Sleeper Project Anyone?

[46Tbird]

Yep, the white '86 you saw at Sonic.

That was many, many moons ago

[Baron Von Crowder]

I don't remember how many years ago, but my wait was about a month, and they said that was "short" at the time. They may have been BSing.

[looks at a stack of them on the shelf] "yeah, you're going to have to wait for a run, but it will only be a few weeks to a month, and that's really short!"

[Chas_svo]

I don't remember how many years ago, but my wait was about a month, and they said that was "short" at the time. They may have been BSing.

[4EyedTurd]

I picked up a 2.3-sbf t5 adapter from Canfield and didn't have very much of a wait but that was ~3years ago.

[Chas_svo]

there's an adapter now to bolt an SBF 4r70w behind one... or really any sbf bell housing trans you want.

Canfield, but you usually have to wait for a prod run. I think I still have my NIB one.

[Baron Von Crowder]

there's an adapter now to bolt an SBF 4r70w behind one... or really any sbf bell housing trans you want.

[Chas_svo]

I agree - as long as you're talking about 85.5 and 86 SVO stuff. The smaller, earlier parts just plain sucked.

My '80 hatch had the complete driveline from an '86 swapped in, which means it had the PE computer and bigger VAM and injectors and .48 AR T3. This car was a lot of fun, but damn if it wasn't broken all the time. At least it was easy to fix.

Yep, the white '86 you saw at Sonic. It was actually pretty reliable until the Gillis valve stuck. Stock parts don't like 32psi...and then it converted to "something broke way too often".

[32vfromhell]

An ecoboost 2.3L making 390whp with E30 fuel would be pretty mean.

[46Tbird]

I was surprised how much more the VAM, injectors, turbo, and computer could handle once passed the head limitation. Lots more misinformation than information on the 2.3T, both before and after the internet came along.

I agree - as long as you're talking about 85.5 and 86 SVO stuff. The smaller, earlier parts just plain sucked.

My '80 hatch had the complete driveline from an '86 swapped in, which means it had the PE computer and bigger VAM and injectors and .48 AR T3. This car was a lot of fun, but damn if it wasn't broken all the time. At least it was easy to fix.

[Chas_svo]

I don't know where you got that idea, but yes the Thunderbirds sure did blow up, especially the '87-88s with that tiny IHI turbo. The '87-88s also had notoriously weird electrical problems and a horrible "programmable ride control" suspension.

The deal is that those '80s 2.3t cars were nearly maxed out stock. Anything you did to get the performance up would identify your next failure point. Fuel pump. Ignition. Vane meter. Injectors. Little T-5. 9" clutch. 7.5 rear end. All that shit is maxed out at around 250whp with a T3, and the IHI cars wouldn't make that without murdering the turbo.

Now if we're talking about the Ecoboost 2.3t, I could get a little more excited.

I was surprised how much more the VAM, injectors, turbo, and computer could handle once passed the head limitation. Lots more misinformation than information on the 2.3T, both before and after the internet came along.

[BLAKE]

connotation.

.

[Baron Von Crowder]

I don't know where you got that idea, but yes the Thunderbirds sure did blow up, especially the '87-88s with that tiny IHI turbo. The '87-88s also had notoriously weird electrical problems and a horrible "programmable ride control" suspension.

The deal is that those '80s 2.3t cars were nearly maxed out stock. Anything you did to get the performance up would identify your next failure point. Fuel pump. Ignition. Vane meter. Injectors. Little T-5. 9" clutch. 7.5 rear end. All that shit is maxed out at around 250whp with a T3, and the IHI cars wouldn't make that without murdering the turbo.

Now if we're talking about the Ecoboost 2.3t, I could get a little more excited.

connotation.

[46Tbird]

You know, the SVO's had a bad connotation of reliability, but the thunderbirds didn't. Ever notice that?

I don't know where you got that idea, but yes the Thunderbirds sure did blow up, especially the '87-88s with that tiny IHI turbo. The '87-88s also had notoriously weird electrical problems and a horrible "programmable ride control" suspension.

The deal is that those '80s 2.3t cars were nearly maxed out stock. Anything you did to get the performance up would identify your next failure point. Fuel pump. Ignition. Vane meter. Injectors. Little T-5. 9" clutch. 7.5 rear end. All that shit is maxed out at around 250whp with a T3, and the IHI cars wouldn't make that without murdering the turbo.

Now if we're talking about the Ecoboost 2.3t, I could get a little more excited.

[JC316]

You know, the SVO's had a bad connotation of reliability, but the thunderbirds didn't. Ever notice that?

Mostly because Mustang owners were idiots that cranked the boost up too far and blew them up?

I only knew one person back in the day with a Turbo Coupe. It was reliable, but it was also mostly stock, only a few years old and the owner was a Ford Tech. They're probably fine engines if you leave them alone but nobody ever leaves them alone.

My mom daily drove an 87 from 2012-2015. Bone stock and 100% reliable. Actually got 27mpg average.

[Baron Von Crowder]

I only knew one person back in the day with a Turbo Coupe. It was reliable, but it was also mostly stock, only a few years old and the owner was a Ford Tech. They're probably fine engines if you leave them alone but nobody ever leaves them alone.

My SVO was my only car for a while, and after fixing the coolant hose maze and the loose/lack of grounds, it was just as good as any other 20yo car should be.