|01-16-2013 04:04 PM|
|1986c10||not to bicker but the svo mustang with the 2.3t was actually faster in the quarter mile than the mustang gt with a v8... With that being said, the merkur was slower than the svo. The svo had a intercooler, computer with more aggressive timing and fuel maps, and a larger vam.|
|01-16-2013 01:34 PM|
A good friend even today had the merkur, and a 84 laser turbo. Another freinds parents had a lebaron turbo. We thought they were Quick at the time, really zip through first gear. Now, the neighboor kid has a newish 2010 cobalt 5 speed with a 4 cylinder that has 160hp and its just a base model. That car is just a quick as most of those mid 80s turbo 4 cylinders..
This forum insisted that a Honda civic or integra was slow. At least not fast . The 1.8 GSR can cook in my opinion. A prelude with H22 is fast and challenging for the v8 350inch/th350 3.08/3.23 geared muscle car of full body. Would the merkur have fit in their ranks, hmm. It wasnt runing mid 6 second 0-60. It was in the 7s.
After the merkur they got a saab 9000 turbo, that was also poor performing car.
|01-16-2013 09:22 AM|
|engineczar||I see you're looking to go with an automatic transmission. If for some reason you do decide on a standard I highly recommend getting the pressure plate balanced. One of the things I've seen with the 2.3's is that replacement pressure plates tend to be terribly out of balance and have caused many crankshaft failures at the #4 journal.|
|01-16-2013 08:08 AM|
2.3 in rod
Well guys here is what I'm going to do. I will put a 2.3 in this car but because of that 4 letter word (work) it will probably be a month or two before I can really get started on it. I run a large repair shop servicing class 8 trucks and oil field equipment. And run my own fabrication shop, so I'm real busy. That will change in Feb. As I am going to start my retirement, And will only have my shop to take care of. So when I get started on this build if you want to see them I will post pict's as I build. In the time in between I will be looking for a doner car to put a engine with a factory turbo in the car. If I can't find one of them I will build a engine with a turbo for it. And thanks to all that have posted I have learned a few things and that is a good thing. Now that I'm a member here you will see me around Thanks Bill
|01-15-2013 09:34 PM|
|01-15-2013 06:00 PM|
|01-15-2013 04:48 PM|
|1986c10||on the subject of the 2.3t, i recently bought a merkur (ford import from germany) xr4ti with the 2.3t. They come stock with 175 crank hp. Mine is bone stock besides a straight pipe right now. Theyre quick for a 4 banger from the 80s and they have a insanely loud turbo. I can do 1-2nd burnouts not trying too hard. The svo mustangs with the same engine but a intercooler and different computer ran a mid 14 second quarter mile btw. You can make 250whp+ with a stock ported intake, large vane air meter from a 87+ supercoupe, la3 computer (out a of tbird supercoupe), 3" downpipe and good exhaust and a intercooler and boost around 18psi and it will be stupid reliable still. I bought all that and its on its way to my house so i'll chime in on how it runs. You wont be dissapointed in one. 87+ tbird supercoupe engine and computer would be the most desirable as they come with the la3 computer and are intercooled and around 200hp stock. Tons of info on turboford.com if you wanna learn more. You wont be dissapointed in that engine! and this is coming from a chevy guy haha|
|01-14-2013 01:20 PM|
I rebuilt a 2.3 Ford a few years ago. I was surprised what a nice little 4 banger this was. Mine was carbed. It was simple, reliable and had decent power. I see a lot of 2.3 Fords in old Jeep CJ3's high hood engine swaps. They are a tall engine, I don't think they will fit under a Jeep CJ2 hood. Decent torque for off road with excellent reliability. Very simple and well built with a big aftermarket supply of cams and performance parts as they were used in Mini stockcar classes. Good luck with your project! Post some pictures.
|01-14-2013 12:48 PM|
|Ironpony||To ap72 Thats the idea to build it up some with all the right parts, so if I decide at a later date going to 300 hp or more should be a simple thing. With the cam and head work that I plan and a turbo I will probably shoot past my goals anyway. So where is the harm in that. To onemoretime Exactly what I'm saying. Many thanks to you for getting it. And as I have said before I have vehicles for going really fast. Sometimes you don't want to. I have done the radical wild cars in the past. And because I have that need for speed ex racer Hot rodders illness. I can say for sure that I will build cars like that in the future. As a matter of fact I have this idea in the back of my tiny little brain. To build a 32 coupe with a Jon Kaase racing Boss 9 with a BDS 1271 sitting on top. But thats a whole differnt thing. Thanks Bill|
|01-14-2013 12:04 PM|
I dont think these cars as they were from the dealer, were as fast as you remember.
The kid beat the piss out of his fathers merkur. It was not that fast. The Daytona/lazer was pretty pathetic too. These were 5 speed turbo cars of the mid 80's. A lebaron turbo coupe from the mid 80's would be laughable as it came from the showroom.
Cars that were fast in highschool. The 86 new efi mustang GT 5speed , Grand national, A supra was impressive, A camaro or corvette probly in 14-15's too.
|01-14-2013 11:56 AM|
I agree so much with what you have in mind for this build. My current build is getting a stock 472 Cad just because the big Cad has plenty and will give good street manners and still burn up some tires should I desire. Some days a neat car with good manners is just what the doc ordered..
|01-14-2013 09:27 AM|
2.3L in a rod.
Before it comes up I thought I would post a pict of My El Camino It is a 68 malibu that I got without a engine. It has a 383 in it that made 440 hp on the dyno before it was put in the car. It has a built TH400 and a 9" ford in the back and no I'm not finished with it. It is currently in my shop getting a new paint job. Because it got caught in one of Oklahoma's hard rains (Hail storm) last year. This is what is keeping me from working on my C cab. And as you can see I got one or two skills. I will also post a pict of my mechanic truck. It is a 2002 T300 Kenworth. Thanks Bill
|01-14-2013 09:18 AM|
|01-14-2013 09:11 AM|
2.3L in a rod.
Many thanks to all who have responded to this thread. I have decided to go with a 2.3 with a turbo. For many reasons number one being a lightweight engine in a lightweight car. My fore to aft balance will be closer to 50/50 and that will help with handling. After hearing some of the suggestions here I'm going to aim for about 200hp using fuel injection. This should yield a very reliable good handling car that's very fun to drive. Exactly what I want from this project. And yes there will be many cars out there that are faster, including my El camino! And as light as it will be I figure about 1900 lbs. That works out to about 9.5 lbs. per horsepower. And that works out to being only about 1 pound per hp. behind My El Camino. And that is very good numbers. That puts the performance right in the middle of the vast majority of hot rods out there. The whole idea behind this car is to make it very user friendly that way it gets drove alot. I will use it as a shop truck often, but my wife may want to use it to go to town to shop, or my daughter may use it. And since most of My cars in the past and probably in the future have been nothing but race cars thinly disguised as street cars that were hard to live with on the street. This should be a fun car to drive. Thanks Bill
|01-13-2013 11:27 PM|
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|