Over the Top Question

LMan

Founding Member

Aug 10, 2002

1,246

0

0

Mom's basement

Jan 20, 2006

#61

• Jan 20, 2006

• #61

Eh, that's wussy stuff. Be a man.....put a diesel from an old VW Rabbit in it.

Think of the mileage and longevity!

 

Hack

15 Year Member

Mar 23, 2004

1,945

13

69

Minneapolis

Jan 21, 2006

#62

• Jan 21, 2006

• #62

http://www.rehermorrison.com/techTalk/20.htm

Advice regarding engine size. They are talking small block V8 versus big block for racing, but the same logic applies to 4 cylinder versus small block V8 for fun street driving.

Getting 2 horsepower per cubic inch into a package that will last 100,000 miles is a real challenge. Most factory pushrod 8s don't get 1 horse per ci (with the modern method of measuring it). The NA overhead cam engines are making slightly over 1 hp per cube, but I'm not aware of any making more than 1.5...

How many miles do crotch rocket engines last? The same logic applies to NA and boosted engines - boost adds stress to the engine (more pressure, heat, etc.) and that reduces longevity. Longevity can be increased, but that also increases cost. Getting a given amount of power from a small package just plain costs more than the same power from a larger package.

 

M

mtbdoc

New Member

Nov 2, 2003

245

1

0

Jan 21, 2006

#63

• Jan 21, 2006

• #63

Okay...if we're going to talk about sacrilegious engine swaps in classics, then I am going to start a thread for a really ill thought I've been having!

 

TBP

Founding Member

Nov 14, 2000

681

0

16

Transient

Jan 21, 2006

#64

• Jan 21, 2006

• #64

 

S

shlby123

Founding Member

Apr 19, 2002

579

0

0

Dallas

Jan 23, 2006

#65

• Jan 23, 2006

• #65

hey rbohm,

Whats an estimat on what the might cost?

 

Edbert

Founding Member

Jul 13, 2002

3,548

32

109

Austin TX

Jan 23, 2006

#66

• Jan 23, 2006

• #66

You need to "find" the engine first. They haven't been made for quite some time so junk yards are going to be your cheapest route. of course you are not going to find a complete 84-85 SVO powertrain that is rebuildable in a junk yard, and buying a crate version will cost a ton.

Once you HAVE an engine that is rebuildable folks here can give you an estimate on putting it into your car. The motor mounts are going to have to be fabricated from scratch, maybe using a I6 mounting system to start with.

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Jan 23, 2006

#67

• Jan 23, 2006

• #67

Thats true, an SVO powertrain will be hard to find, but there is usually a cluster of Merkur XR4Ti and Thunderbird TurboCoupes at decent wreckers.

I had an idea that would be REALLY off-the-wall; how about converting to a Taurus SHO engine? It would be the biggest expense and PITA, but hey, quad cam Yamaha-designed V6. You wouldnt need forced induction.

 

Edbert

Founding Member

Jul 13, 2002

3,548

32

109

Austin TX

Jan 23, 2006

#68

• Jan 23, 2006

• #68

Ya, you could do a FWD conversion too!

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Jan 23, 2006

#69

• Jan 23, 2006

• #69

This forum is harsh.

 

Hack

15 Year Member

Mar 23, 2004

1,945

13

69

Minneapolis

Jan 23, 2006

#70

• Jan 23, 2006

• #70

65ShelbyClone said:

This forum is harsh.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you are right, but most of the comments are right on the money. Better to be honest than not say anything in the belief that you are being nice, IMO. Hopefully people aren't crushed by the comments.:SNSign:

 

Edbert

Founding Member

Jul 13, 2002

3,548

32

109

Austin TX

Jan 23, 2006

#71

• Jan 23, 2006

• #71

65ShelbyClone said:

This forum is harsh.

Click to expand...

Usually the harshness is only directed to japcrap and FWD cars, though in this case the Mazda 4-cylinder was enough to set it off

Speaking personally I think it would be kinda cool to see an SVO powered classic. I don't think it is practical or cost effective, but it would be kinda cool to see it done, not as sacriligous as that Toyota powered 65 that was posted here not too long ago, of couse since he lived in Sri-Freaking-Lanka (or wherever) it was excused.

 

1320stang

Founding Member

Nov 13, 1998

4,329

23

89

Edmond, Oklahoma

Jan 23, 2006

#72

• Jan 23, 2006

• #72

No, you wouldn't need a FWD conversion to use a SHO engine in a RWD application. There is a Aerostar tranny that will bolt right up to it, voila, RWD.

I already went thru the whole "putting a SHO engine in a...." deal back when I had my '89 Isuzu minitruck. SHO's can be had pretty cheap now too.

How about a 3.8 Super Coupe engine? I wanted to put one in my wife's '95 Windstar for S&Gs but we just sold it.

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Jan 23, 2006

#73

• Jan 23, 2006

• #73

Edbert said:

Usually the harshness is only directed to japcrap and FWD cars, though in this case the Mazda 4-cylinder was enough to set it off

Click to expand...

Did I miss the part about a Mazda engine?

1320stang said:

No, you wouldn't need a FWD conversion to use a SHO engine in a RWD application. There is a Aerostar tranny that will bolt right up to it, voila, RWD.

How about a 3.8 Super Coupe engine?

Click to expand...

Yeah, but how much fabrication is inolved with getting the Aerostar trans in a classic? It would be fun to put one in a Pinto

The SuperCoupe engine is interesting too. I think I read in another thread that the 3.8-4.2L V6 has the same bellhousing pattern as a smallblock. If thats true, its would be alot more practical than most other engines.

 

T

turborscapri198

New Member

Mar 30, 2006

1

0

0

Apr 6, 2006

#74

• Apr 6, 2006

• #74

HOLD THE PHONES!!!!!

Ok dude, you need to listen to me. Ive been racing 2.3 turbo cars for years now. My daily driver is a 1988 Turbo Coupe Thunderbird. It weighs 3380 EMPTY, thats a bit more than your mustang. (by swapping you will lose a bit more) I get almost 30 MPG, it runs a modest 14.0 everytime, and more or less its stock. It has 248,000 miles on it and still preforms. I have several cars with this drivetrain and they are THE ONLY FOUR CYLINDER EXCEPTION to the mighty V8 America blessed us with.

I always hated "4 bangers" and I still do, a 1.9L is insulting to a Mustang. But it sounds like that idea is dead now anyway.

Lets all take a step back and remember history. The 2.3 was taken from the design of the late Pintos, and first introduced into a what? A Mustang, I know, I know. Those are the "dark ages" and we arent supposed to talk about that.

Anyway, my current "race car" makes over 400 Hp to the wheels, enough to swing the posi rear end all criss cross in 4th gear, and still gets 25 MPG. (overall cost around $2000 more than half of that to buy the car) 2.3T makes good healthy reliable power with wonderful economy. They are a terrific engine and are very cheap and sturdy. (Stock bottom end is capable of 700+ horsepower)

I paid 500 bucks for my Tbird and havent done much. So go to a j/y find a turbo coupe buy the whole thing and take engine, tranny, cross members, driveshaft, ecu, engine wiring harness, cooling systme ect.

Plenty of guys put a T5 in their Mustang, so figure out how to bolt the engine onto a cradle. Now for me personally, I will put an EFI 5.0 in my 70 fastback before I use a 2.3......but thats just me.
-Michael-

 

TrickStang37

New Member

Oct 17, 2004

292

0

0

Apr 6, 2006

#75

• Apr 6, 2006

• #75

Put an S2000 motor and tranny in there. 6spd and rwd. do it. do it! DO IT!!

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Apr 7, 2006

#76

• Apr 7, 2006

• #76

Since my last post I picked up the '84 SVO in my sig and have learned a lot about the 2.3Ts. Its funny, you can get a used 5.0 engine for about $500 and a used TurboCoupe engine for the same. They are actually about the same dollars-to-horsepower, except the 2.3 block has a higher power ceiling than even a 351W.

turborscapri198 said:

(Stock bottom end is capable of 700+ horsepower)

Click to expand...

Eh, I don't know about that.....the block maybe and perhaps the pistons, but no one is doing that on stock rods or non-strapped main caps.

 

M

mtbdoc

New Member

Nov 2, 2003

245

1

0

Apr 7, 2006

#77

• Apr 7, 2006

• #77

351W [old, non-roller] can make some serious hp. Do you really think that 2.3 block can hold 700 hp???

If you guys are going put this thread back on the front page, I will bring up my LS2 in a classic mustang thread!

 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member

Sep 9, 2000

4,675

38

119

Antelope Valley, SoCal

Apr 7, 2006

#78

• Apr 7, 2006

• #78

mtbdoc said:

351W [old, non-roller] can make some serious hp. Do you really think that 2.3 block can hold 700 hp???

Click to expand...

Well, 800 if you're talking about bhp. Don't take my word for it, ask John Dell Blair. Go here where Stinger from turboford.org has more videos hosted. Look at the video on the bottom right titled "2.3TSVOMustangJDBFourced.mpeg."
http://projecthp.ford23.com/Videos/2.3TSVOMustangJDBFourced.mpeg

 

Cobain03

Active Member

Aug 27, 2003

996

0

36

Lexington, Ky

Apr 9, 2006

#79

• Apr 9, 2006

• #79

if you was gogin to go the route of putting a whole new motor,tranny, computer system, ect in a car. how about a 3.8 or 4.0 v6 out of a newer mustang? you got the fule economy of a sixxer and decent power. plus its a mustang to mustang swap, not a escort motor lol

 

68stang351

Founding Member

May 16, 2002

850

9

39

Savoy TX

Apr 9, 2006

#80

• Apr 9, 2006

• #80

There is a guy in the next town that has a falcon with an escort driveline. Not sure how he did it, but if I'll I ever get to look at it or talk to him again, I'll find out what I can. Since the Mustang uses the falcon platform, it should basically be the same.

I'm trying to be helpful, but I really can't say that I approve of that kind of thing, but it's your car, build it the way you want if it makes you happy that way.