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!


2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-18-2008, 06:05 AM   #41
67 evil eleanor
5th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location:
Posts: 2,106
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Ryan & Ryan, have fun with the project. Also I would recommend a firewall behind the rear seat. You can cut a template out of cardboard and use an old fridge door for the steel. Also keep in mind the steering column and wheel. The solidsscare me in a frontal. I think that they changed in 67. The Explorer rear disc may require a spacer for the bearing (the thickness of the mounting bracket). These can be easily made. Otherwise they work pretty good and I havethem on my track car.A 13 second car is very fast to me.
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
__________________
[IMG][/IMG] Eat Rice and be Healthy!!!
67 evil eleanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2008, 11:07 AM   #42
spdrcer34
1st Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 121
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

As for the SVO hood, I've never liked the off set bulge they had....I like the symetrical look.

We are probably going to graft the 87/88 Turbocoupe hood 'scoops' into the Mustang hood.

Just for reference sake, and for confirmation of my skills to you guys, here is what I have done with my Explorer:

Igrafted 67/68 Deluxe Hood scoops intothe Stock Hood of my Explorer:
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...d.php?t=199149

I installed 10th Anniversary Cobra Brakes onto my Explorer:
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...d.php?t=193870

I have re-built, and dida write-up of the re-build of the Manual Transmission in my Explorer:
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...t=M5OD+rebuild

Modified MAF:
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...d.php?t=216291

I made a CustomIntake Spacer:
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...d.php?t=192015

Modified Throttle Body:
http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/...tle+Body+shaft

Click the image to open in full size.
__________________
1967 Mustang Project, 2.3L Turbo Swap
1992 Ford Explorer 2WD
1993 Ford Explorer 4wd
spdrcer34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2008, 07:13 PM   #43
tarafied1
2nd Gear Member
 
tarafied1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Western KY
Posts: 475
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Quote:
ORIGINAL: 67 evil eleanor

...Also keep in mind the steering column and wheel. The solidsscare me in a frontal. I think that they changed in 67...
My 67 was built in July of 67 and still has the solid shaft like a 66. My 68 FB has the rag joint column.

Nice work on the Explorer! Do you have pics of the finished hood?
__________________

67 Coupe, 429, C6, 9" 4 wheel disc brakes, Eleanor kit
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2842869
tarafied1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2008, 08:31 PM   #44
spdrcer34
1st Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 121
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Yeah, the finished product was on Pg. 3 of that thread....

OR it can also be seen here:

Click the image to open in full size.Click the image to open in full size.

Ryan
__________________
1967 Mustang Project, 2.3L Turbo Swap
1992 Ford Explorer 2WD
1993 Ford Explorer 4wd
spdrcer34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2008, 08:44 PM   #45
tarafied1
2nd Gear Member
 
tarafied1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Western KY
Posts: 475
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Cool, thanks. I didn't realize there were more pages. Looks good. Nice work. I have a 68 FB with that hood but it's thrashed. I also have the steel hood off my 67 that doesn't have those scoops but it's perfect. I thought about grafting them on but worried it would be wavy cuz it's such a big flat panel. Can you tell where the welds are or did you get it nice and flat?
__________________

67 Coupe, 429, C6, 9" 4 wheel disc brakes, Eleanor kit
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2842869
tarafied1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2008, 08:58 PM   #46
spdrcer34
1st Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 121
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Can YOU see the welds?

In the later pages of the thread you can see where I welded it up, but after the body work, you can't see ANY of the work....

Ryan
__________________
1967 Mustang Project, 2.3L Turbo Swap
1992 Ford Explorer 2WD
1993 Ford Explorer 4wd
spdrcer34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2008, 09:03 PM   #47
tarafied1
2nd Gear Member
 
tarafied1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Western KY
Posts: 475
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

It's hard to tell from a picture. I have seen photos of cars that looked good until you see them in person. I was just wondering if you had any wavyness or areas that looked like it had been worked on. Didn't mean to insult you in any way. It looks good in the pics!
__________________

67 Coupe, 429, C6, 9" 4 wheel disc brakes, Eleanor kit
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2842869
tarafied1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2008, 10:43 PM   #48
Tang 72
2nd Gear Member
 
Tang 72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Vehicle: 72, Sprint Coupe
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 152
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Nice work on the hood and good luck with the SVO
__________________
72 Mustang Olympic Sprint Coupe- 302, c4
72 Charger- 440, 727
07 Mustang GT- 4.6L Auto
03 Mustang Mach 1 - 5-Speed
Tang 72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2008, 01:27 AM   #49
spdrcer34
1st Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 121
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

No offense taken....but I learned how to weld in high school, and have been welding ever since. Iwill teach my daughter to use myMIG welder.Andfor this Mustang project, I am going to get a TIG welderand teach her how to weld with that too...

Ryan
__________________
1967 Mustang Project, 2.3L Turbo Swap
1992 Ford Explorer 2WD
1993 Ford Explorer 4wd
spdrcer34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2008, 03:30 AM   #50
4reboy
5th Gear Member
 
4reboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Vehicle: 1969 Mach1
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 2,990
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

good luck with your project Ryan, I built my mach 1 with the help of my dad, truly a great experience to do the father/son and or daughter thing. I know my car inside and out since I've removed nearly every nut and bolt, and that has definitely come in handy.

Right now I'm building a custom trunk for my car so I can install my sub and amp, and to just make the trunk floor look more "finished".

I still wish I knew how to weld though, thats the only thing I wish I knew how to do, so definitely teach your daughter that, and teach her well!

best of luck, keep us posted with your project!
__________________
1969 Winter Blue Mach 1 M-code


Classic ROTM 2009 winner thanks everybody
4reboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 01:00 PM   #51
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Vehicle: 03 Mach 1
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Quote:
ORIGINAL: tyler72

No "close to stock" 2.3 is going to be fast. I have worked on several in foxbodies and thunderchickens (T-Birds) that had these engines, and all of them have been really slow. You can floor them and they just putt along like you have all day to get there. Of course, they were all bonestock, and had most had close to 100k on the odometer, but overall, they left a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe a fresher engine with a few good improvements would be better, but there is no way a stock 2.3 turbo will out do a 289 or 302.
you are ignorant and no nothing about the 2.3 T motor....in 1985 the SVO put 205hp and 185 ftlbs out and it's the 4 banger...the 2.3 block is stronger than a 289/302 by far. not to mention they're almost the same power and the 2.3 is lighter and get up to 30mpg (FWIW).
the N/A 2.3 is a turd i'll give you that, but the 2.3; turbo motor is FAR from the turd the 2.3 NA is.

BTW OP i'll be doing the same swap in the not so distant future
__________________
2003 Ox Wht Mach 1 1:814
modded out the ***!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyxps View Post
I punched it up his ***........ he didn't like to get blown
USMCrebel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 01:14 PM   #52
67BullittCoupe
3rd Gear Member
 
67BullittCoupe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Vehicle: 1967, Ford, Mustang Hardtop
Location: Orlando, Flawda
Posts: 865
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Quote:
ORIGINAL: USMCrebel

Quote:
ORIGINAL: tyler72

No "close to stock" 2.3 is going to be fast. I have worked on several in foxbodies and thunderchickens (T-Birds) that had these engines, and all of them have been really slow. You can floor them and they just putt along like you have all day to get there. Of course, they were all bonestock, and had most had close to 100k on the odometer, but overall, they left a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe a fresher engine with a few good improvements would be better, but there is no way a stock 2.3 turbo will out do a 289 or 302.
you are ignorant and no nothing about the 2.3 T motor....in 1985 the SVO put 205hp and 185 ftlbs out and it's the 4 banger...the 2.3 block is stronger than a 289/302 by far. not to mention they're almost the same power and the 2.3 is lighter and get up to 30mpg (FWIW).
the N/A 2.3 is a turd i'll give you that, but the 2.3; turbo motor is FAR from the turd the 2.3 NA is.

BTW OP i'll be doing the same swap in the not so distant future

hold your tongue.

by design all 4cyl blocks can handle more PSI of boost due to less rotational mass and less displacement.

by design the power limitations placed upon a 4cyl are much lower than a small block v8.

you can make 800 hp off a 4cyl, i know a guy that has 800 hp 4cyl.but it takes him 6000 rpm to get there.

DO NOT associate the MPG with the HP numbers.

you fail to remember that once an engine hits boost rpms your MPG goes right out the window.
oh wait the classic guys are the ignorant ones?




The biggest point is yes you can take the DOHC head off the volvo motors, get a new cam and steal a turbo off a super coupe. and yes you can build an engine to make much more horse power than a stock 289.


but why? i can paint my house purple with a toothbrush. but why? to be different?

you will find that a 4cyl will not replace a small block v8.

if turbo 4s are so great how come the M3 is a v8 or teh AMG is a v8 or how about the SVT cobra.

this is a big car, with a lot of rotational mass, therefore you need some torque. and thats something that is directly associated with displacment.


FAIL
__________________
67BullittCoupe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 01:17 PM   #53
tyler72
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 971
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Whatever, I have driven 3-4, and I don't care what you say, every single one of the ones I have driven was a slow *** turd! Period. My heavy *** car would smoke every 2.3 TurboI have driven, even with thebone stock drivetrain.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that all of the ones I have driven were Automatics, so that could have something to do with it. I am not saying that all2.3 turbosare slow. Im not saying that at all. I know they can be modified to be bad ***,I am just saying that the few I have driven were anything but fast.

Now, the T-Bird supercoupes... thats a different story, those things haul!!!
__________________
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 07-09-2008, 01:27 PM   #54
67BullittCoupe
3rd Gear Member
 
67BullittCoupe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Vehicle: 1967, Ford, Mustang Hardtop
Location: Orlando, Flawda
Posts: 865
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

if speed is NOT AN ISSUE why dont you just build a nice mild 289 or 302?

yeah sure everyone has them. but thts because they work so great. other wise wed all have turbo 4s

if you so concerened about gas mileage get a 4.6 Mod motor and do that swap. that would give her 260 Hp 280 ft lbs of torque.
and if you teach her to drive slow 18 in the city and 25-30 on the high way.

a turbo 4 will run the same MPG if not less on teh highway.

why? because the power needed to move the wieght comes from the motor continually being in boost. 4 cyls are almost always in boost. drive an srt 4 and listen for the blow off. they are continually in boost just for drivbing.

thats because 4 cyls unlike 6 cyl and v8s run on boost, that engine requires boost for all of its power.

a lexus is 300 with a turbo runs off motor and then boost. because the motor is strong enough with out boost to get going. the same cannot be said of a turbo.

your turbo 4 cyl will run twice the rpm to get the same speed as a v8. which obviously uses more gas.
__________________
67BullittCoupe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 01:45 PM   #55
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Vehicle: 03 Mach 1
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Quote:
ORIGINAL: 67BullittCoupe

Quote:
ORIGINAL: USMCrebel

Quote:
ORIGINAL: tyler72

No "close to stock" 2.3 is going to be fast. I have worked on several in foxbodies and thunderchickens (T-Birds) that had these engines, and all of them have been really slow. You can floor them and they just putt along like you have all day to get there. Of course, they were all bonestock, and had most had close to 100k on the odometer, but overall, they left a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe a fresher engine with a few good improvements would be better, but there is no way a stock 2.3 turbo will out do a 289 or 302.
you are ignorant and no nothing about the 2.3 T motor....in 1985 the SVO put 205hp and 185 ftlbs out and it's the 4 banger...the 2.3 block is stronger than a 289/302 by far. not to mention they're almost the same power and the 2.3 is lighter and get up to 30mpg (FWIW).
the N/A 2.3 is a turd i'll give you that, but the 2.3; turbo motor is FAR from the turd the 2.3 NA is.

BTW OP i'll be doing the same swap in the not so distant future

hold your tongue.

by design all 4cyl blocks can handle more PSI of boost due to less rotational mass and less displacement.

by design the power limitations placed upon a 4cyl are much lower than a small block v8.

you can make 800 hp off a 4cyl, i know a guy that has 800 hp 4cyl.but it takes him 6000 rpm to get there.

DO NOT associate the MPG with the HP numbers.

you fail to remember that once an engine hits boost rpms your MPG goes right out the window.
oh wait the classic guys are the ignorant ones?




The biggest point is yes you can take the DOHC head off the volvo motors, get a new cam and steal a turbo off a super coupe. and yes you can build an engine to make much more horse power than a stock 289.


but why? i can paint my house purple with a toothbrush. but why? to be different?

you will find that a 4cyl will not replace a small block v8.

if turbo 4s are so great how come the M3 is a v8 or teh AMG is a v8 or how about the SVT cobra.

this is a big car, with a lot of rotational mass, therefore you need some torque. and thats something that is directly associated with displacment.


FAIL
you better get your **** striaght dude, im a classic guy to *** hat....i've rebuilt my classic in 30 days from top to bottom. PSI has NOTHING to do with power CFM is where that is....i know guys makeing well over 1k hp and guess what it take them 6krpms to get there too. while it true HP and MPG dont go together sometimes. a properly sized turbo will have no lag an Improve FLOW with can improve mpgs IE TT supras full boost by 70mph and get 32mpg . So you fail to understand how turbo's can be setup to work and what makes them work.

IF you know about turbo's then you know they have tha ability to flow which makes power which is what? google it.

if Jon Huber 9 sec 1/4 look it up. 2.5l stroker. you can easily get 400hp out of these cars....oh do you know how far your rpms spin?


on your it takes a V8 to be fast how dumb of a statement can that be STI,EVO, i know some dsm's that will had you your ***.

__________________
2003 Ox Wht Mach 1 1:814
modded out the ***!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyxps View Post
I punched it up his ***........ he didn't like to get blown
USMCrebel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 01:48 PM   #56
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Vehicle: 03 Mach 1
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Quote:
ORIGINAL: 67BullittCoupe

if speed is NOT AN ISSUE why dont you just build a nice mild 289 or 302?

yeah sure everyone has them. but thts because they work so great. other wise wed all have turbo 4s

if you so concerened about gas mileage get a 4.6 Mod motor and do that swap. that would give her 260 Hp 280 ft lbs of torque.
and if you teach her to drive slow 18 in the city and 25-30 on the high way.

a turbo 4 will run the same MPG if not less on teh highway.

why? because the power needed to move the wieght comes from the motor continually being in boost. 4 cyls are almost always in boost. drive an srt 4 and listen for the blow off. they are continually in boost just for drivbing.

thats because 4 cyls unlike 6 cyl and v8s run on boost, that engine requires boost for all of its power.

a lexus is 300 with a turbo runs off motor and then boost. because the motor is strong enough with out boost to get going. the same cannot be said of a turbo.

your turbo 4 cyl will run twice the rpm to get the same speed as a v8. which obviously uses more gas.
yes and no,

you really need to come hang out in the S&S section and learn how this **** really works.....a properly sized turbo can be in full boost by 3k rpms or sooner depending on setup...a 4.6 mod motor in a classic holy ****, do you even understand the extense modifications you would need to do for that?
__________________
2003 Ox Wht Mach 1 1:814
modded out the ***!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyxps View Post
I punched it up his ***........ he didn't like to get blown
USMCrebel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 02:04 PM   #57
Nabster
3rd Gear Member
 
Nabster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 800
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

I realize you've probably made up your mind on this already, but here's just something to consider. Why not put an I6 in it? Build it up nice and solid, with a small carb tuned for mileage. An I6 will be plenty of motor for someone to learn to drive on, later, if needed it can be swapped out for a V8 if needed or wanted or just kept the I6.

At least one advantage to just going with an I6 is the fact they came stock in there cars. Parts are available, the knowledge is out there and at your fingertips. They're perfectly reliable as well.
__________________
1969 Legend Lime Mustang
Nabster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 02:05 PM   #58
tyler72
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 971
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Yes, a 4.6 is a PITA to fit in there. The shock towers have to be cut and moved out, firwal can be a problem sometimes too. It would be harder than the 2.3, yes, but it would alsobe able to to produce twice the torque at half the RPM of a turbo 4 cyl.
__________________
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 07-09-2008, 02:46 PM   #59
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Vehicle: 03 Mach 1
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Quote:
ORIGINAL: tyler72

Yes, a 4.6 is a PITA to fit in there. The shock towers have to be cut and moved out, firwal can be a problem sometimes too. It would be harder than the 2.3, yes, but it would alsobe able to to produce twice the torque at half the RPM of a turbo 4 cyl.
the 4.6 gt motor has a decent amount of potential, but the cost / gains isnt worth it IMHO...now if you went with the DOHC in the cobras/mach 1's maybe, but the cost is still way up there.

but you have to keep in mind power to weight ratio is very very important.. if you put a 2.3t in a 67 coupe it'll weigh a hefty 2800lbs (IIRC), but you put a 4.6 motor or a 302 and it get's heavy and a heavy car with 220rwhp DOES NOT perform as well as a 2800lbs car with 255rwhp (22psi on stock turbo with bolt ons).

here are some proven builds for the 2.3l turbo motor

http://www.turboford.net/ubb/ultimat...c;f=3;t=017352



1)
short block mods/compression ratio/displacement:Stock shortblock
head/port work/valve size:Stock head
cam specs/degrees adv-ret:Stock cam
intake/throttle body:Bob gutted upper and ported lower
intercooler:GN IC with duttweiler neck *supercooled on the dyno*
nitrous system/shot size:None
exhaust manifold:Bobs big log
turbo:PTE SC50
wastegate:ATR 3" internal WG DP
exhaust size:Magnaflow 3" dual
engine management:Stock PE
a/f ratio, total timing, boost:Way rich, 17*, 21 PSI
fuel octane/brand/leaded or unleaded:100 octane from petro
hp@rpm:332@5400
trq@rpm:344@4500
flex plate/flywheel:Spec stage 3 stock flywheel
convertor/clutch:Spec stage 3
transmission:T5
rear/ratio/tire type/tire size:8.8 3.55:1 Nitto 555R 275-60-15
race weight without driver:3400

this is a nice comfortable build


2)
short block mods/compression ratio/displacement: E8 small journal block filled to the top - 2.5 Ranger crank - Venolia pistons - 5.32" GRP alu. rods - stock main caps and bolts - 11.4 compression - Felpro 1035, no o-rings.
head/port work/valve size:Unported Esslinger SVO alu. head - 1.89/1.59 - lots of valve spring seat pressure
cam specs/degrees adv-ret:Crane roller - 260@.050/.585"/112 LSA
intake/throttle body:Weber side draft intake for runners, box plenum, 75mm TB.
intercooler:Custom made air/air
nitrous system/shot size:One dry nozzle to spool, shuts off at 12psi.
exhaust manifold:Homemade 1.5" unequal length header.
turbo:Turbonetics T72/.81 Q trim.
wastegate:Racegate
exhaust size:4" downpipe - Dynomax Bullet muffler
engine management:Mechanical injection - Kinsler fuel pump - 4-.024" primary nozzles, 4-.055" secondary nozzles - Hilborn compensator valve. Electromotive HPX ignition.
a/f ratio, total timing, boost:A/F about 4:1 - 16 deg. total timing - 36 to 40 psi boost.
fuel octane/brand/leaded or unleaded:Methanol
hp@rpm:?
trq@rpm:?
flex plate/flywheel:Stock reinforced flexplate.
convertor/clutch:8" Coan convertor
transmission:C4 - fully rollerized - PA brake valve body - AODE Kevlar direct clutches.
rear/ratio/tire type/tire size:9" - 4.30 - MT or Hoosier 10" x 28" DOT
race weight with driver:2970 lbs.
ET/MPH: Best 1/4 - 9.12 @ 148.55 - best 1/8 - 5.77 @ 120.06 - best 60ft. - 1.27

next areas to be improved: New Borg Warner 75mm turbo for more boost


that is a race build running 9's @ 148
__________________
2003 Ox Wht Mach 1 1:814
modded out the ***!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyxps View Post
I punched it up his ***........ he didn't like to get blown
USMCrebel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2008, 03:44 PM   #60
tyler72
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Apison, TN
Posts: 971
Default RE: 2.3L Turbo swap into 1967 Mustang

Ok, so what??? Honestly, you will never be able to impress me with a 2.3 in a CLASSIC Mustang. I don't care if it make 1000 HP. It is still a 4 banger. Now if that engine was in a Fox, it would be cool to me. However, if it was an I6 making that kind of power in a classic, that would also be cool. Preferably not a 300. A stroked 200 would be cool though.
__________________
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 07-09-2008, 03:44 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 02:00 AM.

© Internet Brands, 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