Search



Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > Classic Mustangs (Tech)
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search

Classic Mustangs (Tech) Technical discussions about the Mustangs of yester-year.

Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-15-2008, 11:32 PM   #11
dugan
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location:
Posts: 388
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Oh come one now whats wrong with hondas![sm=smiley2.gif]

but as far as with the project! after further thought i take back everything i said in my original post on this topic..[sm=signs003.gif]

although i don't like the idea of a 4 cylinder car in a classic mustang its better than a nissan engine in it!
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
dugan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 12:26 AM   #12
straight68
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location:
Posts: 7
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang



The 1968 coupe was the most produced Mustang. Also referred to as the hardtop, the Mustang coupe had a production of 249,447. The hardtop weighed 2635 pounds and had a wheelbase of 108 inches like the prior year's Mustang. The Coupe boasted a 200 cid engine and cost $2602. [/align][/align][/align]-according to the mustang timeline on this site. from what i understand the 67 and 68 are almost identical so i imagine the weights will be similar. 2600 pounds is actually really light. a hopped up 2.3 turbo will be more than sufficient to move the mustang and quickly at that. foxbody mustangs start at about 3200 lbs +/-100 lbs[/align]
straight68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 01:01 AM   #13
andrewmp6
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 8,162
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Dugan the 64-68 coupes are around 2600 lbs the fastback and convertibles are pushing 3000lbs the heavist mustang was the 71 with the big block around 3400lbs tell the newest mustang came out thats a pig.I wouldn't give her the mustang as a first car most people have a car wreck with in 6 months of driving get her a cheap beater for the first year then the mustang is what id do.Gas prices who knows what they will be in 5 years could be cheaper or higher.The 'gas shortage" of the 70s prices did jump a lot and limited you to so many gallons.
andrewmp6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 05:24 AM   #14
SalikDDD
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 671
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

my 1967 with a 289, 8.8" rear, no ac, no power steering, headers etc. weighed 2840lbs with less than 1/4 of a tank without me in it.
__________________
1998 Mustang GT - 1987 Mustang LX RIP - 1967 Mustang Coupe
SalikDDD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 09:25 AM   #15
tyler72
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 971
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Yeah, they are heavy cars. I will weigh my 72 the next time I go to the track. It should be close to the same weight since the entire top end of my engine is all aluminum. I have power steering, and ac, but they might add 100 pounds at the most.
__________________
72 Coupe: 347, C4 (planetaries blown TFU), 8.8 w/ Auburn Pro Posi & 31 spline Mosers, 4 wheel discs, Auto Meters, TT2's
96 Cobra Convertible: Lowered, Pro 5.0 Shifter, Subframe connectors, C/C plates, Roll Bar, Cobra R's, Mac Prochamber, SLP LM1 Catback
tyler72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 12:16 PM   #16
paddy187
4th Gear Member

 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Vehicle: 65 Ford Mustang
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Posts: 1,258
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

So let talk sense we have an engine with the same power as 2 barrel v8 with less weight so it will be faster than a lot of stock cars and some modded ones too. While i would not do it myselfI more in keeping my car period correct, good luck with it.Wasn't that 2.3L turbo that was used in the EscortRS cosworth at high tune and used in the rally car? So I am sure modded you could do a lot more.
__________________
Illegitimi Non Carborundum!!



paddy187 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 12:23 PM   #17
rst08tierney
3rd Gear Member
 
rst08tierney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location:
Posts: 882
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

why would you even think of putting a 2.3L in a mustang....thats just insulting? BUT hey its your money and your car good luck and make sure you post lots of pics because this is something everyone would want to see.
__________________
rst08tierney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 12:30 PM   #18
Waffles
5th Gear Member
 
Waffles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1970 Mustang Fastback
Location: Detroit; where the weak are killed and eaten.
Posts: 2,551
Send a message via AIM to Waffles
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Why the 2.3?

Just go buy a 460 and a c6 tranny, cram it in there, (improperly, of course) and let her start driving when shes 13.



I think its a unique idea, and if you have as much experience with them as you claim, then you should have no problem tuning it in to where you want it.

Good luck. Post pics and stuff as you progress. She'll be a little cutie in High School with the car, but have a hard time finding a boyfriend thats cool with her having a better car than him... [8D]
__________________
Eric- Sales at Brighton Ford.
http://www.facebook.com/sk1nw4lk3r

Waffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 01:37 PM   #19
vineman
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Vehicle: 1972 Ford Mustang
Location:
Posts: 358
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

that engine, according to gov't estimations, gets around the same mileage as my 88 Silverado with a 350. I dunno how much better the mpg of the 2.3 will be in the stang, I know the efi setup im getting for my 72 is estimated at around 18 to 24 mpg. I guess im just laying this out there so in case you can't quite find the 2.3, you know there are other choices form the V8 family that get the same mileage as the 2.3. Plus with it being turbo'd that's going to eat at the mileagetoo, just make sure she doesn't have a lead foot.

www.fueleconomy.gov
vineman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 02:00 PM   #20
TexasAxMan
4th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Vehicle: 1966 Mustang Coupe
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,691
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

It doesn't matter what you do. The cool thing is that you're doing it with your 12 year old daughter.[sm=happybounce.gif]


HUGE THUMBS UP!!!
__________________
1966 Mustang Coupe
302 w/ T-5
TexasAxMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2008, 02:00 PM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
1966, 1967, 1980, 23, 23t, 302, 66, 67, classic, fast, ford, gas, miles, motors, mustang, swap, turbo

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
classic guys doing the 2.3t swap USMCrebel Classic Mustangs (Tech) 10 05-25-2011 12:45 AM

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:21 AM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup