SVO or 5.0?

[foxbodymike87]

me too..i tend to get my clutch foot stuck inderneath the brake pedal when i let off the clutch..lol

 

[N8Dogg98]

SVO's are overrated. Sure they handle not badly, but they're a letdown everyplace else. Even the brakes that everyone raves about aren't all that impressive.

My buddy owned a pristine example of an '86 SVO for a while. Nice car...and the turbo gimmick was cool on paper, but it was a real turd on the street. Had a nice little rush when it started to come on, but it would have easily been walked by my mother’s minivan at the time before that. In any case, they’re nothing any bolt on 5.0L couldn't annihilate with ease.

Oh...and you'd better have feet smaller than Barbie herself if you plan on driving it on a daily basis. Those friggin pedals are so close together, your feet are always getting tripped up in them.

If you want to buy it as a collector and leave it stock and run it back and forth to car shows as a conversation piece, by all means grab it up. If you want an actual driver, stick with the 5.0L. Waaaaaay more bang for the buck and you won't be chopping up a collectable car should you decide to "tinker" with it.

It's also funny that the SVO came with a "hurst" shifter option and that damn shifter has a ROM of like 18" It's like driving a damn semi... haha

 

[NinjaViper]

I had the same dilemma when I was looking for a Stang, I love the SVO's, I had an 84 back in the day. The problem is that in order to get the SVO running an amount of power where you can really have fun with it, you would need to pump a lot of money into the car. With a 5.0 you have that power in a basically stock car. Your 5.0 bolt ons are reasonably cheap and if you need some parts, chances are you can find them at a local wrecker. Neither of which you can say with the SVO.
I think SVO's are a collectors item, fix it up and take it out to the car shows on the weekends, but not an everyday driver. Also, like someone else said, you will be hard pressed to find a good one without too much rust, replacement parts are ridiculously priced, blah blah blah.
After weighing out the positives and negatives it was obvious that for me a 5.0 was the right choice. You may find the same.

 

[VibrantRedGT]

Had a buddy that rocked an 1986 Mercury Capri white with orange spoke wheels (came from the factory like this) with a 2.3 turbo. With minor mods it was bullet. The 87 GT came out and actually traded it in for the turbine wheel car. His car so unique. He kicks himself on that one.

It looked identical to this but it had the 2.3L turbo in it. White with orange wheels.
‪1986 Mercury ASC McLaren "Why cant this be yours?"‬‏ - YouTube

 

[foxbodymike87]

im still thinking svo.you can make just as much power as a 5.0 but half the cost..

and how do you post pics..i have a pic of a nasty svo i saw at a car show and if i got one it would end up like it

 

[Riverart]

here's an SVO in LA (OC)
MUST SEE !!!1986 FORD MUSTANG SVO FACTORY TURBO

 

[NIKwoaC]

Get a photobucket.com account, upload your pics to that website, then use their "

 

[foxbodymike87]

Pictures by foxbodymike87 - Photobucket

ok see if this works..this is the SVO at a car show i went to the black one..the other stang is my current stang

 

[69clark]

It sounds like you have already made up your mind. Go with the SVO, and build the hell out of it!

 

[1989GtFoxBody]

I race a 2.3 dirt car, and the if you pick up a speedway catalog or look on internet the parts base for that motor is huge, and they are easy to build. The parts are extremely affordable as-well. My 2.3 is NA with the cast block and head has tons of get up and go. throw a turbo on it and it would be a crazy animal. Like someone else mentioned throw a down-pipe intercooler and boost controller on there and you would have a hell of a time.

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

I race a 2.3 dirt car, and the if you pick up a speedway catalog or look on internet the parts base for that motor is huge, and they are easy to build. The parts are extremely affordable as-well. My 2.3 is NA with the cast block and head, and dynod about the same as my bolton 5.0 would, (240rwph) and it has tons of get up and go. throw a turbo on it and it would be a crazy animal. Like someone else mentioned throw a down-pipe intercooler and boost controller on there and you would have a hell of a time.

I don't know much about the NA 2.3 stuff...i would love to see the build of a NA 2.3 that put down 240rwhp.

 

[Shakerhood]

I would stick with a 5.0, cheap, easy, and reliable.

 

[1989GtFoxBody]

Didn't mean to throw the R in there sorry. But alot of the guys in my class actually run 2.5s and Im going off their word? pro 4 trucks I know are in the 300-350 catagory, and my buddy's car who isn't built near as much as the rest put down 150rwph. Still the power potential with the turbo and uniqueness is always out there. And that SVO that was linked for 3k is also on the San Diego CL aswell.

 

[jgarrard]

Put a built 2.3 turbo in a regular Mustang or get a 87or88 Turbo Coupe and then you'll have alot better looking car.

 

[1989GtFoxBody]

similar to what Ive seen, ill try find a carbed version.

http://www.esslingeracing.com/flyer.pdf

"340 HP 250 Tq"


Here is basically what we run.

Welcome to Esslinger Engineering

if you see the dyno sheet at the bottom for the 2.5 it shows about 225 at the crank. Sorry for the earlier numbers my cars never touched a dyno, I was going off the other guys bench racer numbers

Also, If your looking to play with 4 cylinder stuff that's a website to hang around on.

 

[rustyruststang5]

we have a svo in ne that runs 10s all day and he competed in drag week and did well. they can be made fast. plus i had a 2.3 turbo in my 86 xr7 cougar and it was a blast to drive.

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

We have a guy on our local forum running low 10s with one, and another guy building an insane 800hp+ Pinto with a stroked 2.7. I guess it's all in how you spend the money.

 

[NIKwoaC]

similar to what Ive seen, ill try find a carbed version.

http://www.esslingeracing.com/flyer.pdf

"340 HP 250 Tq"


Here is basically what we run.

Welcome to Esslinger Engineering

if you see the dyno sheet at the bottom for the 2.5 it shows about 225 at the crank. Sorry for the earlier numbers my cars never touched a dyno, I was going off the other guys bench racer numbers

Also, If your looking to play with 4 cylinder stuff that's a website to hang around on.

Yea, see, you definitely need to throw boost at an engine that small. 220ish HP is impressive for a little 4 banger, but let's be real, that's what a stock 5.0 makes, and at a much more streetable RPM. Of course, double that engine and you've got a 440 HP 5.0L...

 

[Gearbanger 101]

Is that not just Foxes in general? I've been driving mine for almost 10 years now, and I still fumble my feet on the pedals from time to time.

Take your average fox pedal configuration, then move them each about 1/2" closer to one and other. I swear, driving one of them with feet larger than size 9 is like playing hopscotch.

im still thinking svo.you can make just as much power as a 5.0 but half the cost.

Keep telling yourself that.

 

[foxbodymike87]

i will