RX8Club.com

RX8Club.com (https://www.rx8club.com/)
-   General Automotive (https://www.rx8club.com/general-automotive-49/)
-   -   Sherman tank engine in a mustang. (https://www.rx8club.com/general-automotive-49/sherman-tank-engine-mustang-108994/)

darkempire83 02-06-2007 01:07 PM

Sherman tank engine in a mustang.
 
Some crazy dude decided to put a Ford 1100 cu in. v8 from a WWII Sherman tank into a 70 mustang: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/s...d.php?t=159833

Talk about excess! Friggin cool though! Check out the short clip of the engine running, sounds like a beast...on steroids...and meth.

Unhooked 02-06-2007 01:36 PM

awesome!!

Steakboy42 02-06-2007 01:42 PM

invalid thread specified

-Steakboy

darkempire83 02-06-2007 01:50 PM

I think the forum may have been overloaded....that thread got posted to fark, the ensuing flood of traffic may have been too much for them to handle. Hopefully it will be up again soon. In the meantime, here is the clip of the engine running: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt5uSx3eFYU

Now, the dude is putting THAT into a 70 mustang.

rotarygod 02-06-2007 01:52 PM

That thing is the size of a car. How does it fit in one? I can't see any pictures so I don't know.

darkempire83 02-06-2007 02:01 PM

Well, you remember those muscle car hot wheels? Thats exactly how that thing looks in the engine bay of a 70 mustang. With the air filter on, it's taller than the roof of the car. The thing originally weighed in at 1400 pounds, but the guy apparently got it down to 960. 50/50 weight distribution this aint! Sorry I dont have any pictures. I should have swiped them before they closed the thread down.

bascho 02-06-2007 02:26 PM

Here's a link with a picture:

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/02/05...with_tank.html

rotarygod 02-06-2007 02:47 PM

Yikes. I wonder how much that affected his weight distribution!

bascho 02-06-2007 02:53 PM

I just did some research on Sherman Tanks......they never used a 1100cu in V8. They were built with a Continental R974-C1/C4 9-cylinder, 4-cycle radial gasoline engine.

Stats on the Continental R974-C1/C4:

net horspower = 400@2200rpm
net torque = 940 ft/lbs @1700rpm

I wonder what engine that guy really used?

therm8 02-06-2007 03:10 PM

Well, maybe he won't need a wheelie bar, at least.

army_rx8 02-06-2007 03:13 PM

now that guy has a lot of time on his hands.

lol

Clavius 02-06-2007 03:24 PM

So..... is it front heavy? :Wconfused

m477 02-06-2007 03:31 PM


From the builder's own mouth:

"Just thought I'd share some before and after pictures of my Ford GAA tank engine. All aluminum 1100 cubic inch V8 used in WWII Sherman Tanks. These were gas burners rated at 500 HP and 1050 Ft. Lbs. of torque for military service, but are capable of much much more using mostly stock parts.
:Freak_ani

There won't even be any need to shift... he'll be able to light up the tires in 5th gear from a standstill. :ylsuper:

darkempire83 02-06-2007 04:01 PM

In the thread he talked about considering adding a couple of turbos to the engine. I wonder how fat the rear tires would have to be to have any chance at grabbing traction if that were the case.

I think it may be interesting to put that engine on a rolling chassis with a mid-engine layout (something akin to an ariel atom, but obviously much bigger).

NotAPreppie 02-06-2007 07:39 PM


Originally Posted by bascho
I just did some research on Sherman Tanks......they never used a 1100cu in V8. They were built with a Continental R974-C1/C4 9-cylinder, 4-cycle radial gasoline engine.

Stats on the Continental R974-C1/C4:

net horspower = 400@2200rpm
net torque = 940 ft/lbs @1700rpm

I wonder what engine that guy really used?

I thought that they used multiple different engines in the Shermans.

bascho 02-07-2007 09:57 AM


Originally Posted by NotAPreppie
I thought that they used multiple different engines in the Shermans.


That's what a war buff here at my office said too......but I couldn't find any documentation of Sherman M4's built with anything but the Continental R974. I'm sure anything is possible I guess.

encorez 02-07-2007 10:08 AM

Good thing it,s not a real ford mustang, because it would break in half.

rotarygod 02-07-2007 10:44 AM

There were over 38000 Sherman tanks built and some improvements made during the war. There was bound to be an engine change in there somewhere.

fluffysheap 02-07-2007 09:26 PM

It's probably from a Pershing, not a Sherman. Although the Sherman did eventually get the V8 too.

Hey, it's still a Ford engine... I wonder if the bellhousing bolts right up? :)

edit: According to wikipedia, they actually used the V8 in the Sherman before the Pershing, so... the original article is correct.

chickenwafer 02-08-2007 11:42 AM

That's insane. See what Jay Leno started!!
Here's a link to another tank engine runing WITHOUT HEADERS! Check out the flames! the guy, even though he's wearing ear protection, still must have gone deaf. 27 liter V-12!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbma5VSWA1s

army_rx8 02-08-2007 12:54 PM

^hahaha that's pure madness

excellent unbalievable fun madness

darkempire83 02-08-2007 05:53 PM

27 liters eh? How long before someone complains about the poor gas milage ;)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:38 PM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands