@bosswrench posted:I never got to drive my basket case Mangusta. I'd say that Johnny Woods' method of eliminating rear bump-steer from suspension bind in the Mangusta is the best alteration one can make for that car. Once altered, the Goose rear suspension and handling is identical to a that of a GT-40. Most of my driving experience is 40 years in the Pantera and I approached its front brake locking problem from a different angle.
Instead of perfecting the non-adjustable prop-valve in the Pantera's front brake circuit, which reduces its stopping power, I put an adjustable valve in the rear brakes and rebalanced the whole system so the fronts were working more efficiently without a front prop valve. This was quite a bit more trouble -probably why Ford didn't do it- but it then allows phenomenal stopping power. Especially with big tires like the GR-4s used without a prop valve.
My preference would be to put the adjustable valve in the rear system and leave the fronts at full pressure. That is how I understand the system.
I suppose that you could put one in the front but you would need to examine how the existing master cylinder proportioned pressure to the rear before you did anything. Production cars tend to become uncontrollable under sever braking because the rear locks up and starts to come around. Not the other way around.
At one point there was also resistance to putting better tires on US cars from "Detroit" because they were afraid of people using that potential and they didn't want to be "Naderized" as making race cars and putting them on the street. That I think is a result of the ass backwards views projected by the "legal team"?
Jack, did you play with the bore of the master cylinder or stay with the original? You can reduce the front lock up or eliminate it by going to a larger bore. That's what was done on the 65-6 GT350's along with a Shelby version of the Corvette adjustable rear valve and you just can't lock the system up.
I think what happened with the Mangusta vs. the Pantera was that Ford was running Pantera production ALMOST from the beginning with US engineers assigned to Detomaso in Italy.
The procedure at Ford has always been to take something that works out of the existing vast array of parts already produced.
That simply didn't exist with the Mangusta.
How and why that Pantera front proportioning valve came to be is just a mystery to everyone now because it is simply counter productive.
I CAN envision a scenario though where it's possible "Ford" felt that the braking on the Pantera WAS TOO GOOD for the average driver in the US market and killed it a little?
The lawyers always want to be in control even if it shows that they have their heads up their asses...as usual. Now they have to protect you from yourself. It seems to be their moral calling?