Lots of good information. As a regular on Turboford.org and owner of an '84 SVO, I thought I would elaborate on a few things:
Anlushac11":29cj9kg5 said:
1.) Dont use a 88 Turbo Coupe. It uses a IHI turbo to try and improve throttle response and reduce turbo lag. Most 2.3L guys consider it too small. Probably OK as long as you dont modify the motor or try to turn the boost up.
2.) On TurboFord.net the bigt thing now is guys are learning how to install the Volvo 2.3L Aluminum DOHC 4cyl head to make a 2.3L DOHC 4 valve per cylinder turbo motor. Apparently the Volvo motor's block is based on the Ford 2.3L block and the DOHC head bolts right on and everything lines up but you have to fabricate the timing belt setup.
3.) The turbo heads have a somewhat closed chamber head, IIRC its called heart shaped, Most stock 2.3L;s have the common Ford wedge shaped chamber. Turbo heads have inconnel exhaust valves.
4.) A guy who advertises on Turbo Ford named Boport ports stock cast iron heads and has been able to get them up to 200cfm flow on the intake. IIRC stock they flow about 170cfm.
5.) The factory turbo exhaust header is prone to cracking so if you get one check it for cracks. As you look at the manifold turbo flange look just to the right and insect for cracks. There are several guys who sell tubular exhaust headers, Stinger being one of the most popular. The E3 turbo manifolds are notorious for cracking in stock motors, the E6 manifold is usually not too bad but when people start cranking up the boost they sometimes crack or if the turbo overheated the manifolds can crack.
6.) The E6 square style manifold seems to be the best performance version but several guys are also getting good results with a modified log style intake.
7.) A stock Mustang SVO or Turbo Coupe with a cold air intake and a 3" low restriction exhaust, larger injectors and/or fuel pressure turned up, and timing bumped can usually hit 275hp with no problems.
8.) A common upgrade is to install a Ranger roller cam and roller followers. The cam is not really a performance improvement as it is to reduce friction.
9.) Multiple keyway cam sprockets are available so you can advance or retard cam timing.
10.) IIRC stock fuel injectors are 32lb/hr on green tops and 36lb/hr on later brown top injectors. I want to say SVO's were 42lb/hr but dont quote me.
1.) Both '87 and 88 Turbo Coupes came with the smaller IHI turbo. True, they are not as capable as the 60-trim T3s, but the the engines are still rated at 195hp/240tq and they have been used to push those heavy Turbo Coupes into the 12s.
2.) The Volvo head is more involved than that. In addition to fabricating a cam belt tensioner, a deck extension plate must be welded onto the back of the head because it is about 1.5" shorter than the Lima head/block. The head's distributor hole must also be plugged, non-stock pistons must be used, and on top of that, the chambers still don't line up perfectly with the Lima's bores. It's very close, but not perfect.
3.) The '83-89 turbo heads have a bean-shaped bathtub chamber that is slightly larger than that of the NA 2.3, which has a heart-shaped chamber. Using a stock NA head on a turbo will raise the compression by about 0.5(from 8.0 to ~8.5:1). NA engines had a combination of flat-top pistons and the smaller chambers to net around 9.0:1.
4.) Boport does some incredible porting on the 2.3T heads(and other engines too). Some of the more serious 2.3 heads he has done are over ~225cfm on the intake.
5.) I agree; the E3 manifold(used on '83-85 2.3Ts) is crack-prone restriction. The E6(used from '85.5-89) is much better and much less prone to cracking, although they do still crack.
6.) The general consensus seems to be that the '85.5-89 "square" intakes are easier to gut and port, but the '83-85 "inline" intakes are comparable and are a bit better for torque. For a mild engine, I don't think it matters.
7.) Some claim to have made nearly 300rwhp on stock T3 turbos and 35lb injectors, but the 60-trim is falling off the choke line by then. The volume airflow meter(VAM) is also far beyond maxed-out. Heck, the VAM is pegged by around 3000rpm on a
stock engine.
8.) True, about the only reason to use a Ranger roller cam is to get roller followers. If anything, I think it's actually a downgrade for performance. Many have reported that retarding it helps, but it is still a torque-oriented truck cam.
9.) There are also slotted adjustable cam pulleys available from outfits like Racer Walsh and Esslinger.
10.) '83-85 2.3Ts came with 30lb green-top injectors and '85.5-89s came with 35lb brown-tops(except for maybe '85 Merkur XR4Tis, which I think had browns instead of greens). None of them had anything higher than 35lbs/hr.
I will also confirm that the 2.3T is pretty heavy as four-cylinder engines go, partly because it's built like a tank. The most commonly quoted number I see is 450-460lbs, but I don't know of anyone that actually weighed one in full dress. The Zetec engine is lighter(and has a pretty good DOHC/16v head), but still has an iron block. The good news is that RWD bellhousings are available for them. The even newer Duratec 2.3 Ranger engines are all-aluminum, but I don't know what is available as far as bellhousing adapters. One guy on Turboford has been working on swapping one into an SVO.