Mass Air/ TB Swap Q's

JamesBaumann said:

I ran a couple searches and could't find any definitive answers.

With the following mods:

3" CAI
Roller Cam & Followers
Ported & Polished Head
Milled Head
Polished Upper & Lower Intake
2.25" exhaust with Ranger Header and Flowmaster 40 series

What kind of gains would I see by converting to a MAF (Mass Air) instead of a speed density setup in which I have now (1988)? And how difficult a procedure is it to do?

Also, I was wondering what type of gains I may see from swapping in a less restrictive throttle body.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing this is for a N/A 1988 2.3L? Sorry its been some time for me

3" CAI= Well I found it much easier to just build a 2" - 2.5" CAI system than messing with a 3". The gains on this alone aren't much at all...maybe about .5 to 3 hp gain. I did noticed my higher PRMs was more fun than normal and it had a nicer sound when I got on it.

Roller cam= Well the 88' 2.3Ls came stock with like 88hp while the 91-93' Came with 112-115hp. They tell me the main difference is the roller cam shaft in the 91-93'2.3Ls. Now the MAF may help a tad bit more on this also but not sure.

Ported head= The main problem with these motor is there restriktive head air flow. I can't say how much this will gain you but I would think with everything on you list you should get 150 fly wheel HP.

Mill Head= talk to Buff about this. He can tell you how much to cut off when milling a 2.3L head. I think his is around 9:1 compression. I think he's gotton 138rwhp from all this.

Polished intakes= This probly want net you more than .5 hp but combined with everything it should help out some. I would port match the intakes to a gasket also. When polishing anything in the fuels path you shouldn't use higher than 80 g paper I believe.

Header/2.25" exhaust= I've heard people say you tell really tell once you put a ranger tube header on. I guess if adds probly 5-10hp since you can feel the difference. Now a 2.3L stang comes with a 2.25" exhaust system already and will do ok but if you do all of the above you could get away with a 2.5" system which I believe what Buff is using. ** Heres where I probly will get flamed if I haven't already I'm not sure if you intend to run duals mufflers or not but I would run duals on a 2.3L my self. I don't think theres and dyno proof that one way or the other will hurt you. But its more my opinion that duals would hurt power some or atleast add extra unneeded weight

MAF Convert= Crap thats a good question on a 2.3L I'm a be believer in MAF but not sure if its worth the trouble on a small motor like a 2.3L. If I had the time, parts and know how to do it, I probly would do the swap

TB= I don't think a highflow or bigger TB with help a stock 2.3L out but it may help a heavely moded 2.3L. There is a guy out here who has installed a 94-95' GT TB on his 2.3L N/A but I can't remember if he said it helped or not.

I hope that helped you out a hair and Good Luck

The only good reason to go to mass air on any vehicle is if you want to make more radical mods than your typical bolt ons, like a cam or aftermarket heads. Now, I can't honestly say how the car would run on speed density with a ported stock head. In addition, I don't know how to convert an SD 2.3L over to speed density, but it probably takes a lot of work.

To me, it seems silly to go through all the trouble of a mass air swap and still be stuck with a 6000rpm rev limiter. Superchips or someone might be able to burn a custom chip for you ($$$). It just seems like WAY to much work to do a mass air conversion, because when you are done, you will basically have a 91-93 engine with CAI, a port and polish, intake and exhaust.
Also, with a setup like that, it would be insane to run a ranger roller. The biggest advantages of the RR are a glass smooth idle, and great reliability. The specs are nearly identical to your stock slider cam, with the only real difference being that the valve opens slightly quicker with the roller, and fractionally less friction loss from the cam.
The only modification you can't do on a speed density engine is a wild cam that can't draw much vacume at idle. The 5.0 guys have proven this time and time again.
If you want to make big power with an NA, you should probably start looking at carbs. The circle track racers have proven combinations that make power on a carb, and if you don't go to wild, it will be fine on the street to.
I am guessing that you are just looking for a more fun daily driver though? I would do what you want with the speed density computer and keep the cam mild (I could help with that, or the RR would be fine). But that just sucks because you know the engine could have a lot more if you got a bigger cam... but unfortnatly that means mass air with a chip or carb setup.
I guess if I were to summerize my feelings... you arn't going to make descent power unless you rev it up to 6500-7500rpm, which is going to require a lot more cam than the RR, and no stock computer will get you there.
Modding an NA really is like being trapped inside a box! Unlike the turbo, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
As for my recommendations for a street NA 2.3:
*mill the head for 9.8-10.2:1 compression. 87 octane should still work. rule of thumb is 1cc out of the combustion chamber for every .007" milled off
*long tube header with descent exhaust
*mild cam good for speed density (I could help you out there if you want)
*port it if you want. Should still give you descent gains with a mild cam... but could be better
*CAI of sorts to get rid of the stock airbox
All of that listed should push the stock injectors pretty hard. Wouldn't suprise me at all if you needed an AFPR and 19's.
The throttle body won't be a restriction, and I doubt the intakes would be much of a restriction... certainly not worth the effort to me.

Luckily, most modifications will increase fuel economy. This is especially true for more compression, becuase the engine won't have to work as hard to make the same power. You just have to be careful how much you lean on the gas pedal.
The ranger roller would be acceptable, and if it costs you less than $40, I would keep it, but there are some other good options available. Duration is how long the valve stay open (in degrees or rotation), and the duration @.050 is how long the valve lift is over .050 inches. I would consider a duration of 220* @ .050 to be the maximum for a you. Almost every manfacture can offer you something right at 220*, such as the racer walsh stock+, camcraft, or even FMS. However, instead of treading the fine line of decreased drivability, you might consider something like the Camcraft "B" cam (very bottom of the list I gave you). It has 205* @.050 which is a big improvment over the stock 188-190*. In that same duration range, you will also see the Schnider 1365.
Here is the cam spec list for everyone else: cam spec list courtisy of turboflush
The mass air swap would be nice to have, no doubt about it... but I think that your speed density setup will continue to work for you.

JamesBaumann said:

I believe that the 91-93 came with 105hp stock, not 112-115hp. The reason was mainly because of the cam & followers, but also because of the MAF and if memory serves correct, the 91-93 Mustangs came with a slightly higher compression ratio.

Click to expand...

I knew it was some where around there. I also dyno my 93' LX for the heck of it the other day but spent the whole afternoon shooting the crap with the dyno guy. I'm guessing 75rwhp As for the MAF part that is why I mentioned on the roller cam part of my post that I didn't know if it had anything to do with the power difference.

JamesBaumann said:

I also think that 2.3's came stock with a 2" exhaust, not 2.25". That's why I wanted I wanted to make that .25" upgrade, just to help it breathe a little easier.

Click to expand...

This is a perfect reason not to mess with stuff like this late at night when your tired They came stock with a 2" system and you can get away with a 2.25" system. I believe buff is running a 2.5" system which his car is moded pretty good for a 2.3L. Plus he's got a bottle as a mod also.

I will try to stay away from the keyboard when I'm tired from now on

The stock slider cam actually has 188 on on the intake, and 189 on the exhaust (I couldn't remember exactly, so I put the range of 188-190). The ranger roller is within a degree of the slider above.
http://www.flatlanderracing.com/schfordpinto.html <-- looks kinda expensive to me.
http://www.camcraftcams.com/ <-- wasn't working for me a second ago, dunno why???
Comp cams makes several good choices in the High energy line http://www.compcams.com/Technical/CurrentCatalog/HTML/58-61.asp
The ranger roller will work fine and save you money, but any of the cams we have talked about will give you just as much low end power with more pull above 3500rpm than the RR.

You could also give www.lazercams.com a try. They can give you a cam recommendation and make you a custom ground cam for around $168 (that's what I was quoted for a cam for my turbo engine)

is that 168 for a custom roller cam? I know there was a place offering a VERY competitve price on a custom roller, but I didn't have the time.
With any of the slider cams, you need to buy new slider followers (unless they come with them, like the camcraft cams). Mark another point in the RR catagory.