Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: differneces....87-88 T-Bird (Read 17158 times) previous topic - next topic

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #75 –
I'm going to let you off the hook and say you mis-read someone here. Nobody said the car didn't boost past 2nd gear. They said it's reduced/limited it in the upper gears.

Also, Turbo coupes in '87 only had boost in 1st and 2nd gear with the manual transmission. '88 had boost in all 5 gears.


[COLOR="royalblue"]??????????????????????????[/COLOR]

PLEASE SPARE ME WITH I AM GOING TO LET YOU OFF THE HOOK BS. I TAKE THIS STUFF AS SERIOUS AS A HEART ATTACK. Now it is time to go to work I HAVE CARS TO BUILD AND TUNE.
I spend money I don't have, To build  cars I don't need, To impress people I don't know

HAVE YOU DRIVEN A FORD LATELY!!

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #76 –
No argument from me.
'88 Sport--T-5,MGW shifter,Trick Flow R intake,Ed Curtis cam,Trick Flow heads,Scorpion rockers,75mm Accufab t-body,3G,mini starter,Taurus fan,BBK long tube headers,O/R H-Pipe, Flowamaster Super 44's, deep and deeper Cobra R wheels, Mass Air and 24's,8.8 with 3.73's,140 mph speedo,Mach 1 chin spoiler,SN-95 springs,CHE control arms,aluminum drive shaft and a lot more..

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #77 –
Here's basically the same discussion from a thread over on NATO, appears the boost limit in upper gears is correct for a '87 with LA2 EEC...

Quote
Originally posted by Hawk:
 "Later LA3 allowed full boost in all gears"

Jeff,

That's an old wives tale.  Think about it, how does the computer know which gear you are in with the T5?  There is no feed back.  That myth got started because of the article in Car& Driver or Motor Trend where someone from Ford was quoted saying such nonsense. 

Hawk


Quote
Originally posted by sbhjr44:
 Well I get full boost in all 5 gears in 88 and my 87 gets 15 psi in 1st and 2nd and 10psi in 3rd, 4th and 5th gear. If it is a old wives tale then tell me how come my TC's seem to do as told above?

Santana


Quote
Originally posted by Jeff K:
Quote
Originally posted by Pete D:
Hawk, My experience says it's true, and I had side by side  88 cars that bore it out. I believe the EEC can determine gear by rpm, and speed via the speed sensor
Correct.... the PCM can determine tranny gear from looking at VSS vs RPM.


Quote
Originally posted by Hawk:
Cool, good explanation. The VSS is the feed back loop that seemed to be missing.

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #78 –
Oh, Look at that you're right ;0) perhaps he meant "full" boost. Regardless, the statement was corrected and you still felt the need to do your thing.

btw, we have a quote feature. Most web forums do. Learn to use it.

Quote from: TOM Renzo;367046

I TAKE THIS STUFF AS SERIOUS AS A HEART ATTACK.


Obviously. X

Enjoy your day:flip:
:america: 1988 Thunderbird Sport, Former 4.6 DOHC T56 conversion project.

Rest of the country, Welcome to Massachusettes. Enjoy your stay.

 
Halfbreed... Mango Orange Y2K Mustang GT
FRPP complete 2000 Cobra engine swap, T56 n' junk...
~John~

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #79 –
I thought threads like this got shut down when they got this out of hand...? I remember it did when we had the thread about the mustang forum..
-'88 Tbird 3.8
-2012 Altima 2.5 BASE. 
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Future: Budget 5.0 300 HP.

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #80 –
Quote from: TOM Renzo;367046
I'm going to let you off the hook and say you mis-read someone here. Nobody said the car didn't boost past 2nd gear. They said it's reduced/limited it in the upper gears.

Also, Turbo coupes in '87 only had boost in 1st and 2nd gear with the manual transmission. '88 had boost in all 5 gears.


[COLOR="royalblue"]??????????????????????????[/COLOR]

PLEASE SPARE ME WITH I AM GOING TO LET YOU OFF THE HOOK BS. I TAKE THIS STUFF AS SERIOUS AS A HEART ATTACK. Now it is time to go to work I HAVE CARS TO BUILD AND TUNE.

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/DSCF0251.jpg

 
My apologies to all for igniting a firestorm of controversy. I will stay with the simplicity of HO 5.0 V8 fuel injection like Vinnie and stay out of 2.3 Boost.
2003 Marauder 300B
1996-97 Cobra wheel straight but weathered (For Sale)
84 TC manual shifter handle no  (For Sale)

BTW, I had a 1988 T-Bird Sport way back when. I found out that it was totalled shortly after trading it in. It still has the ignition switch recall to date.

Special thanx to EricCoolCats for showing me to this site.:bowdown:

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #81 –
LMAO  this is great  page after page, all because of one missed *F* word in one post ...... "87 only had *"FULL*" boost in 1st and 2nd gear"


 I have seen less B.S. when a certain other four letter *F* word was actually used  in a thread .
Fox-less at the moment

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #82 –
Quote from: RoyLPita;367064
My apologies to all for igniting a firestorm of controversy. I will stay with the simplicity of HO 5.0 V8 fuel injection like Vinnie and stay out of 2.3 Boost.

 
It's 8 page long threads like this that make the 2.3T seem so "complicated" and "troublesome". It's a freakin' four cylinder with a small compressor attached to it people. At the end of the day, it's no more complicated than everyones "simple" injected 5.slow.
88 TC 5speed, 168000+ miles, stock 2.3T long block, ported RFE6 exhaust, Evergreen T3 running 15#'s.
Up next: FMIC, fresh air intake, ported intakes, ported big valve head.

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #83 –
Quote from: hypostang;367066
LMAO  this is great  page after page, all because of one missed *F* word in one post ...... "87 only had *"FULL*" boost in 1st and 2nd gear"


 I have seen less B.S. when a certain other four letter *F* word was actually used  in a thread .


I guess it's what happens when the maturity level rivals that of a 3 yr old.
-'88 Tbird 3.8
-2012 Altima 2.5 BASE. 
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Future: Budget 5.0 300 HP.

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #84 –
Yeah...lot of stubbornness and unwillingness to accept the truth here.

Probably scared the OP off, too.

Some like 2.3 engines, some like the 5.0 (myself included). Doesn't mean I feel the urge to imply it's better than 2.3 or LSx or hemis or whatever.

FACT: 100% stock 1987 TurboCoupes will not make as much boost in the upper three forward gears as an '88 will.

It's pretty accepted that the VSS is the leading contributor to the EEC's knowledge of vehicle speed and engine RPM, thusly knowing when to limit the boost in those three gears.

If your '87 TC (this is to Tom Renzo, btw) makes the full 15psi in ALL the gears, then A: it's not as stock as you say, B: you're a liar, or C: it has a very late build date, and does have the LA3 EEC.

My guess is that it has an LA3....also, what's the build date on the door jamb?

I'm not saying you're lying...you do know your way around these cars from reading your posts...but there has to be a good reason why your '87 makes the full boost...not picking on you, and striving to be civil here.




Now...bluntly...as I said, you've shared some good info, and no doubt you've been turning bolts and nuts far longer than I've been alive (I'm 34). But when someone who's correct in their info (or several someones, in this instance) refute your misinformation with proven facts, why do you get mad and say you're leaving? Seems a little childish to me.

I respect the capabilities and power of the LSx engines, however, they are just not arousing to me. Besides, me and a buddy are looking at turbo kits. For what your kid mentioned cost-wise, I could have a TT 5.0 that would knock the socks off of most cam-only LS2 or-3 engines...and for a hell of a lot less.

Granted, I'd have to have the required MAF setup, but on an otherwise stock engine, it would still make more power with reliability than an LS2.

But anyway, this thread was started about the basic differences between an '87 and an '88 Thunderbird...and even more ironic, the OP has a 5.0 car. I doubt seriously he gives a fat rat's ringpiece (Thanks Carm!) about boost in this gear, that gear, or not at all.

So yeah..
You build yours, I'll build mine, and life will go on. I promise.
'98 Explorer 5.0
'20 Malibu (I know, Chevy, but, 35MPG. Let's go brandon, eh)

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #85 –
Quote from: ThunderbirdSport302;367076
Yeah...lot of stubbornness and unwillingness to accept the truth here.

Probably scared the OP off, too.

Some like 2.3 engines, some like the 5.0 (myself included). Doesn't mean I feel the urge to imply it's better than 2.3 or LSx or hemis or whatever.

FACT: 100% stock 1987 TurboCoupes will not make as much boost in the upper three forward gears as an '88 will.

It's pretty accepted that the VSS is the leading contributor to the EEC's knowledge of vehicle speed and engine RPM, thusly knowing when to limit the boost in those three gears.

If your '87 TC (this is to Tom Renzo, btw) makes the full 15psi in ALL the gears, then A: it's not as stock as you say, B: you're a liar, or C: it has a very late build date, and does have the LA3 EEC.

My guess is that it has an LA3....also, what's the build date on the door jamb?

I'm not saying you're lying...you do know your way around these cars from reading your posts...but there has to be a good reason why your '87 makes the full boost...not picking on you, and striving to be civil here.




Now...bluntly...as I said, you've shared some good info, and no doubt you've been turning bolts and nuts far longer than I've been alive (I'm 34). But when someone who's correct in their info (or several someones, in this instance) refute your misinformation with proven facts, why do you get mad and say you're leaving? Seems a little childish to me.

I respect the capabilities and power of the LSx engines, however, they are just not arousing to me. Besides, me and a buddy are looking at turbo kits. For what your kid mentioned cost-wise, I could have a TT 5.0 that would knock the socks off of most cam-only LS2 or-3 engines...and for a hell of a lot less.

Granted, I'd have to have the required MAF setup, but on an otherwise stock engine, it would still make more power with reliability than an LS2.

But anyway, this thread was started about the basic differences between an '87 and an '88 Thunderbird...and even more ironic, the OP has a 5.0 car. I doubt seriously he gives a fat rat's ringpiece (Thanks Carm!) about boost in this gear, that gear, or not at all.

So yeah..
You build yours, I'll build mine, and life will go on. I promise.


Well said.  I agree with you entirely.  I personally have always been more of a 351 Jasper kind of guy.  The 302 just never did it for me and the LSx engines are just to  expensive for the output.
1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe (daily driver) - T5, Short Throw, Ranger roller cam (soon to be Boport 1.5), stock turbo and TMIC (also soon to change.)

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #86 –
This may come as a surprise to you guys, but I am happy to have a 5.0 in the Sport.

Is it more or less complicated than the turbo-4? Probably not, but, I don't think I can handle 8, 9, or more pages of thread every time I ask a question..

Also, my "5-slow" is probably the absolute slowest car on this forum..... but I still like it.
'88 Sport--T-5,MGW shifter,Trick Flow R intake,Ed Curtis cam,Trick Flow heads,Scorpion rockers,75mm Accufab t-body,3G,mini starter,Taurus fan,BBK long tube headers,O/R H-Pipe, Flowamaster Super 44's, deep and deeper Cobra R wheels, Mass Air and 24's,8.8 with 3.73's,140 mph speedo,Mach 1 chin spoiler,SN-95 springs,CHE control arms,aluminum drive shaft and a lot more..

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #87 –
Quote from: vinnietbird;367089
This may come as a surprise to you guys, but I am happy to have a 5.0 in the Sport.

Is it more or less complicated than the turbo-4? Probably not, but, I don't think I can handle 8, 9, or more pages of thread every time I ask a question..

Also, my "5-slow" is probably the absolute slowest car on this forum..... but I still like it.

 
You sir, have made this entire thread worth reading. :rollin:

But I disagree, my 5.slow is by far the slowest one here.
2002 Honda Civic EX

1984 Ford Thunderbird Elan
5.0 CFI, T5, Dual Exhaust

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #88 –
Quote from: vinnietbird;367089
This may come as a surprise to you guys, but I am happy to have a 5.0 in the Sport.

Is it more or less complicated than the turbo-4? Probably not, but, I don't think I can handle 8, 9, or more pages of thread every time I ask a question..

Also, my "5-slow" is probably the absolute slowest car on this forum..... but I still like it.

I seriously doubt that... If you can get traction, you'd no doubt hand a mildly modified 2.3T it's ass(you may need to get a new clutch pedal cover :giggle:)... For the most part, few fast Turbo Coupes are anywhere near their original weight...

differneces....87-88 T-Bird

Reply #89 –
Thanks Tom. That makes me feel warm and fuzzy.LOL. The Sport does have traction issues, but after paint, I'm going to look into a set of drag radials for the fun stuff.
'88 Sport--T-5,MGW shifter,Trick Flow R intake,Ed Curtis cam,Trick Flow heads,Scorpion rockers,75mm Accufab t-body,3G,mini starter,Taurus fan,BBK long tube headers,O/R H-Pipe, Flowamaster Super 44's, deep and deeper Cobra R wheels, Mass Air and 24's,8.8 with 3.73's,140 mph speedo,Mach 1 chin spoiler,SN-95 springs,CHE control arms,aluminum drive shaft and a lot more..