[ap72]

Originally Posted by hcompton

With the turbo setup and full factory intercooler the top end takes up alot of room with the efi manifold going over the valve cover. Cool thing is the turbo outlet point right at the throttle body opening. And lots of ford intercoolers out there that fit in between for nice short charge length the same is a motor without an intercooler.

Head gaskets are weak. They will always pop first if its stock gasket go in after it. And use ranger head bolts they are ne time use so buy new from ford or arp. Do not try to boost with pinto head bolts they will stretch easily. Pinto, mustangs, capris, rangers, merkur, cougar, tbird, and some others im sure all had tje same 2.3 block all the turbo blocks use forged pistons and usally have good bores.

Injectors are found in gm tbi in 53 pound not sure which ones but have seen them used many times.

You can also hog the entire top plentum out of the intake bottom one can be worked over as well. Use a standard trans to keep the cost down uless you drive alot of highway driving. The autos are just to fun on the highway.

the bottom half needs to be opened up some too, and for injectors just get aftermarket 60#'s. And you're right about the intercooler piping, methanol injection may be something to consider there... or just run E85 fuel...

[spinn]

THere were a number of 4 clyinder turbo cars in the mid to late 80's that people drove to highschool. They were NOT fast in any sense of the word. Like the sunbird gt, merkur xr4ti , lebaron gt, probe gt, dodge daytona , hyundai scoop, and were some major flops.

Not sure what you are thinking that made them fast. They could not even pull a 9 sec 0-60 . Todays honda civic would smoke them.

[timothale]

The 8 spark plug head engine is hard to work on, also there were a few years that Ford did not drill out the squirter hole in the connecting rod, the bump was still there just no hole. It could scuff the pistons in cold weather . after ford realized the problem they started drilling the squirter again. Cat location problems. Ford had a few engines that had a burn off Cat in front of the turbo. A hard blast in a cold engine could crack ithe elements in the cat and the pieces would ruin a turbo. Also after a hard run with the turbo you should let the engine run at idle or light load to let the turbo cool down so you don't coke up the oil in the turbo. The Factory Turbo engines used stronger parts internally .

[ap72]

Originally Posted by spinn

THere were a number of 4 clyinder turbo cars in the mid to late 80's that people drove to highschool. They were NOT fast in any sense of the word. Like the sunbird gt, merkur xr4ti , lebaron gt, probe gt, dodge daytona , hyundai scoop, and were some major flops.

Not sure what you are thinking that made them fast. They could not even pull a 9 sec 0-60 . Todays honda civic would smoke them.

the dodge daytona and xr4ti can flat out haul *** when properly modified. Turbo, ECU, injectors, exhaust, and methanol/intercooling being most of what it needs.

those cars can easily hit 400hp on pump fuel and when you cut a little of the extra weight you end up with something pretty quick.

[hcompton]

Originally Posted by spinn

THere were a number of 4 clyinder turbo cars in the mid to late 80's that people drove to highschool. They were NOT fast in any sense of the word. Like the sunbird gt, merkur xr4ti , lebaron gt, probe gt, dodge daytona , hyundai scoop, and were some major flops.

Not sure what you are thinking that made them fast. They could not even pull a 9 sec 0-60 . Todays honda civic would smoke them.

Uh.. My 86 svo mustang was faster than the v8 that year and ran 14's stock. With a boost controller easily low 14's. Not great but not that bad for 86. Considering the 5.0 mustangs in 87 ran 14.8 in the 1/4.

Merkur is also pretty fast i think they would be fast sep they had open rear. But it was independent rear with disc brakes. I think cost and low compression killed them. Newer turbo cars use much high compression and are a lot more funto drive and a lot less lag.

Most of those were front wheel drive and very cheap and completely different from the 2.3 fords. There are 1000 hp 2.3 out there. Your not going to find a scoop running around all jacked up.

[hcompton]

I have blown a few of these engines. They are not as strong as everyone claims but not that weak either and can be build with good strong parts and make some real power.

Turbo 4-cylinder Mustang - YouTube

Turbo 4-cylinder Mustang - YouTube

[spinn]

I drove to high school in these vehicles catching rides with friends. They were Not fast. I have no idea what you are smoking. The Xr4ti was 5 speed and could barely squeak the tires. The daytona/laser turbo was junk , i dont think it made 140 hp.

Do you have any video of them from the 80's . Like a car and driver road test.

Not into these racing videos. They dont show hardware.

Faster car in the junior/ senior parking lot was a grand national.

the t bird made 142hp in 86

the svo made 175 hp in 86 and could barely make 7.5 secound in 0-60

If you said 1000hp, im out. You are a dreamer.

[OneMoreTime]

Well dunno for sure on this but I do know that several of the Model A guys have installed the 2.3 in their cars to get a late model engine trans into the stock A to give some reasonable street performance. O fcourse those guys were not looking ot shred tires but to get down the road and keep up wiht trafic which they do..

Sam

[hcompton]

Originally Posted by spinn

I drove to high school in these vehicles catching rides with friends. They were Not fast. I have no idea what you are smoking. The Xr4ti was 5 speed and could barely squeak the tires. The daytona/laser turbo was junk , i dont think it made 140 hp.

Do you have any video of them from the 80's . Like a car and driver road test.

Not into these racing videos. They dont show hardware.

Faster car in the junior/ senior parking lot was a grand national.

the t bird made 142hp in 86

Yeah ok your drove an xr 5 speed and it wouldnt squeak the tires? Sure your right. They may not be super fast but they ran 15 bone stock and were usally spinning the tires half way down the track. Drive one and tell me they are really that slow.

Also the svo i actually owned and did drive for many years was not slow by any means it put a lot of big blocks down. With 29 lbs of boost it probably lay waste to your current car. I know a few guys with xr's well built they are crazy fast and stock brand new they were also pretty quick. Hard to think you even rode in one before. Most turbo cars will spinn the tires easily with a little slip of the clutch to raise the boost up first.

Svo is 205 hp and 248lbs tq not bad considering the vette Was only 90hp north of that in 86.

[spinn]

Originally Posted by hcompton

crazy fast .

Crazy all right.

[spinn]

Post 22 corrections.

Svo should read - Xr4ti made 175hp. No highschool kid is going to throw aftermarket parts on their parents new car voiding its warranty.

Never drove/rode in a svo.

[LATECH]

The super coupe T bird 2.3 intercooled made 190 horses in 88. 230 ish in torque.
No doubt some more boost and a stroker kit and you could have some decent potential.
Also why not a small pro charger to do the job.
Bore it, stroke it, pro charger hmmmmmm..........................

[hcompton]

The engine as it ships from ford will take about 16 lbs of boost so a simple boost controller is all you need fish tank bleeder style works just fine.

Also using good fuels helps alot. Still not aweful when stock. Its double a honda civic in case you didnt notice.

Svo was one of the cars shelby put his name on. Quad shock konis from tje factory with lots of other goodies light weight control arms one of the focuses was 50/50 and unsprung weight also had 4 wheel disc.

I would skip the stroker kit unless you want more than the 300 hp. They will make 300 pretty easy without the stroker. 2505 stroker is a nice kit and will make some great power. 400 hp on the street is not impossible but will take a built bottom end and much larger turbo than stock.

[spinn]

Originally Posted by hcompton

Yeah ok your drove an xr 5 speed and it wouldnt squeak the tires? Sure your right. They may not be super fast but they ran 15 bone stock and were usally spinning the tires half way down the track. Drive one and tell me they are really that slow.

Also the svo i actually owned and did drive for many years was not slow by any means it put a lot of big blocks down. With 29 lbs of boost it probably lay waste to your current car. I know a few guys with xr's well built they are crazy fast and stock brand new they were also pretty quick. Hard to think you even rode in one before. Most turbo cars will spinn the tires easily with a little slip of the clutch to raise the boost up first.

Svo is 205 hp and 248lbs tq not bad considering the vette Was only 90hp north of that in 86.

What the hell does this post this mean?

Drive one, they have not been at the dealer in over 20 years
slipping the clutch? you think i cant drive stick?
Tires barely squeal slipping first, but in 4 th gear locked up WATCH out.
29 lbs of boost, whatever. Go read comic books son.
Civics can make 200hp NA
Apply the same boost and mods to a new honda as a 1988 2.3L mustang
How many sv mustangs sold in 88? How many GTs?

Dodge had a shelby line GL turbo vehicles too. They were junk. Even with the MP super 60 add ons.

A 2.3L would be nice in model A. Keep it simple and reliable.

The 2.3L was the same 4 cylinder in the tempo/ topaz.

[hcompton]

Originally Posted by spinn

What the hell does this post this mean?

Drive one, they have not been at the dealer in over 20 years
slipping the clutch? you think i cant drive stick?
Tires barely squeal slipping first, but in 4 th gear locked up WATCH out.
29 lbs of boost, whatever. Go read comic books son.
Civics can make 200hp NA
Apply the same boost and mods to a new honda as a 1988 2.3L mustang
How many sv mustangs sold in 88? How many vettes?

Dodge had a shelby line GL turbo vehicles too. They were junk. Even with the MP super 60 add ons.

A 2.3L would be nice in model A. Keep it simple and reliable.

The 2.3L was the same 4 cylinder in the tempo/ topaz.

Wrong they would not fit in a tempo. They are rear wheel only in larger cars like rangers and mustangs.

Fyi were the same age.

I have a turbo civic it makes about 200 hp. But was 100 hp stock like all most every civic sold in the last 15 years. D16y7... Certainly not as fast as my svo was.

Dodge Glhs was a great little car. Faster than a shelby cobra. Look it up.