To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (Full Version)

Mustang >> Ford Mustang Tech >> 4 Cylinder NA and Turbo >> SVO Forum

To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question

  

mr.marion -> To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (4/29/2004 1:14:57 PM)

Hey, do any of you guys drive any SVOs or Turbo cpupe Thunderbirds? I just got ahold of a 93' LX convertible and I'm trying to decide whether to go with the V8 or to go with an SVO/Turbo coupe setup. I could really care less how loud my car is. I am thinking about practicality and everyday drivability. However, if I can't find any parts for a turbo four stang, then I'm gonna have to go with a V8. If any of you guys happen to know any good places in TX to get SVO components, then please let me know.

  
50fiend -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (4/29/2004 2:41:04 PM)

SVOs are extremely cool but apples to apples they will never be able to make as much power as a V8. It depends on how much work you are willing to do to get power. If all you interested in is dependalblity and economy then the turbo 4 cylinder is the way to go. Or if you want to be different...Or if you want a sleeper.....It all depends on what you want and what you are willing to do to get it.

brockstang -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (4/29/2004 3:29:06 PM)

LoL, I used the apples to apples comparison in another one of the threads that he left a reply :) V8!!!!!! Its nice to have a hotrod feeling.

mr.marion -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (5/3/2004 1:18:12 AM)

hey, 50fiend.
do you know of any places where they sell any turbo crate motors?
this would definately be my number one choice. i have already tried to find something in the FRPP catalogue, but there is no model number given for the turbo i4. if i could take care of it all in one shot, that would be fairly bad-ass.

50fiend -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (5/3/2004 8:36:16 AM)

I've never heard of a turbo crate motor. Than again I've never looked for one either. Sorry.

Jugador -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (6/4/2004 12:39:34 PM)

umm everything you said is like opposite. 2.3t will not be even close to reliable compared to the 5.0 but it will be so damn cheap to make power (especially if you like fabricating stuff and going to junkyards).

50fiend -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (6/4/2004 1:24:18 PM)

Ummm...like...I had a 2.3 and it was extremely dependable. As long as you don't put a turbo with 50 pounds of boost you'll have an economical dependable car. What's...umm...like backwards about that. I didn't notice anywhere that he said he wanted junkyard or home fabricated parts. I do believe he was looking for a "turbo crate motor". So...umm...like...I believe it is you who has it all backwards.

mdvaldosta -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (6/4/2004 1:54:30 PM)

no way is a turbo system more reliable than a NA setup. thats what he was referring to. I know of alot of fast 2.3L cars, but to make them faster than a mildly modified 5.0 it takes a ton of boost and reliability becomes a major concern for a daily driver. A junk yard by the way is the best place to find a turbo 2.3

Jugador -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (6/6/2004 6:44:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 50fiend

Ummm...like...I had a 2.3 and it was extremely dependable. As long as you don't put a turbo with 50 pounds of boost you'll have an economical dependable car. What's...umm...like backwards about that. I didn't notice anywhere that he said he wanted junkyard or home fabricated parts. I do believe he was looking for a "turbo crate motor". So...umm...like...I believe it is you who has it all backwards.


2.3 and turbo 2.3 are like night and day when we're talking about reliability. with enough boost to make the car worth doing it will not be reliable. if he doesn't want junkyard parts or to modify them himself then he does not want a 2.3, because thats the advantage of having one. and there are no turbo crate motors so have fun looking. but once again, why...the fun of these cars is to have nothing in them but a little money and your own work and to blow the doors off bitches.



and joe, i can beat mildly modded 5.0's and mine's *somewhat* reliable and from what i hear not too far from stock, some even speculate that its technically worse than stock (it's the original dual plug dis motor that they added a turbo, intercooler, and forged pistons to)

ROUSH360R -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (6/6/2004 8:31:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdvaldosta

no way is a turbo system more reliable than a NA setup. thats what he was referring to. I know of alot of fast 2.3L cars, but to make them faster than a mildly modified 5.0 it takes a ton of boost and reliability becomes a major concern for a daily driver. A junk yard by the way is the best place to find a turbo 2.3


Agreed, when I read that I said the same thing. A 4 is bad enough but a turbo 4 is an engine dying to give you trouble, plus the turbo lag sucks. My friend had an 84' SVO @ the same time I had my new 87'GT and it didn't impress me at all! Nothing is like putting your foot into a nice juicy 8, instant power and torque! Don't even consider a 2.3 turbo!

Jugador -> RE: To turbo or not to turbo...THAT is the question (6/6/2004 10:41:17 PM)

depends on how you are...some people can drive an SVO that runs 15's and an LS1 in the 13's and not be impressed at all by the latter. feeling that boost come in may be an acquired taste, but i think its fun as hell.

and not to mention your friend had a really unimpressive SVO...try an 85.5-86 and you'll notice a difference.

  

Page: [1]

Return to Mustang Forums home page or view the Full Version of this page.