beat by 4 bang stang....
02-17-2006, 11:47 AM
#21
Teching In
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Alta Loma, CA
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually before the SVO, in 81 or 82 (don't remember the year exactly) the GT was available as a 5.0 or a non-intercooled turbo 2.2. As you can imagine, most people chose the "bigger" 5.0 so very few Turbo GT's were made. A few years later, the SVO appeared with an intercooler turbo 2.2.
02-17-2006, 01:12 PM
#22
Launching!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Newark ohio
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GMendoza
Actually before the SVO, in 81 or 82 (don't remember the year exactly) the GT was available as a 5.0 or a non-intercooled turbo 2.2. As you can imagine, most people chose the "bigger" 5.0 so very few Turbo GT's were made. A few years later, the SVO appeared with an intercooler turbo 2.2.
Last edited by 89tang; 02-17-2006 at 01:25 PM.
02-17-2006, 02:55 PM
#24
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cleveland Mississippi
Posts: 6,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by suzukibruce
its a wet system and is capable of 100,125,150.... i'm thinking 150......that should do the trick.... 
now tires......
apperantly the gt turbos and svo's were faster than the gt's.... at least thats what my ford lovin' brother told me....
now tires......apperantly the gt turbos and svo's were faster than the gt's.... at least thats what my ford lovin' brother told me....
02-17-2006, 04:24 PM
#26
As I recall, high 14's low 15's and it didnt sell because it was "different" without the V8, also, the 5.0 GT was just as fast with more low end grunt and a lower price tag to boot,and it was a hard car to sell because of this. Kinda like you buying a Lotus Elise over a 03-04 Cobra. not likely, unless you are the ultimate purist when it comes to sports cars.
02-17-2006, 10:43 PM
#27
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Springfield, Illinois
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually Ford first put the turbo 2.3 liter in the 1979 pace car mustang as an option. They made VERY few from 1980-1982, and picked them up again in 1983. I am working on a notchback swap for fun right now. Go to www.turboford.net There are quite a few guys on there with over 500rwhp! Couple that with cars that have been lightened to ~2750lbs with driver and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know these things can be sleepers. I do believe that a friend of mine from Michigan will break into the 8's this year at World Ford Challenge in 3100lb notchback, not to bad for a little 2.3 liter.
02-18-2006, 06:52 AM
#28
Teching In
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am fairly happy with my SVO and can vouch for their "mod-ability"
It is definitely not a loss to be ashamed of. Great power from a small motor, light weight, and a well-balanced vehicle. It reminds me of driving a go-kart if I drive it after driving my firebird for a while.
Merkur XR4Ti's had the 2.3 turbo as well. It's a popular motor for circle track, dirt track, autocross, etc. Ranger owners with the 2.3 also often put the turbo motor in.
It is definitely not a loss to be ashamed of. Great power from a small motor, light weight, and a well-balanced vehicle. It reminds me of driving a go-kart if I drive it after driving my firebird for a while.
Merkur XR4Ti's had the 2.3 turbo as well. It's a popular motor for circle track, dirt track, autocross, etc. Ranger owners with the 2.3 also often put the turbo motor in.
02-18-2006, 04:14 PM
#31
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by suzukibruce
couple of weekends ago i was at the local street race hangout and had run a few impytuners and wasn't doin' well when this old ratty as* piece of crap stang pulls into the lot. as it goes by i see a tinfoil rear side window, more rust than i've ever seen on a car in one piece and a dinky tail pipe dragging the road at every bump. so i turn to a friend of mine and joke about that thing being the only race i could win that night.... so my friend goes up to this guy and sets up a light to light run against me..... i really didn't feel like wasting my time but my buddy went out of his way to set this up..... so light goes green i mash the pedal and leave this guy about 4-5 lengths behind me.... the next thing i know this sound like a friggin fighter jet flies past me eminating from this stang... i look down at my speedo and i'm pushing 80 and this thing passes me like i'm sitting still..... 
so here is the sleeper of the century.... 83? mustang gt turbo... i don't know much about turbos but this thing looked like it came off a mack truck.... the owner procedes to tell me he also sprays it to get 9.50's in the quarter....nice now i really feel stupid and go home for the night...
so here is the sleeper of the century.... 83? mustang gt turbo... i don't know much about turbos but this thing looked like it came off a mack truck.... the owner procedes to tell me he also sprays it to get 9.50's in the quarter....nice now i really feel stupid and go home for the night...
02-18-2006, 04:16 PM
#32
Ya, the 2.3L ford 4-banger won A LOT of the races my cousin entered. THey called him out all the time for tear-downs etc. etc. (He never did stroke or bore it beyond the rules) He just knew how to hide his stuff, as well as build a damn good motor 
02-18-2006, 04:27 PM
#33
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Plainfield, CT
Posts: 10,520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those 2.3 liter SVO turbo's were prety sweeet back int he 80's. A friend of mine put an SVO turbo engine in a pinto. What a sleeper. We suprised quite a few fast cars back then. He even beat my cammed 77 T/A.
