Skip to main content
Topic: I really HATE the 2.3 !! (Read 24911 times) previous topic - next topic

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #150
No one here gives a flying shiznit about an LSX engine.  If an LSX had a dick ABM would be all over it.
One 88

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #151
Like I said, come pick on me!!!!! Lets throw my pinto into the mix :shakeass:

Mr. Bill

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #152
I think SO 5.0's have a design flaw that deprives all 8 cylinders of air. How else could you explain 155 horses from a V8?

As for the "bolt-on VS major mod" debate: I personally consider everything from the deck up a "bolt-on", plus the cam. Yes, they do completely change the nature of the engine, but the parts are still bolt-on parts that can be changed in a day, or at track side. Anything else (crank/rods/pistons/block) ain't a bolt on, they're an overhaul...
2015 Mustang GT Premium - 5.0, 6-speed, Guard Green - too much awesome for one car

1988 5.0 Thunderbird :birdsmily: SOLD SEPT 11 2010: TC front clip/hood ♣ Body & paint completed Oct 2007 ♣ 3.55 TC rear end and front brakes ♣ TC interior ♣ CHE rear control arms (adjustable lowers) ♣ 2001 Bullitt springs ♣ Energy suspension poly busings ♣ Kenne Brown subframe connectors ♣ CWE engine mounts ♣ Thundercat sequential turn signals ♣ Explorer overhead console (temp/compass display) ♣ 2.25" off-road dual exhaust ♣ T-5 transmission swap completed Jan 2009 ♣

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #153
Quote from: Thunder Chicken;200595
I think SO 5.0's have a design flaw that deprives all 8 cylinders of air. How else could you explain 155 horses from a V8?...

I can think of worse cough 255 ;) and the 221 v8
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
1974 maverick lsx powered turbo car SOLD
1973 maverick Tijuana Taxi Tribute
1957 chevy LSX Turbo project (race car)
Owner of Joe Dirt Fabrication

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #154
Quote from: Aerobird Motorsports;200584
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.


Yeah, and I disagree with them on that probably, because the wideband is tuning for the masses and I think it's the way to go now.  Bob has tons of experience.  Frank has gleaned a lot from Bob so that explains that.  In the days before widebands we had EGT which was not a substitute but could keep you from "melting the mill", also reading the plugs, which some people still stand by if you know how to do it well.  Bob also has only used T3 turbos to my knowledge and has managed to go amazingly fast with it.  With a T3 and jacked fuel pressure, yeah the stock fuel management can work.  Get into 50 trim territory and really crank it up and you need to rethink your whole engine management system. I love standalones, they make life so easy and change the way the engine works so dramatically.

 I don't have positive things to show for all the different work I've done, the pieces have never fallen quite right for me and I have other obligations, but I know the ins and outs and problems with these engines and can honestly say I've examined lots of other options and still consider the 2.3T one of my favorites, the only other thing by Ford I'd consider going with is the 4.6 DOHC for any current projects of mine, and even that I wish I could do turbocharged but it's quite expensive.

I'll be honest and say a stock TC engine isn't all that impressive, it has a big torque hit and then instantly chokes.  My first ride in my white TC was with an engine I rebuilt and prepped the way I thought was best and it made all the difference over the stock TC (as I got to drive one later).  It's easy to poke fun at a stock TC's times and forget just how big of a difference the intake, exhaust, extra boost makes, but also I went farther and did porting and a cam, and that truly made all the difference.  Unless you do a big valve ported head, the stock ranger cam just doesn't cut it, it's lame.
Long time Turboford freak...
84 SVO
88 TC
87 XR4Ti

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #155
Quote from: CougarSE;200592
No one here gives a flying shiznit about an LSX engine.  If an LSX had a dick ABM would be all over it.


You're acting very bitter...what's your problem?  I haven't seen any LSx fanboy-ism from anyone in here...

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #156
Quote from: CougarSE;200592
No one here gives a flying shiznit about an LSX engine.  If an LSX had a dick ABM would be all over it.

You need a timeout *******.

Yeah, because somebody that owns two 302's, an AMC 401, a Pontiac 3800, two 2.3T's, and a 4.6 2V is an LSx "fan boy". Please. Get over yourself. I like a lot of engines, hence the diversity, something you know nothing of. Now go away, you're annoying me.

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #157
Quote from: jlewis05;200599
Yeah, and I disagree with them on that probably, because the wideband is tuning for the masses and I think it's the way to go now.  Bob has tons of experience.  Frank has gleaned a lot from Bob so that explains that.  In the days before widebands we had EGT which was not a substitute but could keep you from "melting the mill", also reading the plugs, which some people still stand by if you know how to do it well.  Bob also has only used T3 turbos to my knowledge and has managed to go amazingly fast with it.  With a T3 and jacked fuel pressure, yeah the stock fuel management can work.  Get into 50 trim territory and really crank it up and you need to rethink your whole engine management system. I love standalones, they make life so easy and change the way the engine works so dramatically.

 I don't have positive things to show for all the different work I've done, the pieces have never fallen quite right for me and I have other obligations, but I know the ins and outs and problems with these engines and can honestly say I've examined lots of other options and still consider the 2.3T one of my favorites, the only other thing by Ford I'd consider going with is the 4.6 DOHC for any current projects of mine, and even that I wish I could do turbocharged but it's quite expensive.

I'll be honest and say a stock TC engine isn't all that impressive, it has a big torque hit and then instantly chokes.  My first ride in my white TC was with an engine I rebuilt and prepped the way I thought was best and it made all the difference over the stock TC (as I got to drive one later).  It's easy to poke fun at a stock TC's times and forget just how big of a difference the intake, exhaust, extra boost makes, but also I went farther and did porting and a cam, and that truly made all the difference.  Unless you do a big valve ported head, the stock ranger cam just doesn't cut it, it's lame.


I like a lot of what you have to say. WB's are definitely the way of the future, especially now that they are affordable for the masses. That may have helped my setup immensely. I also agree on the stand-alones, although I don't think the market is quite there yet (yes, MS is awesome, but for people who suck at wiring it's not viable). I think in another year or two we'll be singing a different song though, and "bolt-in" stand-alones will be par.

I am giving the 2.3T another shot on this engine I'm building for DW, but I swear I'm keeping it under "that line" and doing as much as I can with it there. We will be drag testing it and dyno-tuning it so hopefully we can lay down some decent #'s on the LA3/35#s/VAM.

I think your last paragraph speaks a lot of truth (cam especially). And while the TC (or So 5.0, or hell even the HO 5.0) seem "lame" compared to cars of today (300HP 3V Mustang, 400HP GTO, 303HP FWD Grand Prix, etc, etc) they are still fun drives. I still smile when I see one on the road (V6's included) and taking a nice one for a cruise is a treat to be enjoyed.

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #158
No diversity huh?  Might seem that way since I don't preach my life here like yourself.  What you consider diverse is very narrow to what I have in my garage.
One 88

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #159
Quote from: Aerobird Motorsports;200622
LA3/35#s/VAM.


3 of things that limit power the most.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
1974 maverick lsx powered turbo car SOLD
1973 maverick Tijuana Taxi Tribute
1957 chevy LSX Turbo project (race car)
Owner of Joe Dirt Fabrication

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #160
Quote from: CougarSE;200629
No diversity huh?  Might seem that way since I don't preach my life here like yourself.  What you consider diverse is very narrow to what I have in my garage.


Prove it.

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #161
Quote from: SLEEPER T-BIRD 87;200632
3 of things that limit power the most.


Well, when you're going for 100pt Concourse correct under the hood, there's limitations :evilgrin:

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #162
Quote from: Aerobird Motorsports;200640
Well, when you're going for 100pt Concourse correct under the hood, there's limitations :evilgrin:



fake vam, GN compressor and wheel,aftermarket injectors painted to look like brown tops and megasquirt :D theres ways around it
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
1974 maverick lsx powered turbo car SOLD
1973 maverick Tijuana Taxi Tribute
1957 chevy LSX Turbo project (race car)
Owner of Joe Dirt Fabrication

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #163
You are seeing where we're going :D But the VAM will be real. .454 slider cam, Essy gear behind the timing cover, 3" downpipe, T3 hidden behind the A/C compressor, Bob's gutted/ported intakes, ported E6, etc, etc. All hidden behind a clear-powdercoated and painted 100% stock looking 2.3T.

I really HATE the 2.3 !!

Reply #164
I personally have never had an engine management system because I dont even have all my dang parts on the car yet (my fault), and there are more things like maintanance, or cheaper go fast parts to be bought on a budget. Some sort of engine management will be bought in the future!!
One big reason that I like my 2.3 is because it is different!! You dont see one everyday! It also gets decent gas mileage to boot, which is nice. I dont care what ANYBODY says, if you keep up on the maintanance, and build the thing right, it CAN and WILL be strong/reliable!! There is soo much more than just throwing parts at it, I think that point has been proven already however... BTW, whats the heck is a 5.0?? :flip: :shakeass:

Frank M.
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/665379

1983 TurboCoupe-T3 .60/.63, 3" exhaust, Motorsport front mount, PJ, large VAM, green tops, 8.8" w/ 3.55's, 13.72@97mph
1985.5 SVO
1984 Fullsize Bronco- 300, NP435