Turbo 4 cylinder vs a stock 5.0

[Mr. Rustypwnz]

I'd take the low end torque, street manners, driveability, low buck performance and low maintance of an '87-'93 5.0L over the high strung, peeky power band of a worked turbo I-4 2.3L any day of the week.

wrong..

You can make a svo faster with less money. say you do a trickflow top end kit, thats 2300, then you need headers a maf and a tb, I mean you dont need it but to make it run the best you need them.

the svo you put a bigger intercooler off ebay or a new treadstone for around $300 with the piping, a k&n filter $50 Get a 3" exhaust from the above mentioned website, for around $300 I believe, Boost controller $50, afpr $70 and if you get the plans for bigger boost You could pick up a holset hx35 for around $300 used, maybe if you want a header you can buy log header for around $250. They already come with a hurst shifter stock, and 3.45-3.73 gears
some mt et streets, $400

all that **** is around $17-1800, and I know I wouldnt want to run one set up like that running over 20psi. I know what they are capable of, yes they are extremely finicky, but for the money to hp factor its more efficient.

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

It'll take a strong H/C/I Mustang to hang with a properly outfitted 20psi 2.3. I also wouldn't say it's a peaky high RPM engine...they make most power in the mid range from my experience (but i'm not at 20psi yet either). Finicky is a fact though, but proper attention to the engine bay and some willingness to learn can take care of that.

With 2.3t, all you do is make sure it's got enough intake and exhaust, make sure it doesn't run out of fuel and make sure it doesn't detonate, then you just turn the wick up until the T3 has had enough or you crack the exhaust manifold.

 

[MyFordsFly]

Someone needs to tell mine its supposed to be finicky then I guess. Only reason Ive had to pop the hood in years has been to change the oil and plugs.

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

Someone needs to tell mine its supposed to be finicky then I guess. Only reason Ive had to pop the hood in years has been to change the oil and plugs.

I guess i should point out that my 2.3t experience is with a Merkur, and there's nothing that's NOT finicky on these cars

 

[MyFordsFly]

I guess i should point out that my 2.3t experience is with a Merkur, and there's nothing that's NOT finicky on these cars

Oh yea Ive been there. Had an 86 some years ago. Cool little cars though, I liked mine alot.

 

[5.SL0W]

someday.... i want both. a turbo 2.3 would be fun as hell imo

 

[GTOreturns]

Back in the mid 80's when in HS my buddy had a new 85GT. His neighbor had a brand new SVO and they raced on Nichols rd. (NY) The SVO beat em. SVO's are a serious machine to be taken seriously.

 

[1991notchbackLX]

Back in the mid 80's when in HS my buddy had a new 85GT. His neighbor had a brand new SVO and they raced on Nichols rd. (NY) The SVO beat em. SVO's are a serious machine to be taken seriously.

haha, it was weird seeing a road right by my house mentioned on this site, i just drove on Nicholls about 5 mins ago

but yeah, there's a lot to be said about the 2.3 turbo motor, boost is a whole different animal and i've seen some worked 2.3s at shows that were putting down some serious numbers

but it goes back to the old stock vs. stock thing, who really keeps these cars stock any more? there's a guy on here with a no option white coupe with 14k miles on it, and he's making it a H/C/I car lol... that about sums it up right there

 

[webshot]

ANyone have pics of some clean ones? Especially the engine compartment?

 

[Gearbanger 101]

wrong..

You can make a svo faster with less money. say you do a trickflow top end kit, thats 2300, then you need headers a maf and a tb, I mean you dont need it but to make it run the best you need them.

the svo you put a bigger intercooler off ebay or a new treadstone for around $300 with the piping, a k&n filter $50 Get a 3" exhaust from the above mentioned website, for around $300 I believe, Boost controller $50, afpr $70 and if you get the plans for bigger boost You could pick up a holset hx35 for around $300 used, maybe if you want a header you can buy log header for around $250. They already come with a hurst shifter stock, and 3.45-3.73 gears
some mt et streets, $400

all that **** is around $17-1800, and I know I wouldnt want to run one set up like that running over 20psi. I know what they are capable of, yes they are extremely finicky, but for the money to hp factor its more efficient.

Wrong about what? I said nothing of the 5.0L making more horsepower. I commented regarding the low end torque, street manners, drivability, low buck performance and low maintenance of an '87-'93 5.0L.

Alright, granted the 2.3T set up can be modified to move like a raped ape with a decent selection of parts, but there's no way ever that it will compete with the drivability of the 5.0L.

I've driven a worked 2.3L SVO and been in an early Turbo Mustang that were both balls out. My biggest complaint about either of them was a horribly peaky power band and serious lack of low end and part throttle torque. The power bands get more narrow and violent as you build them. If you want to see grunt out of any of these set ups, its either balls to the wall, pedal to the metal or nothing. There's no rolling onto the throttle, there's no part throttle stabs with sideways action. If you want torque from a roll, you need to load them up, suffer through the lag then hold on when it hits you like an uncontrollable sledge hammer. Not something I would consider pleasant as a daily driver. The funniest thing of all, was that I found once these guys had their cars worked up to the point where they could put 5.0L's on the trailer, their number one advantage....the reason for owning a 4-cylinder at all....fuel economy, took a huge crap.

So no, something like a Trick Flow top end kit won't turn a 5.0L into a street sweeper, but it adds a generous amount of torque and horsepower....more than enough to get you into the 12's and has next to no effect on drivability or economy. As the matter of fact, in most cases both those traits are improved.

Turbo 2.3’s are cool and the ability to build fast street and track cars with them is a satisfying accomplishment, but lets recognize their limits as well here people. If they were the superior horsepower makers and made better daily drivers, we’d all own one.

 

[webshot]

well I really do not plan to do too much racing, or track visits. I just want something with some balls and easier on gas. Just something all around different than the stangs you see.

 

[5.SL0W]

well I really do not plan to do too much racing, or track visits. I just want something with some balls and easier on gas. Just something all around different than the stangs you see.

power for power, i dont think its going to be much better on gas but i could be wrong.

 

[webshot]

serious? The gas mileage is the same?

 

[GTOreturns]

serious? The gas mileage is the same?

Pretty much.

 

[5.SL0W]

serious? The gas mileage is the same?

i would think about the same. a turbo is nice and all, but the amount of fuel it takes to support boost is going to rob gas mileage from you. i would think a h/c/i 5.0 would get about the same, if not better, gas mileage than a 2.3 turbo built to make just as much power. but again, i could be wron, its something to look into for sure.

 

[25thmustang]

Trying to move similar weight, at the same speeds, will probably take similar amounts of fuel...

 

[8.8mustang]

A little off topic but I am impressed with the 2.3t. About 5 years ago I raced one in north Seattle with a mildly built big block elcamino. Ya I blew his doors off but not until I hooked up in 3rd. I tried to get the guy to stop. I'll never know what was done, but I bought a 2.3t to do a conversion to a 5.0. Just not sure about it yet. Alot of work for a car that already runs.

 

[MyFordsFly]

Ive never seen a HCI 5.0 get better mileage than a stock 5.0. Matter of fact any cam worth owning is going to have a good amount of overlap and seriously hurt low end efficiency. But I digess.
My 4 banger commonly gets over 27 mpg with mostly highway driving and some good beating on the onramps. Which isnt too bad considering its performance.

 

[millhouse]

Ive never seen a HCI 5.0 get better mileage than a stock 5.0. Matter of fact any cam worth owning is going to have a good amount of overlap and seriously hurt low end efficiency. But I digess.
My 4 banger commonly gets over 27 mpg with mostly highway driving and some good beating on the onramps. Which isnt too bad considering its performance.

Most well tuned H/C/I 5.0’s should actually get better mileage than a stock 5.0, assuming the cam isn’t overly aggressive. With the better flowing combo comes a higher VE of the engine itself. One thing to keep in mind is that many running a n/a h/c/I package are also running a numerically higher gear ratio (often 3.73’s or higher). The gears can have a huge impact on fuel economy.

My 5.0 gets an average of 24mpg on the freeway….and can get upwards of 28mpg if I really baby it.

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

My Merkur weighs in at an almost even 2900lbs...it's just a tad bit heavier than my coupe. The 2.3 with the turbo only weighs around 75lbs less than a 302, so even though there's half the cylinders you're not dropping much weight (although 75lbs off the nose of a car is still significant).


Here's a coupe pics of mine:

Before the ghetto intercooler:

After the ghetto intercooler (which even being in a terrible location, it made a huge difference)

That mess is just temporary for kicks...this summer it's getting a nice front mount.