I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #135 – January 28, 2008, 06:59:11 PM Yes, but those can be considered bolt ones. I mean, header, intercooler, intake manifold, VAM, injectors, and things of that nature are bolt ons. Heads and cams are internal. Thats a big undertaking, where as a turbo or header can be done by anyone with some sort of decent experience. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #136 – January 28, 2008, 07:04:23 PM Well its good to see that everybody has been keeping this a good thread (debate?). Just remember that thats why they make all kinds of motors because everybody likes something different.Myself, I bought my first TC in 1988 it was a brand new car that had a sticker of over 20K and that was alot of money back then. We owned the car for about a week and I was ready to trade it in because I hated the 2.3 and the best it would run was 15.9 @88 @ mph@NED. Needless to say about three months went by and I was at the dealer trading it in. The next year (summer of 89) I was driving a almost new black 88 TC with a stock 5.0L HO swap with a 5 speed and to this day that was one of the best Daily driver cars I have ever owned. It wasnt fast and only ran mid 14s @98 MPH but it was just overall a much nicer car to drive with the V8.Myself = I have never liked the 2.3 and although it is a great motor and is very strong they are just not for me.Give me a 87/88 TC with a mild 302 with an S trim and I will be a happy camper.:D Oh and one of the first guys to do a 87/88 TC 5.0l swap in this country was a guy named Rick that owned Manards auto in NH. Back in the late 80s he had already done about 8 of them.He did them before Windsor fox did. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #137 – January 28, 2008, 07:05:58 PM Quote from: kingcars;200544 But the point still stands that if you want THE MOST straight line speed for your dollar.Then you build a chevy..:D Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #138 – January 28, 2008, 07:10:43 PM Oh jeez, Sleeper, the last thing we need is a Chevy vs Ford engine debate It's also worthy to note that my dad used to race N/A 2.3s, and when built correctly, were very stout (although not at any real high hp range). Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #139 – January 28, 2008, 07:13:54 PM Quote from: Aerobird Motorsports;200520And Gumby, you DO hear about the design flaw problems! How many threads are constantly being made about dizzy gears/auxiliary shafts? Slider cams wiping lobes? PIP/TFI systems pooping out? Heads cracking? E3's cracking? Pistons breaking? The PVC system failing? Fuel rails leaking? Granted there's going to be more as time marches on and these cars get more miles, but a design flaw is a design flaw. AMC V8's have to run an internal oil line to keep from starving the rear lifters. We also have to run sleeves in the integral oil pump (because steel gears on an aluminum housing = accelerated wear and poor oil pressure). It's just a design flaw that has to be overcome.OK..how about stepping in your own poop a little more. First you state that a "design flaw is a design flaw", then you tout that your vaunted AMC V8 has a design flaw, that has to be over come. Double-standard much?I also have issue with your list of "flaws". The only SERIOUS flaw is the aux/dist gear. The rest are all things that were fixed in the production runs, or a problem with EVERY EEC 4 vehicle.Slider cams wiping lobes is not a common thing, the TFI/PIP thing is an issue on every Ford with that system, so it's not just a 2.3 thing, Heads cracked due to overheating, which is due to poor maintenance, not a design flaw. The E3 thing is just a grasping a straws, it was a resolved issue from the factory. Pistons "breaking"?? Seriously? The early carbed ones yes, the later EFI ones, no. Fuel rails leaking? Again rare and could happen on any application. PCV system failing? Perhaps it's not adequate, but that is just another "flaw that has to be overcome".I guess you can talk yourself into anything if you want, but you're grasping here for a lot of those to try and make a point. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #140 – January 28, 2008, 07:37:59 PM Don't the stock heads on the SO 302 also have a design flaw , one that starves the 8th cylinder of air? Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #141 – January 28, 2008, 07:56:51 PM Quote from: 20th anny 5.o;200563Don't the stock heads on the SO 302 also have a design flaw , one that starves the 8th cylinder of air?Not just limited to SO's.....HO's had it too....Was an intake issue. Quote Selected
Come pick on ME Reply #142 – January 28, 2008, 08:05:37 PM My 2.3 was in a PINTO! LOLTalk about design flaws, good thing I took out the stock gas tank and installed a fuel cell.BTW, I came close to building a sleeper Pinto with the 2.3:shakeass: My 2.3 ran over 7 full seasons from 5500 to 7200rpmYes it was only 200hp but I love that engine!!!!Here is my old school 5.0 actually 289 bored 40 over circa 1979My 2.3 experience circa 1994Our modern 5.0 projectthe other 5.0 (pos)The 6.3 aka my beast!!!All of these cars have brought me countless hours of grief, aggravation, blood, sweat and tears.and many fond memories and TONS of Fun. This is why it is a Hobby, it's our escape and our pleasure. Let's just enjoy it!!!! Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #143 – January 28, 2008, 08:36:42 PM Nowhere Michael have you said yes or no about using a wideband, if you weren't using one then forget it, nothing you say can be valid when it comes to what did or didn't blow up. It's not rocket science, if a 2.3 detonates under higher power levels it will likely blow. If the aux shaft does not break in properly, has a defect, you run the wrong oil in cold weather, or run a high volume pump, it is more likely to fail. It's a high power density engine and so things happen, parts break, if you can't handle that then stick to what works for you and quit all this arguing.Essy makes parts to fix the problems, billet aux shaft which is honestly well worth the money if you want to race. You can't skimp on parts that increase reliability when it comes to a turbo engine. Head cracking? Get an Essy head for 1500, bolt it on and do the math on the HP/dollar, or if you have the time and desire do a Volvo head, either is a big improvement over stock without the cracking problems. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #144 – January 28, 2008, 08:49:14 PM Quote from: Chuck W;200554OK..how about stepping in your own poop a little more. First you state that a "design flaw is a design flaw", then you tout that your vaunted AMC V8 has a design flaw, that has to be over come. Double-standard much?Ummmm, no? I was pointing out that the AMC engine had design flaws, just like the 2.3. It's a bad thing and it just has to be dealt with. And you're pretty annoying. It took Ford FOUR YEARS to fix the cracking E3, and the E6 sure isn't the most "un-crackable" item ever. How many fuel rails are in the "Wanted" section every month on TF? Seriously Chuck, the 2.3 is not a "God" motor and it DOES have problems. There's a reason nobody has good fuel rails in stock (or aux gears, or 87/88 TC clutch forks, etc, etc). Come on man. It's a debate not a race for a winner. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #145 – January 28, 2008, 08:50:53 PM Well looky here, more ABM bitching about Ford engines. Hey here is a great site. http://www.ls1.com/forums/ How about you get the **** out of here and go circle jerk the rest of your LSX buddies? Appears they are looking for a good pivot man. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #146 – January 28, 2008, 08:53:28 PM Quote from: jlewis05;200574Nowhere Michael have you said yes or no about using a wideband, if you weren't using one then forget it, nothing you say can be valid when it comes to what did or didn't blow up. It's not rocket science, if a 2.3 detonates under higher power levels it will likely blow. If the aux shaft does not break in properly, has a defect, you run the wrong oil in cold weather, or run a high volume pump, it is more likely to fail. It's a high power density engine and so things happen, parts break, if you can't handle that then stick to what works for you and quit all this arguing.Essy makes parts to fix the problems, billet aux shaft which is honestly well worth the money if you want to race. You can't skimp on parts that increase reliability when it comes to a turbo engine. Head cracking? Get an Essy head for 1500, bolt it on and do the math on the HP/dollar, or if you have the time and desire do a Volvo head, either is a big improvement over stock without the cracking problems.I've never claimed nor used a WB. Then again neither has Bob (martin0660), Frank (turbo83coupe) or anybody that raced before 2002. Come on man, get real. $1500 buys a wicked set of 5.0 heads vs 1 2.3 head that's only marginally better out-of-the-box then stock?The aux shaft fails for no reason. Some guys get 200K out of them, some don't last a week. It's a design flaw. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #147 – January 28, 2008, 08:53:56 PM Quote from: CougarSE;200580Well looky here, more ABM bitching about Ford engines. Hey here is a great site. http://www.ls1.com/forums/ How about you get the **** out of here and go circle jerk the rest of your LSX buddies? Appears they are looking for a good pivot man.WTF is your problem? Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #148 – January 28, 2008, 08:57:24 PM Wow don't let this thread get ugly again...Cmon guys, ABM (and mostly everyone else) has been just saying it how he sees it. It has nothing to do with manufacterer. Quote Selected
I really HATE the 2.3 !! Reply #149 – January 28, 2008, 08:59:12 PM Quote from: kingcars;200589Wow don't let this thread get ugly again...Cmon guys, ABM (and mostly everyone else) has been just saying it how he sees it. It has nothing to do with manufacterer.;) Quote Selected
Topic: I really HATE the 2.3 !! (Read 24912 times)
previous topic - next topic
