[engineczar]

So are planning to build the motor or find a donor? If you do plan on building a 2.3 I've built many N/A versions for local circle track racers. I can give you some good do's and don'ts to save you some grief.

[Ironpony]

to engineczar I think as I will have a exposed engine with no hood I am leaning towards building my own. As I have access to a cnc milling machine I would try to build a pan and rocker cover and timing belt covers from aluminum. and smoothing the block. I have built a stainless turbo manifold for a 4bt cummins from heavy wall pipe with very good results. And think I will do that on this engine. Because it needs to look good. As for how much to build up the engine I was thinking of keeping the comp. low in the 8.6 to 1 range and using a mild cam. Keeping the boost under about 8 lbs. and using a 390 cfm 2 barrel carb. That should have no problems getting me to my horsepower levels and should be very drivable. And live for a long time. But I am willing to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks Bill

[ap72]

Originally Posted by Ironpony

to engineczar I think as I will have a exposed engine with no hood I am leaning towards building my own. As I have access to a cnc milling machine I would try to build a pan and rocker cover and timing belt covers from aluminum. and smoothing the block. I have built a stainless turbo manifold for a 4bt cummins from heavy wall pipe with very good results. And think I will do that on this engine. Because it needs to look good. As for how much to build up the engine I was thinking of keeping the comp. low in the 8.6 to 1 range and using a mild cam. Keeping the boost under about 8 lbs. and using a 390 cfm 2 barrel carb. That should have no problems getting me to my horsepower levels and should be very drivable. And live for a long time. But I am willing to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks Bill

DON'T GO CARBED. There are so many EFI parts out there that it doesn't make sense to run a carb- ESPECIALLY if you're running a forced induction application.

If you're that good at fabricating I'd look into building a tuned runner EFI manifold, make it out of aluminum and polish it up to sparkle nice. It'll be top notch for both function and form.

[hcompton]

Originally Posted by Ironpony

to engineczar I think as I will have a exposed engine with no hood I am leaning towards building my own. As I have access to a cnc milling machine I would try to build a pan and rocker cover and timing belt covers from aluminum. and smoothing the block. I have built a stainless turbo manifold for a 4bt cummins from heavy wall pipe with very good results. And think I will do that on this engine. Because it needs to look good. As for how much to build up the engine I was thinking of keeping the comp. low in the 8.6 to 1 range and using a mild cam. Keeping the boost under about 8 lbs. and using a 390 cfm 2 barrel carb. That should have no problems getting me to my horsepower levels and should be very drivable. And live for a long time. But I am willing to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks Bill

The efi motor has a funky look. Its like an old art deco looking manifold and the valve cover has ford efi turbo on tje froont and looks cool. The none intercooled model has a finned aluminum tube coming off the turbo and a rubber expanding joint the swells under boost its an easy convert to strange and old looking with the stock efi. A little polish and nice manifold and paint this could look pretty cool. Carb may also look cool if it was stnding stright up off thencarb in a draw thru setup. Maybe even on top of a large pipe.

If i wanted to build a funky looking engine the ford 2.3 efi has got to be a good place to start short of a 928 spider looking thing. I bet it would look steam punk ish and still be efi and oem relaible.

But you probably got something completely differnet in mind. The strange intake on the efi is not for everyone for sure.

[ap72]

Originally Posted by hcompton

The efi motor has a funky look. Its like an old art deco looking manifold and the valve cover has ford efi turbo on tje froont and looks cool. The none intercooled model has a finned aluminum tube coming off the turbo and a rubber expanding joint the swells under boost its an easy convert to strange and old looking with the stock efi. A little polish and nice manifold and paint this could look pretty cool. Carb may also look cool if it was stnding stright up off thencarb in a draw thru setup. Maybe even on top of a large pipe.

If i wanted to build a funky looking engine the ford 2.3 efi has got to be a good place to start short of a 928 spider looking thing. I bet it would look steam punk ish and still be efi and oem relaible.

But you probably got something completely differnet in mind. The strange intake on the efi is not for everyone for sure.

which efi intake? I think there's 4 different versions. Any of them polieshed up would look cool, but that's a lot of damn time polishing.

[hcompton]

Originally Posted by ap72

which efi intake? I think there's 4 different versions. Any of them polieshed up would look cool, but that's a lot of damn time polishing.

The type like an 86 or 87 merkur has no intercooler and the efi manifold that runs over the top of the engine.

I would brush or paint the lower and polish the top. It not that big it would not be a real chore. Easier than doing a wheel.

Copper plate (Copper powder coat) the throttle body. To offset the coiled and polished copper oil and fuel lines. Also polish the turbo outlet and housing. Stainless exhuast manifold would be nice to see most of the ones you can buy are either cheap and weak or heavy and expensive and usally low performane.

Pluck off the timing cover and get one of those niffy gears and let it run open. Maybe use a one inch toothed belt for the other assesories as well.

[hcompton]

Here is a link to another forum with some pics not real good but you cankinda see what it looks like.

Ford 2.3 turbo

[Torque454]

Uhhh I can squeal the tires and then some in a stock NA 2.3 from the 70s (not even 100hp) in my pinto with 3.00 gears. I dont buy for a second that the 2.3T can barely do that. Thats double the HP and TQ.

What have YOU been smoking, spinn? I think you're speaking from "what you've heard" rather than experience.

Yes there is room for improvement, as the 2.3T is lower compression, batch fire fuel injected, Single non roller cam without variable timing, etc.

For comparison the new Ford Ecoboost engines run 10:1 compression plus 12-ish psi boost, with high pressure (2500psi) direct fuel injection (like a diesel) and twin independent variable camshaft timing. Plus they have more precise fuel and spark control than the old 2.3L doesnt have.

[Torque454]

Originally Posted by spinn

What a waste of a turbo, 200hp. The 2.0 honda K makes that NA.

The 200hp honda 2 liters are also VTEC engines with high performance camshaft profiles and other more performance oriented parts.

[Ironpony]

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

[ap72]

Originally Posted by Ironpony

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

You're setting awfully low goals, even a 300hp version can be done with a stock cam and great street manners. If you're going to use a completely stock junkyard engine then it'll put out 200hp, but if you modify it at all I would be expecting much biggger numbers.

[Ironpony]

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

[OneMoreTime]

Bill,
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..

Sam

[spinn]

Originally Posted by Torque454

What have YOU been smoking, spinn? I think you're speaking from "what you've heard" rather than experience.

.

No I try to keep it honest and practical.

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.

[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