Crazy motor "fit" question

Here is an eye-opening article on 2.3 four cylinders.

http://www.fordpinto.com/pdfs/htorodapril1999.pdf

You need Acrobat Reader to open this file.

Please ignore the repeated use of the word "Pinto".

Looking at the pictures. I see a suspicious lack of shock towers. Having spent as little time possible under the hood of Pintos back in the day, I am guessing they had some kind of "proto-Mustang II" front suspension going on. Shock towers in our cars would be a big stumbling block if you want to follow Turbo Joe's formula here.

 

Having owned three pintos ('77,'79,'80), I concur that there were no shock towers. In fact, being unfamiliar with the Mustang/Maverick body topology, I was surprised to see them.

My problem is, every time I read an article like that, I WANT another Pinto. Why? They are small, lightweight, and can be equipped (as in the article) so as to have both decent gas mileage AND rip off the quarter mile if "needed".

The impetus for putting the four in the Maverick was to satisfy two needs - have the Maverick (better styling/appeal than the Pinto), and have a small, high HP motor (2.3L) that I am familiar with.

Choices, choices. This stuff will drive you crazy. I don't even have the Mav in my posession yet, and I have a lead on a "local" Pinto cruising wagon. Argghhhh....

Chris

 

Thanks for the link. How could you change the suspension? I keep hearing people mention mustang II front end...Is a swap like that possible?

 

Not done it, but appears to be the suspension upgrade of choice for many of the members here.

I assume that the mustang II had a 2.3 version...I've seen one parked next to a capri of simular vintage in my favorite junk yard. Both had the same 4 cyl engine that I assume was the 2.3. The only thing I did not like about what I saw was that they both had four lug hubs.

At any rate, if that is the case, the tech knowledge to put a 2.3 powered Mav with a mustange II front clip rests on the board.


Lou

 

A Mustang II suspension swap is very involved, far from being a bolt-in. Requires welding and fabrication.

 

After making my last post, I did a little board searching...I would have to agree with your assesment.

Lou

 

A few thoughts on the 2.3 four banger....My wife's 93 Fox body Mustang ragtop has the 2.3 with a overdrive automatic. It gets around 25-27 mpg. I would assume that the Maverick and Mustang weights would be very simular. Ours is a fuel injected version, and has plenty of pep, and although I'm not sure of the top speed, it will get up to 70 in a hurry and still have more left. I would think it would perform about the same in a Maverick. They are tough little motors, being used in Pintos, Mustangs, and Ranger pickups. The pony circle trackers like'em, too. Fabbing up a set of mounts shouldn't be that hard if you have any welding skills. I once put a 231 Buick V6 and Saginaw 4 speed into a 78 Toyota pickup, and even used the factory hydro clutch setup. Some of the circle track suppliers might have the parts to convert it to a front or drysump oil system. Installing a Mustang II front end would be expensive just to run the four banger, probably in the $2500 or better range.

 

how bad do you want to see a running/driving 2.3 turbo Maverick? I have an engine...need a car to put it in!!

Give me a 2 door Maverick and I'll drop it in and document every minute of it.

If it were me, I'd use Merkur block mounts and modified Thunderbird 3.8 fluid filled mounts. The 4 bangers vibrate pretty good and the 3.8 SC mounts dampen a LOT of the vibration. The Merk block mounts bring the rubber mounts straight out toward the frame rails. Then it'd be a matter of welding up a pair of flat pieces to the frames and bolting it down.

Main problem is that the turbo is RIGHT where the shock tower is. And the intake on the other side is right where the other tower is. So yeah it'll be tight. But they make headers. Center mounts, front mounts, or make your own like I did on my SVO when I put a Holset HE351CW on it. And you can also make your own intake really easily. Keep in mind that the 2.3 is a very tall engine. Especially if the throttle body is in it's stock location. It's heavy too. I think a 2.3T with cast manifold and turbocharger is about 400 lbs. Not much lighter than a 302. But they are just a little different. Everyone has a 302. Not many have a 2.3T or a 2.5 stroker turbo. The 2.5 out of the rangers is the same engine but longer stroke, for the most part.

I would love to do up a 2.3T in a Maverick or Comet but I don't have another Maverick!! I had a 302 turbo in a '74 Maverick at one time, loved it, but I want a 2.3T in one to be different.

By the way the 2.3 Volvo engine is totally different. At least the B234F engine is. BUT, the B234F head will physically bolt to the 2.3 Ford (a.k.a "Lima" 2.3) and it flows 10 times better. You do have to do some welding and such to make the Volvo head fit the Lima block but it's been done numerous times. Best of my knowledge, there is a few of them making over 500 HP with about 30psi boost.

For performance stuff, check out Esslinger. They make about everything. Heads, etc. Although a 2.3 Aluminum head is pricey, around $2500 for a ported version. But they are awesome. There is another guy that I know of who ports the stock dual plug 2.3 lima head to the point where he's made about 450 HP with only 24 psi boost. That's VERY impressive especially for an iron head 2.3. Stinger makes headers. As does ATR, and others. I made my own...worked great...out of weld-els. Had $70 in it from flange to gaskets to bolts.

 

a 4 cylinder cummins turbo diesel would be sweet, but not with the diesel prices anymore

 

=======================================================

OK, let me understand this right....I'm in Texas (Dallas), with a two door '70 that has no motor (well, I have TWO I6's, but the previous owner disassembled them). I want a 4 cylinder turbo.

You are in Arkansas, with a 4 cylinder turbo, and no car. Hmmm? Like Chocolate and Peanut butter, maybe.......?

I'll do the bodywork/paint if you'll do the drivetrain....we are neighbors.....

Chris

 

I'll let you all know how it drives

 

AAAAh! I hope someone can cough up a donor car. A step by step "this is what I did" article would be awesome.

 

Here is a pic of my friends 2.3 probe 750 rwhp and 8.50s @ 165mph @ 30psi. In 7 years its broke 1 rod and blow 2 head gaskets. Its quik and reliable what else do you need to urge you to do it to a Mav or Comet...lol

 

yup that car hauls arse

 

Thought I would bring this post back up... I dropped a EFI 2.3 out of a '93 Mustang in my '69.5 today. You could not ask for a better fit. It still has the '93 Mustang motor mounts, and with the transmission sitting in the cross member (with a C4 trans mount), the Mustang motor mounts fall dead nuts on where the original frame mounts bolt to the shock towers. It's matter of welding maybe a two inch long piece of steel on, drilling a couple of holes, and it's all bolted up. The EFI intake clears the drivers side shock tower perfect, the exhaust manifold clears the passenger side shock tower perfect. The engine looks right at home sitting in there. I'm going to try a few drive shafts I have laying around in it tomorrow. I'll post pics tomorrow evening. I bought this engine with the intention of putting it in my '80 Capri, but I think it's going to go in my '73 project car now.