Rheostat, no, definitely not... The actuators are in either firm or soft, no in between setting... Requires reversing polarity to switch the setting...
You could probably use something like a power window switch to reverse polarity...
Thanks.
How much to the actuators turn the strut adjuster, 1/2, 3/4, or one full turn either clock/counter clock wise?
Oh, and I'm glad you understood what I was trying do.
Oh, just to clarify, I don't want to run the ride control computer.
I know you can adjust the strut outside the car, but it would be much easier to just be able to adjust the strut while driving
I just want to be able to change the strut from soft to firm, or firm to soft depending on road conditions, or if my wife drives the car [she would want it on the soft setting].
Say you're out driving on some back roads that happen to have killer curves, and smooth road surface. You have the settings on the ride set to firm. You deftly drive through the curves with a grin on your face as the struts [and rest of the suspension] are doing their job.
About a mile away on the same road the road surface turns to . Lots of huge bums, and pot holes.
At this point with the current external strut adjustment you would have to pull over, open the hood, and reset the struts to the soft setting.
With the internally electrical setup all you would have to do is just turn the electrical to the desired settings without missing a beat.
I was thinking about modding an SVO Mustang [that came factory with Koni adjustable struts] with the T-bird electronic adjusters.
Now I know there will be some fabbing on the top of the strut itself to make this work, but I can take care of that pretty easy.
The question is would that little motor that turns the top of the strut adjuster work simply by wiring it up to a rheostat [an electrical device that controls voltage by turning a either clockwise or counter clockwise].
I also know that part of the motor that engages the strut adjuster is round on the Tbird, and the Koni adjuster needs something like a flat screwdriver. I was thinking to just press the round part flat with a vice so that it wold fit the slot on the Koni adjuster.
As an alternative a 90's camero bumper cover might be fabbed to fit as those car had the front end of the body coming to a point kinda like the Thunderbirds 87, and 88.
I'll tell you something that would be a lot easier: Buy one of those inspection cameras, drain the oil, stick the camera in the drain plug hole, and look around. Those inspection cameras can be had for under $100, and that's gotta be worth not having to take the pan off...
Now that is a great idea, and the owner shouldn't object either, thanks!
I might be interested in buying an 87 turbo coupe. The owner says the engine has Weisco pistons, and JE forged connecting rods along with main cap studs.
Here is the sticky wicket. The guy also has another turbo 2.3l car so the receipts for the pistons/rods could be for the other car, or he might have swapped the "built" engine to his other car.
Not saying the guy is lying, or anything, but business is business, and it would really suck to get the car home only to find stock rods, and pistons after paying the premium price for the other parts.
I'm a mechanic so pulling a pan wouldn't be a huge issue if I had the car at my shop, however I need to know how hard it is as in doing it at the owners house.
The only fair way to do this is to offer the owner $100 to hold while I pull the pan. If the parts he says are in the car are in fact in the car, then the $100 goes toward the purchase of the car. However, if I pull the pan, and find stock rods, and no studs then I would get my $100 back, and reinstall the pan.
If the parts turned out not to be there, then obviously that would cast doubt on the rest of the parts that are supposed to be on the car, not to mention the machine work that was done would also be in question.
FTR, I do know that an oil pan on a 5.0l engine is a pain to pull on a Fox Mustang without jacking the engine up with an engine puller [even then with the trans bell hitting the fire wall its almost impossible to get that pan out].
This is going to come across as sounding rude, but I honestly don't mean for it to be....
What would be wrong with the wife learning to drive a manual?
hahahahahahahahahaahahahahaaha................sorry, but a little Asian woman driving a stick is a threat to national security, the stereo types are true.
Actually I did get her to drive an SVO Mustang for a while, but even so I would also be driving the car on the interstate. Once we went on a 6 hour trip to see my family in our 86 SVO Mustang, and got into gridlock traffic about three times on the trip going, and comming. That was NO FUN with a stick.
If those 5 speeds are electronically controlled then all bets would be off unless someone made a controller for it like the 4r70W, but I kinda doubt it. Plus, like TC50 said, I'll bet the housings are for V6/V8 so ................
I guess the next option would be to build a stout 4L. From what I've read the 4L is basically a C3 with an overdrive which really isn't bad as the C3 is a lot like a C4.
Back years ago there was guy Joe Morgan who was a turbo 4 racer. IIRC, he said you could build a 4L to take plenty of abuse.
I was looking to buy a Turbo Coupe, but its got a five speed manual. That would be great for me, but not for my wife.
So, I was looking into how to beef up the 4l auto, and found a truck site where everyone was ditching the 4l, and going with a newer five speed auto [of course this might just work only for the V6 Fords that had the 4l auto so, bell housing issues might be the killer].
I've still got a 2.3l bell for a C4, but I've got to have overdrive with that little 4 banger.
Being able to repair the car is HUGE for me. It would be interesting if you could retro fit the new 2.3l dohc turbo into the T-bird while keeping the factory ecu setup.
You would loose any variable valve timing [assuming its electrical like my stupid Nissan], and you would have to change out the throttle body on the new 2.3l, but Hell that would be a plus for me as I HATE electronic throttle bodies.
The new cars in a few more years will be so far tech'd out that you with either have to own $$$$$ scanner/programming tools just to fix them. I about pooped my pants when I found out my 05 Nissan Altima has electronic MOTOR MOUNTS!. That isn't too bad in itself, but when they go bad they WILL take out your ecu.
Like someone just said the 87-88 T-birds had just enough tech without being overly complicated.
I've loved the looks of the 87/88 turbo coupes as soon as I saw them
Like I said on another thread I think were the 87/88 tc birds were released today with maybe some minor body mods like bigger dia wheels, and more electronic tech it would be a hit today.
I think the tc's were the link to bridge the gap between performance car [Mustang] and family car [Taurus]. So the younger guy, who wants something that has a bit of performance, but is big enough for the kids riding in the rear, plus plenty of room in the trunk for the grocery's. This car lets him have his cake, and eat it to.
Sporty looks, two door, performance.
For the older guy who wants something with a bit of performance, but more room, and a comfortable ride, the tc offers both.
Also, its a good sleeper car with plenty of indirect after market support as it shares lots of part with the Fox Mustang.
After the 88 tc I really didn't like the next generation as it gained way too many pounds to be anything sporty.
Also, and I almost forgot, I really HATE the newer fuel injected cars as they are waaaay too complicated to work on should you have trouble. I made the mistake of buying a sport version of the Altima in the SE-R. I totally restored this 2005 POS, and found some interesting things like electronic motor mounts.
Electronic motor mounts wouldn't bother me except that when they go bad they take out your ecu. Alternators with clutches, anti theft system that can lock you out of your own car with no way to reset it without a trip to the stealership, bad power steering switch that can make the car undriveable, and the list goes on.
The Thunderbirds are waaay simple in contrast to the 05 NISSAN to repair , and keep running.
My logic for a swap to the new 2.3 eb vs a new Coyote is that I like cars that can make a good HP, and lower the weight of the car.
Lowering the weight of the car does several good things.
Lowering the weight helps the car handle better, possible better gas mileage, and from what I saw with the eb swap into the SVO the engine was more behind the shock towers than the original SVO engine, which helps the weight bias.
Also, I think this little engine, the 2.3 eb has even more hp potential than it the previous 2.3l in the turbo coupes of the day.
"Carbed or EFI??? ", its Carbed, but please don't start on the angle that going carbed was waaaaay easier than efi as there are a ton of stand alone efi setups out there as well as one from Ford that can be ordered with the 2.3l crate engine.
Here is my little truck, to prove its real. Almost everything had to be fabbed from big brakes, front suspension, rack/pinion steering, watts link in the rear, rear suspension, AC with the condenser relocated to the bed, etc. Then the body work to get an Edge Ranger front body onto the B front, not to mention a REAL SVO Mustang hood scoop.
Like I said, work on one thing at a time, and you will figure it out. \
