GTs and Ecoboost Premiums for under $40,000 easily. Half the Mustangs at my local dealer are for around $40,000 or less.
@@nukewiller4083 the internet, youtube, and you can try all day to convince me that a 50k mustang or camero or Challenger is an affordable bargain. But my pocket as well as the pockets of many other people disagree. Yes they are faster and better built than the old ones, and 700 wheel horsepower capable with a supercharger from the factory. If you have another 10 to 15,000 laying around for the supercharger, tune, and supporting mods. they're all very nice Vehicles just not affordable that's all I'm trying to say. The Mustang in this MotorWeek didn't have any less value than say a California special Mustang today. The Mustang GT in 86 was about 10,500. New Mustang GT today is about 3 times as expensive, at base price, no big brakes and skinny on this car 255s i believe. Mustang sales of the fox era were double of what they are today. I've talked to many people at the Mustang shows I've gone to. And while Everyone likes the gains the Mustang has had, most will agree the price is getting out of hand. And I'm not even going to get into $70,000 Raptors and hundred-thousand-dollar Navigators. Car loans are stretching out to 84 to help people afford to pay their payments. A record amount of people are three months or more behind in payment. But im sure you're going to disagree with all of this, but that's your prerogative.
@@easycomeeasygo8901 Vehicle purchasing power is virtually unchanged over the last 30 years, and dollar per performance is the best it's ever been. Ecoboost Mustangs are sub-$30,000 cars all year long, and provide more eye-watering performance than anything you could get back in the day. If you can't afford your trill at that price, it's a purely personal issue.
Its a better looking fox body XD
These worth big bucks now? I don't think the ASC Mclaren Grand Prix from the 90's being worth much but is the ASC Capri worth something? I see it being pretty rare? Were there any other ASC Mclaren versions?
I’d gladly drive this even now
I like that coupe a lot!!!
The barn find push back in
They got something or some things wrong. 0 to 60 in 7.7 is more like a high 15 at 90. A 14.2 at 90 isn't possible..... there simply isnt enough traction on stock tires for a time/trap speed combo like that! A 14.2 would equate to more like a 98 mph trap speed with the traction available on the stock tires. My 86 5.0 Mustang when stock managed a 14.4 at 96 with no spare tire and minimal gas. A typical run with a full tank and spare would have been closer to a 14.6 at 94.... and a 0 to 60 in 5.9 or 6 seconds. Most magazine times were in the low 15s in the low 90s.
Motorweek has had more than 1 really sketch batch of performance numbers over the years... this being one of them!
@Joe Mamma mine did many a time. 2.2 60 foot and shifting at 5,000 rpms yield consistent 14.4s at 96 with cool weather near sea level at Cecil County drag way... which is known to be one of the fastest tracks in the country.
Mine was a LX so it was light and as I said this was with no spare or jack and not much fuel in the tank....
Went 14.3 at 97 with pullies and no mufflers.
You're 100% right. The 0-60 time of 7.7 and 1/4 mile trap speed of 90 don't add up to anything close to low 14's. More like low 15's.
My neighbor has the Mustang convertible version of this car. Justs sits in his garage and he hasn't driven it for at least ten years. Been bugging him to sell it to me but he always says no.
Didn’t see, but one cool blue/green with orange trim ASC back then. But I latter bought 86 5spd. Conv. Mine had Cobra t-5 swapping. My was a put back together wreaked. Clear title. Wish it hadn’t lost its stiff engineering. It was Charcoal & charcoal
So 80s!!!! Fantastic !
That is a nice looking coupe.
“Very fast”!😂
All that dip. Lol the good ole days
Something doesn’t add up. 7.7 to 60 yet still pulled a 14.2 quarter mi? Any car doing 14.2 is gonna have a mid 5 second 0-60 and any car doing 0-60 in 7.7 is gonna have a quarter mile mid to high 15s
A Classy Fox Body🦊🥰. What More Could You Ask For?!
Wish I still had my mustang lx with the gt hardware.
God John is so damn young here
They filled in the rest of the speedometer at 1:51 I believe the SVO from 1984 only went up to 85 then just had a bunch of red lines.
I wonder how many of these are left?
How are you going to put McLaren on a car and the car only makes under 200 hp,
McLaren tuned the Buick Grand National, and that car is a monster.
TREVOR THE BALD MINGE chill out dude, it's friggin 1986. They didn't mod the engine, more bodywork and suspension. It may not be nearly as fast but I'm sure it's a hell of a lot more reliable than the supercars they build today.
@@sidefx996 different company that make the supercars, they are British called McLaren Automotive and part of the McLaren Group based in England which is also has the F1 team. There is no connection to ASC McLaren in the States.
Pretty much everything in the seventies and eighties I was way under powered like that so no shock there they didn't perfect smog systems such as catalytic converter smog pumps and all that and it really diluted the power of the engine
It was the 80's you would be lucky if your car didn't have an air pump.
My friend told me a story of buying one of these over a Grand National GNX back in the day.
@William Schwartz Unfortunately, the friends car got totaled as he underestimated the cars power.
Larry June brought me here - LOL
So I get the ASC part, American Sunroof Company, they did the conversion. But where did the "McLaren" part come in?? As far as I can research, the McLaren F1 race team(they were only a race team in the 1980's, this was before they ventured into road cars with the McLaren F1) had nothing to do with these hopped up Capris.
My uncle had an 87 Mustang asc McClaren, and the only upgrades were the convertible mechanism, body kit and rims. Didnt know they did hardtop Capris with upgraded suspension
The beginning of the video explained it.
McLaren Engines is an American company that did the tuning. They are now called McLaren Engineering a subsidiary of Linamar (Canada), now mostly agricultural and industrial drivetrains.
sooo...this where the 87’GT got its styling que from🤔
7.7 0-60 and still managed a 14.2 1/4? Something doesn’t had up....
So the Capri was a more expensive Mustang???
Is this the same mclaren as the supercar maker?
I have never heard of these models. or ever seen one wonder how many of the 1000 are around still
Build it yourself. Just what Saleen did. And sold a bunch more of those kits for other Mustangs.
3:27 More like 15.2 at 90
0-60 was 7.7
Perhaps MW used the automatic convertible's 0-60 and the 5 speed coupe's 1/4 mile times? Seems that when MW has tested the automatic foxbody 5.0 the 0-60 is always in the high 7s, but the 5 speed 1/4 times seem to be in the 14 second range. Just a highly speculative guess :-)
From the calculators I can see online, a 14.2 quarter would need at least a 96 mph trap speed. A poor launch would need to be even quicker.
I think there's a typo.
@@kokocostanza2036 Yeah, I agree. Unless the vehicle is super light with low hp(which would allow a fast ET with a so-so trap speed), this video is a wrong.
@@05gtdriver Even then, I don't see how the trap could be that low outside of being a rocket off the line and running out of steam towards the end, but the video doesn't show it launching all that well
@@kokocostanza2036 Gearing makes acceleration and hp makes mph.
A lightweight car, like a Caterham 7 with 130ish hp, but 1200lb of weight could run a low 14 but not exceed 90mph.
they should have at least upgraded to some long tube headers and exhaust system. and they could have made the airscoups functional.
Is a nice car?
Larry June got me here lol
Rad!
I have one of these with 13, 728 miles on it.
Sekhem El awesome I would like to see some pics of it?
Very underrated. 🤐
Cool Car's 😀
Didn’t touch the engine... Dam that IS what you should be touching
Anyone else catch some resemblance in the convertible to a newer Challenger? At least when locking head on....
SGT Nick H I see it
Dark times back then...