More Horsepower! Reply #60 – August 17, 2013, 12:53:04 AM Fellow Tbird/Cougar brothersGot to love the ford 302 vs 2.3T debate....its always a good one...(the average 5.0 guy isnt even aware of the 2.3T) stock block 302 can make some serious power with a power adder....your choice to which it is...nitrous, turbo, supercharger...but that stupid stock block always causes problems....alot more if your car is heavy...ie over 3000lbs. The 2.3T is an awesome engine...but having a factory limited rotating assembly over the 302. The 2.3T rods are good, but 7000rpms and 450rwhp will cause problems. Both are great engine, reliable engines that ford built almost 30 years ago. I find that impressive. But Tom is right about making great power...both of these engines have heads from the factory. Easy to fix on the 302...not some much on the 2.3T. The aftermarket has come along way. One of the biggest reasons that LSX engines are so popular is the worst factory heads flow better than the best aftermarket heads that you can bolt on a SBF.....never mind the lowly 2.3T. I really wish Ford in the 90's would have went to town on there SBF OHV setup verse the modular stuff.... Im not saying the mod motors are bad...they are great reliable engines....which is all that a OEM manufacture really cars about....but the LSX engines just wipe the floor with them...stock to stock.A nice basic explorer engine with good heads intake....blah blah blah....can barely keep up with the power produced by a 5.3 chevy truck motor with a cam and long tubes...and you can get these engine for almost nothing....and the blocks and rotating assembly is pretty impressive...well past stock 302 and 2.3T setups and on par with the much bigger and heavier 351W....crazy...GM did a good job on the basic engine. I did 351w swap with a turbo in my car...it should make 700 flywheel horsepower with a nice easy setup...it will be a powerful setup for sure. I didnt want to deal with the stock 302 breakage with my heavy cougar...and I wanted more low end grunt than a 2.3T would provide...so I swapped. The much bigger 351w is a big pain to fit under our hoods....but that is done. It has taken almost 2.5 years for this to all work out....I only wish Chris had went 10's with a 2.3T a couple of years ago....It would have been enough for me. Hind site being 20/20 and all :)Sorry for the long post....Thanks Travis Quote Selected
More Horsepower! Reply #61 – August 17, 2013, 07:37:48 PM Like Tom, I too have learned a bunch from this thread. I am a newcomer on this forum, and I really appreciate the fact that this touchy subject could be intelligently approached on here, & we all came away with some great info on both engines & the possibilities of making them go faster. Thanks to all of you who contributed to it.Ron Quote Selected
More Horsepower! Reply #62 – August 17, 2013, 09:24:53 PM Quote from: Chrome;420172For such a heated topic, this was kept extremely civil. I was reluctant to involve myself due to the fact that I know very little about the little 4 bangers. I just prefer the 302 due to the fact that I know them pretty well and available parts are endless.:D:DDUDE anyone that has a BIRD with a DOGS head can chime in ANY TIME. That is SCARY!!!! Quote Selected
More Horsepower! Reply #63 – August 18, 2013, 03:21:11 PM I was almost afraid to look at this thread since my last post as on most other forums when you are a newer member you seem to get slammed whenever you voice your opinion.Maybe when the free horsepower subject is brought up it might be best to consider the power that the factory has bottled up or not unleashed, not just the money. To me that is what is so great about being a car nut, finding out what can be done to get the most from your ride...Sure both motors have poor heads but compared to what was available before, ( 1974 up smog heads ) they at least offered some decent performance. I did post a link to a Essy head with Bopart cam that is being auctioned on Ebay. The head is already more that what I payed for my CNC KC Brodix 210 cc heads that they used on the Windsor that was built for me. I like the 2.3 and want to build my TC motor into a decent daily driver motor that gets good mpg when I am cruising down the highway and when some kid wants to play with his Audi or BMW and tries to put you to shame, I want to have the power to make him think twice. I like them both and I like most Ford motors they all have there place.Hearing a stroker FE run is one of the coolest sounds in the world...Anyways nice that everybody kept there cool, nice to see.Mark Quote Selected
More Horsepower! Reply #64 – August 18, 2013, 04:07:37 PM We are a pretty laid back bunch of folks around here. A good debate can usually be had without it turning heated. Quote Selected
More Horsepower! Reply #65 – November 23, 2013, 09:46:47 PM It's funny but Tom u look similar to the guy on fast-n-loud that comes to buy cars sometimes , check it out very close Quote Selected
More Horsepower! Reply #66 – November 25, 2013, 06:18:44 PM Good debates and conversation is essential to the life of the messageboard....as long as everyone is an adult...all is good.Travis Quote Selected
More Horsepower! Reply #67 – November 25, 2013, 10:31:34 PM Something not mentioned is valve springs. I agree that intake work is not going to net appreciable gains, but worn out valve springs make the car fall over at higher revs. Pretty common on old 2.3's.More turbo is the biggest bolt-on gainer, there are cheap hybrids out there that are holding up, and if you want to port something, do the exhaust manny (a later one). My 2.3 in the TR7 has a little more cam (re-ground ranger roller .410 ish lift), new valve springs and a T04E50/.63 turbo on a stinger header on an otherwise stock motor with large injectors and Megasquirt and made over 300 tq and 280+ rwhp on a dyno. Never popped the original 120,000 mile head gasket ever and have over 20,000 miles on it since I did it 6 years ago. I have a few drag race passes on it as well. Quote Selected
Topic: More Horsepower! (Read 10221 times)
previous topic - next topic
