2.3 engine mounts - anyone (mainly our Brazilian friends) have a pair?

I've something to add to this thread. Maybe some of you know that Ford of Argentina produced Falcons for 30 years, most of them were I6, but in 1982 they made a economical version with a 2.3 engine. Now, Mavericks are Falcons with different body, if these argentinian falcons didn't change mechanicaly, there's a chance that we could know which mounts they used on their Standard De Luxe Falcons.

Here's a link to the site I found this info:
http://www.cocheargentino.com.ar/f/ford_falcon.htm

I would have to register in an Argentinian Falcon forum to get the info needed for this conversion. And I wouldn't have to learn portuguese! I'll search one of those forums these days.

 

well duh forgot the link

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Book...012QQitemZ220115610560QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

 

I can tell you from experience that an iron headed 2.3T is not much (if any) lighter than a 302 with an aluminum intake and iron heads. BUT everyone's got a 302. I would love a 2.3T in a Maverick. Lighter than an SVO, MUCH lighter than a TC. Only issue is the shock towers. I believe that the turbo will interfere with the tower on the pass. side and the lower intake will probably be a tight fit on the driver's side. And then we run into oil pan issues..which might be easily solved with an M2/pinto pan. Where will the intercooler fit? I guess we'd have to MAKE it fit in front of the radiator somehow. I think a Porsche 944 IC would probably do the job. A NPR IC might even work if you remove the hood latch and support. I loved the way that the 2.3T ran in my old SVO. It was like having the best of both worlds. 27-30 mpg off boost but if you wanted power, just let it rev and give it some throttle....it was like turning on a light switch. At 3800 RPM I had a full 25 psi boost and it sounded amazing (that was with the HE351CW turbo....). The stocker T3/.63 did a good job but it lacked the top end punch that the Holset had obviously. The T3 was also MUCH noisier on the turbine side. The holset had a very quiet turbine yet a very loud compressor. I loved it. Too bad it spent more time in the shop than it did being driven.

 

Definitely a fun toy. I always enjoyed our turbo coupes. The 2.3 is an easy engine to work on as well. For all intents and purposes it's bullet proof. The EECIV is easy to work with as well.

I thought that all the 2.3s were made in Lima Ohio though.... Maybe not.

 

The 2.3 is an excellent engine. Ask any person that runs mini-stock.
Racer Walsh has a lot of 2.3 performance parts. Brother-in-law is
an authority on the 2.3 and they can go..It doesn't seem like that
hard of a swap. Just have to fab up the stands. Love to see it done.

 

would it be possible to fit the 2.3 turbo and EFI pieces on a I6? might be an easier alternative and im sure the extra cubes and cylinders wouldnt hurt.

oh yea, heres that I4 turbo ranchero I made. in the bed you can see its hauling the ch3bby BB that came in the kit



here it is side by side with my I4 turbo fox 'stang. the stang doesnt have a intercooler though.

 

Those are sweet
For a second i though the ranchero was rear engine powered like this truck i saw a while ago at a Car show.

 

Hey everyone, I registered yesterday to this argentinian Falcon forum. http://miarroba.com/foros/ver.php?id=708442

I already posted a thread asking what parts and part numbers were used in their 1982 Falcons Econo-4, which were 2.3 powered. I'm waiting for a response, hopefully I'll get answers at night or tomorrow.

 

cool i'm going to join also

 

yeah, i knew if i didnt say that the ranchero was "hauling" that engine people would think that was its engine

 

The Pinto oil pan is front sump and fits fine. I have a 2.3 from a '84 Mustang with an SROD 4 speed behind it sitting in my '76 parts car body right now. I am going to swap it over to my '69.5 rolling body this weekend. I'll take some pictures if I can. I think I am just going to make some mounts at work using the 6 cylinder frame stands so I can get it on the road. It looks like the rubber mounts in my '80 Mercury Capri RS might be close to the 6 cylinder Maverick frame stands... We'll see.

 

sounds cool. on a 2.3 if you mount the trans in the stock location do the motor mouts even coom close to the thock towers?

 

I can't really say, because I do not have a stock Maverick transmission behind mine. The SROD is not the same as the C4's or old 3 speeds far as mounting and stuff. The two major hurdles for me getting this thing streetable are mounting the engine to the car and getting the clutch cable hooked up. I also have not test fitted a driveshaft yet, but it looks like it may be real close to working with a Maverick drive shaft. I have a long weekend coming up and I am going to try to get it driveable then. I will definately post pics...

 

Good news Jamie - take some pics and post them up for us to see ...and thank you guys who have joined the argentina board...if I can get part numbers, I have connections to try and locate/retrieve some mounts (or find equivalents here)...


Jamie - I think you're onto something with the Mercury Capri motor mount idea...they are somewhat similar...as far as the SROD goes, that should be about the same length as a Toploader 3 speeds Mavs/Comets came with (if not exactly the same length)...the clutch cable should be a no brainer (or, you could use a hydraulic one from 87/88 Turbocoupe Tbird - just an idea)


I'm a bit sidetracked with my 2.3 in a Mav idea...I bought my dream truck this past weekend (1953 F100 flathead V8...I'm still gazing at it in amazement that I now own one)

 

Um... Mercury Capri and Ford Mustang are the same car... so the mustang mounts would work as well...

I have the motor mounts from a 2.3 in a mustang if anyone needs them... everything that goes between motor and the k member.