[Freaks89]

what has been your overall exp with your 2.3 mustangs?

mine? uuhhhh.... on one hand it has been a very dissapointing car, having EVERYONE around beating my ass in the track, driving in the slow lane of the highway....

on the other hand, the fuel economy has always been the upper hand of this car, at least compared to my ex 99 gt and my ex 94 v6 camaro, it is slow, but also comfty, it look good


i´ve been thinking about what to do with this car, turbocharge the engine with the stock internals @5psi could give me like 160hp, not that big deal but it will be really fast compared with the 80hp it has now, having a 302 installed and start putting some hp to the concrete, or just make it look good and buy a gt to whoop some butts

 

[Green78II]

Mine is still pretty slow, but it still puts the ricers in their place and has enough power to surprise people.

 

[b_chandler]

I've had very good luck with mine. The fuel mileage was the main reason I left the car stock for so long. I parked my 5.9L Ram 1500 and drove the Mustang to work and back and only used the truck for truck things(hauling things, pulling the boat).

I guess in your case it really boils down to what's readily available in your neck of the woods and what you really want out of the car. If you're going to use this car for basic transportation, and economy is a concern, leave it alone and find something else to play with.

I think 160hp out of 5psi is a bit optimistic (that's 2X the horsepower with less than 1/2 atmosphere of additional boost), and even so, engine survival depends on fuel quality. How is your fuel rated? (RON, MON, or RON+MON/2),you wouldn't happen to know what additive package(s), if any is being used in your area?

How easy is it to get parts for the choices you described? The initial parts list will be fairly large, but then you have to think about each version's consumables. Which of these power choices would be easiest to maintain.

I like the thought of a second vehicle if its within your budget, and you have a place to put it. If it breaks, you still have something to drive to work and/or school. That plan goes along with a philosophy I learned the hard way years ago. "Never make a toy out of your daily driver, and never make a daily driver out of your toy."

 

[gi1less1fytr]

I've had very good luck with mine. The fuel mileage was the main reason I left the car stock for so long. I parked my 5.9L Ram 1500 and drove the Mustang to work and back and only used the truck for truck things(hauling things, pulling the boat).

I guess in your case it really boils down to what's readily available in your neck of the woods and what you really want out of the car. If you're going to use this car for basic transportation, and economy is a concern, leave it alone and find something else to play with.

I think 160hp out of 5psi is a bit optimistic (that's 2X the horsepower with less than 1/2 atmosphere of additional boost), and even so, engine survival depends on fuel quality. How is your fuel rated? (RON, MON, or RON+MON/2),you wouldn't happen to know what additive package(s), if any is being used in your area?

How easy is it to get parts for the choices you described? The initial parts list will be fairly large, but then you have to think about each version's consumables. Which of these power choices would be easiest to maintain.

I like the thought of a second vehicle if its within your budget, and you have a place to put it. If it breaks, you still have something to drive to work and/or school. That plan goes along with a philosophy I learned the hard way years ago. "Never make a toy out of your daily driver, and never make a daily driver out of your toy."

Haha! I made a toy out of my daily driver and soon daily driver no more, got 2 toys now though, maybe ill take the bus...

 

[Freaks89]

I've had very good luck with mine. The fuel mileage was the main reason I left the car stock for so long. I parked my 5.9L Ram 1500 and drove the Mustang to work and back and only used the truck for truck things(hauling things, pulling the boat).

I guess in your case it really boils down to what's readily available in your neck of the woods and what you really want out of the car. If you're going to use this car for basic transportation, and economy is a concern, leave it alone and find something else to play with.

I think 160hp out of 5psi is a bit optimistic (that's 2X the horsepower with less than 1/2 atmosphere of additional boost), and even so, engine survival depends on fuel quality. How is your fuel rated? (RON, MON, or RON+MON/2),you wouldn't happen to know what additive package(s), if any is being used in your area?

How easy is it to get parts for the choices you described? The initial parts list will be fairly large, but then you have to think about each version's consumables. Which of these power choices would be easiest to maintain.

I like the thought of a second vehicle if its within your budget, and you have a place to put it. If it breaks, you still have something to drive to work and/or school. That plan goes along with a philosophy I learned the hard way years ago. "Never make a toy out of your daily driver, and never make a daily driver out of your toy."

as far as fuel is concerned, it is rated RON (i think) Premium 93 Octane, Regular 89 Octane. i also have access to aviation fuel wich is 114 octane

the second reason i think, turbocharging with stock internals is a bad idea (like you said) is that around here, finding parts to rebuild an engine can be pretty hard and expensive

and putting a 302 in it, is by far the most expensive, i have to import just about everything i need to do the swap, my numbers round $2.5k for swapping a stock 302, wich is ridiculous

i guess the only thing i can do with this car is putting basic bolt ons like exhaust, maybe a roller cam, and the most agressive thing i can think of is putting some nitrous, maybe 50hp shot.


i guess your philosophy is toll right chandler, i´ve also had some very bad experiences with making my daily driver a toy

 

[b_chandler]

If I remember my octane ratings, by comparison, RON is the higher of the two. In the US, it's R+M/2 basically an average of the RON and MON. So what we call 93 isn't the same as what you're calling 93. If your pump regular is 89 where ours is 87, I'm thinking your premium is about 91 by US standards. Our avgas is rated at 110.

In my head I was thinking the 302 was the easier option, but I forgot that smaller engines tend to be more popular everywhere but here. There's probably not many donors in your area for the parts you'd need.

I probably wouldn't mess with much more than what you just posted. How hard will it be to find a toy? :bigthumbsup

 

[Freaks89]

If I remember my octane ratings, by comparison, RON is the higher of the two. In the US, it's R+M/2 basically an average of the RON and MON. So what we call 93 isn't the same as what you're calling 93. If your pump regular is 89 where ours is 87, I'm thinking your premium is about 91 by US standards. Our avgas is rated at 110.

In my head I was thinking the 302 was the easier option, but I forgot that smaller engines tend to be more popular everywhere but here. There's probably not many donors in your area for the parts you'd need.

I probably wouldn't mess with much more than what you just posted. How hard will it be to find a toy? :bigthumbsup

well, not that hard i guess, i found a 2.3 T5 79 mustang for $250, needs some work but it would be a good candidate for a 2.3 turbo engine swap!

 

[carbuff]

My 92 2.3 vert is slow, very slow. And the gas mileage ive been getting isnt very good. 17 mpg around town? Its got high mileage, but has good compression and seems to be running well. I dont know about this gas mileage thing. I saw a guy in another thread that claimed that he was getting close to 500 miles on a tank of gas. This kind of talk is pure bs. So hes getting 45 mpg? I dont think so. Even the claims of 350 miles are a bit of a stretch for me. I just dont see it possible. Im lucky to get 200 miles on a tank and my engine is tuned up and running clean. If this car were not a vert I would not waste my time on it. I dont think anyone is putting any ricers in their place with a 2.3 n/a motor. Any stock civic would blow this thing into the weeds. Its the slowest car Ive ever owned. My old 210k mile 95 camry 4 cylinder automatic would eat this thing for lunch. Its just pitiful. But it looks cool and theres lots of stuff to buy for it. You can make it look fast at least.:heha:

 

[gi1less1fytr]

My 92 2.3 vert is slow, very slow. And the gas mileage ive been getting isnt very good. 17 mpg around town? Its got high mileage, but has good compression and seems to be running well. I dont know about this gas mileage thing. I saw a guy in another thread that claimed that he was getting close to 500 miles on a tank of gas. This kind of talk is pure bs. So hes getting 45 mpg? I dont think so. Even the claims of 350 miles are a bit of a stretch for me. I just dont see it possible. Im lucky to get 200 miles on a tank and my engine is tuned up and running clean. If this car were not a vert I would not waste my time on it. I dont think anyone is putting any ricers in their place with a 2.3 n/a motor. Any stock civic would blow this thing into the weeds. Its the slowest car Ive ever owned. My old 210k mile 95 camry 4 cylinder automatic would eat this thing for lunch. Its just pitiful. But it looks cool and theres lots of stuff to buy for it. You can make it look fast at least.:heha:

Damn ur car is thirsty, I get about 320 freeway and street mixed...

 

[b_chandler]

well, not that hard i guess, i found a 2.3 T5 79 mustang for $250, needs some work but it would be a good candidate for a 2.3 turbo engine swap!

It would be a perfect candidate!!!!

 

[carbuff]

Damn ur car is thirsty, I get about 320 freeway and street mixed...

Have you ever done an actual mpg calculation? Just going by 320/15 youre getting less than 22 mpg. But Im sure that you fill up before you run the tank dry so the number is likely to be higher. Is your car a stick or auto? Im gonna fill up again today to see what the numbers are this week.

 

[gi1less1fytr]

Have you ever done an actual mpg calculation? Just going by 320/15 youre getting less than 22 mpg. But Im sure that you fill up before you run the tank dry so the number is likely to be higher. Is your car a stick or auto? Im gonna fill up again today to see what the numbers are this week.

yea I've calculated it, its about the same every week. I spend the same amount of time on the streets and freeway. I drive it a lot for work... I go back and forth about 3-4 times a day... and I always run it dry cuz I'm lazy... gets 320 at the least and $40-$45 at a time. Its auto and most I got out of it is 360 on a tank driving mostly freeway...

 

[mg man 75]

Overall experience. Wife loves the car. Got a 94 Jeep that sits in the yard for weeks at a time. We drive it everywhere we want to. Been dependable except for the new/rebuilt parts I bought. Had a bad parts supplier but that is another subject. Start out simple which was a 86 turbomotor and computer and no intercooler and red interior. Just changed things as I traded or found them in j-yard. And has been a blast getting to know a bunch of people here that would not have happen if never built one. Thanks all Maurice

 

[TheRoadWarrior]

You guys are my heroes. I want a four eyed 4 banger soooooo badly but i don't have time room or money right now. I have always wanted a 4banger to do a bigblock swap on since the price of 5.0 notchbacks and Gt's has been increasing steadily. I would love to get a 79' to 86' and leave it stock looking even after the bigblock, just run the slicks and skinnies and leave the body alone, a hood to clear the motor of course, but that's it!

I think the coolest thing I've ever seen is an SVO blow the doors off newer cars, eating new edge mustangs and camaros at the track.
I can watch youtube vids all day!

 

[mg man 75]

I agree. The expression of a sn94 this weekend. Priceless. But I would love a 4 eye with the new SHO motor. Power with the looks and fuel economy. Maurice

 

[carbuff]

yea I've calculated it, its about the same every week. I spend the same amount of time on the streets and freeway. I drive it a lot for work... I go back and forth about 3-4 times a day... and I always run it dry cuz I'm lazy... gets 320 at the least and $40-$45 at a time. Its auto and most I got out of it is 360 on a tank driving mostly freeway...

Geez, I dont know what the problem is then. I got 116 miles from full to between 1/4 and 1/2. This netted me a wopping 15 mpg. I purposely drove like a grandpa this week too. I just dont get it. It runs smooth and clean but lacks in power and mpg. There has to be something wrong. I would love to come across the problem and have one of those "tada!" moments, but I dont see it happening as I cant find a problem with it.

 

[TheRoadWarrior]

I agree. The expression of a sn94 this weekend. Priceless. But I would love a 4 eye with the new SHO motor. Power with the looks and fuel economy. Maurice

I can't fricken believe the performance their putting in cars these days.

The average grocery getter these days has over 200hp, averages over 20mpg and top speeds over 140mph. Impressive!

 

[Lenny2.3]

I saw a guy in another thread that claimed that he was getting close to 500 miles on a tank of gas. This kind of talk is pure bs. So hes getting 45 mpg? I dont think so. Even the claims of 350 miles are a bit of a stretch for me. I just dont see it possible.

I'm guessing that was my post you are referring to, and no it was not BS. Granted that was a one time thing, I took the car on a 600 mile nonstop round trip--all highway. The only time I stopped on that trip was once each way for a bite to eat and then once I reached my destination. Bear in mind that these cars have a 15.4 gallon tank, which is much larger than the 10-12 gallon tanks in most passenger cars. On that trip I got 491 miles, which comes out to about 32 MPG (I probably had only a half gallon of gas left in the tank when I refilled because I wanted to hit 500 in the worst way but couldn't risk running out).

On average, I was getting 450 miles to a tank which comes out to 30 MPG, which shouldn't be too unusual for this type of engine.

 

[Lenny2.3]

My overall experience, except for the HP has been a good one. Gas mileage is great, it's even better than any car that I bought recently. The car is very reliable, the engine is as dry as a bone at 145k. I have had to do a few things to it over the 14 years I have had it, but nothing out of the ordinary. It's reliability can put a lot of toyotas to shame.

The HP is certainly a disappointment, but the car still gets the job done in most cases. It's not like I race the car or anything. Also, when I do try to challenge somebody on the highway a lot has to do with how you maneuver and handle the car which can give you an edge on a lot of inexperienced ricers.

A good point to remember, that a lot of people see you driving a Mustang. They don't know that you only have a 4 banger under the hood, many assume that all Mustangs are 5 liters. So that certainly helps when it come to image.:shigrin

 

[carbuff]

My overall experience, except for the HP has been a good one. Gas mileage is great, it's even better than any car that I bought recently. The car is very reliable, the engine is as dry as a bone at 145k. I have had to do a few things to it over the 14 years I have had it, but nothing out of the ordinary. It's reliability can put a lot of toyotas to shame.

The HP is certainly a disappointment, but the car still gets the job done in most cases. It's not like I race the car or anything. Also, when I do try to challenge somebody on the highway a lot has to do with how you maneuver and handle the car which can give you an edge on a lot of inexperienced ricers.

A good point to remember, that a lot of people see you driving a Mustang. They don't know that you only have a 4 banger under the hood, many assume that all Mustangs are 5 liters. So that certainly helps when it come to image.:shigrin

Is yours a stick or automatic?