Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: I found Parts (Read 3787 times) previous topic - next topic

I found Parts

Reply #15 –
threw the 5 speed comp in my dads auto car without the BCS just that made a difference
not a huge one, but it did make some difference
RIP 1988 and 1990 Lincoln Mark VII LSC
I welcomed the dark side and currently am driving a 2000 Dodge Durango SLT plus, with a 5.9, Code named project "Night Runner"
Shes black on black, fully loaded, with headers, 180 tstat, e fan, straight exhaust into a cherry bomb vortex ler, full tune up, ported intake and T/B, MSD coil, and round aircleaner.
Mods to come: Fully rebuilt and heavily modded 46RE, and a richmond rachet locker.
my $300 beater ;)
R.I.P Kayleigh Raposa 12/18/90 - 2/24/07

I found Parts

Reply #16 –
Hey superdave where are you located?  Just wondering -- I live 15 minutes southwest of Findlay.

I found Parts

Reply #17 –
I live off the south side of main street on east lima street. we will have to get together sometime and talk shop. I going to be putting on the new turbo soon.

I found Parts

Reply #18 –
So still, what is the big difference in the 86 and 87. it rates 155 on the bird in 86 and 190 in 87. now excuse me for being a moron but that is 35 more ponies with a lesser turbo. I was under the impression that the rest of the motor was the same.  In 86 the bird had 10 more hp than the cat but in 87 it had 40 more. Please explain?

I found Parts

Reply #19 –
The main difference other than the turbo was the top-mount intercooler.  I'm not sure how much of an increase it gave the latemodel TC's, but it was definitely a good boost.  There were other subtle things as well, like a slightly larger VAM.  The motor is in fact the same, although in '87 Ford went to a slightly shorter upper intake for some reason?...  I can't really think of any other differences at this time.  Maybe someone will chime in...

I found Parts

Reply #20 –
Quote from: TurboCoupe50;228179
AFIK all EEC-IV processors run at 15Mhz...

I think the early ones (pre 87) ran at 6 or 8mhz.
One 88

I found Parts

Reply #21 –
take a look at the boost settings for both 86 and 87-88. I bet you will see that the older cars were set lower that the newer inter cooled setup. The whole Idea is colder air means less chance of detonation. Witch in turn means you can run higher boost levels. Then you have a smaller turbo witch should help get into boost even quicker. I do believe they used the shorter intake to help hood clearence with the Air funnel. Then that calls for a notched V.C. even though I've used it with both short and tall intake.
84 Turbo coupe 2.3T Modded with 88 upper and lower intake, 88 injectors, E6 manifold, T3-4 AR.60 turbo, 31X12X3 FMIC, Homemade MBC , Greddy knock off BPV.
4 eyes see better than 2! 
Da Bird!

FreeBird

I found Parts

Reply #22 –
Sweet, I had that Idea in my head about the intercooler but I thought the earlier T-Birds had the intercooler and hood. Did not know for sure. I understand that the intercooler is worth a lot from the other cars I have worked on. This is not my first one just my first ford. I thank you all very much for your input and knowlege. I am going in the morning to pick up my parts and get stuff together. I hope to have the ol' cat screaming soon. I have a pile of questions that will end up in other posts. just a quick list. My temp gauge dont work< door locks no work, power windows dont work, I cant even lock the drivers side door, my drivers seat wont go back, my door panels are falling apart, the window seals are , mirrors dont work and are hazed, paint sucks , wheels suck, and ther is a lot of noise in the car including a lot of grinding and dry bearing sounds. and oh yeah I dont have a place to work on it. So I will be giving updates and moving forward one step at a time. Maybe CJ next year. lol

I found Parts

Reply #23 –
Quote from: ipsd;228351
take a look at the boost settings for both 86 and 87-88. I bet you will see that the older cars were set lower that the newer inter cooled setup. The whole Idea is colder air means less chance of detonation. Witch in turn means you can run higher boost levels. Then you have a smaller turbo witch should help get into boost even quicker. I do believe they used the shorter intake to help hood clearence with the Air funnel. Then that calls for a notched V.C. even though I've used it with both short and tall intake.


Only trying to contribute to this thread, but I question the validity in this statement above.

I have a non intercooled 86 TC (5spd - so that might be the difference here) that I recently purchased and unless the guage is wrong it frequently pegs the 15lb marker on the factory dash display in cooler weather conditions (morning) . Definatly swings well pass 10lbs easy during the day probably 13-14lbs and the car is stone stock except for a blown out factory ler. 

:headbang:

I found Parts

Reply #24 –
Quote from: CougarSE;228349
I think the early ones (pre 87) ran at 6 or 8mhz.
My source of info is the '80-'87 Probst EEC Manual which only mentions 15Mhz... Would stand to reason the early ones do possibly run slower, but I'd be willing to bet all EEC-IV SEFI processors are 15Mhz...

Is stated EEC-IV computers use the Intel 8061 16 bit processor and 8361 memory chip... I don't have anything on hand earlier than maybe a '86 HO LSC EEC... Maybe someone would like to open a earlier one and check the ICs???

[COLOR="Red"]EDIT[/COLOR]

Well apparently the ole boy (Probst) is holding out on us... Forgot I have a batch fire '85 F-150 EFI EEC with a GV code(no '86 LSC though)... The Processor in it is a 6126A and memory is 6128B, the crystal that determines processing speed is a 12Mhz... So without a doubt, there are slower versions... Also the layout is nothing like pictured in the book, which has different chips(size wise) than the ICs he states are used and pictured seperatly...

Off to open a 2.3L '87 Stang EFI processor...

I found Parts

Reply #25 –
87-88 had different intake, turbo, had the intercooler, differnert bcs, computers, and big vam I think thats about it. thats where the power difference comes from
RIP 1988 and 1990 Lincoln Mark VII LSC
I welcomed the dark side and currently am driving a 2000 Dodge Durango SLT plus, with a 5.9, Code named project "Night Runner"
Shes black on black, fully loaded, with headers, 180 tstat, e fan, straight exhaust into a cherry bomb vortex ler, full tune up, ported intake and T/B, MSD coil, and round aircleaner.
Mods to come: Fully rebuilt and heavily modded 46RE, and a richmond rachet locker.
my $300 beater ;)
R.I.P Kayleigh Raposa 12/18/90 - 2/24/07

I found Parts

Reply #26 –
The 87-88TC ECU's did run a faster processor speed than the other 2.3T's.  They ran twice the processing speed of the 83-86 ECU's.

The SVO ECU's (PE) aside, the 87-88 TC's also had the most aggressive  fuel and timing maps of any of the 2.3T's.  The auto cars had a more aggresive timing map than the manual cars as well.
 
The reason they were able to make the maps more aggressive on the 87-88 cars was the IC.  The cooler air charge was what allowed the timing to be advanced more aggressively.  The 83-86 ECUs were much more conservative (slightly richer fuel map, and more conservative timing curve).  Had they spec'ed the same turbo on the 87-88TC's as they had the SVOs, the overall power output would have surpassed that of the SVO, but they chose to opt for a quicker spooling unit to help get the heavier car moving.  Coupled with everything, the tune was the primary reason the 87-88 TC's had a higher power output over the earlier ones, even with the smaller turbo.

I ran my XR-7 with an engine with 9.0:1 compression, no IC, 14* timing, big exhaust and 16-17 boost on the PC-1 ECU (85.5-86TC) and it never made a peep due to the (slightly rich) fuel curve.

On the boost issue, save for maybe the 85.5-86TC's (manual), the max boost on the non-IC TC's from the factory was 11#.  The Merkur XR4's (also non-intercooled) also ran 15# boost on the manual cars from the factory as well.
Long live the 4-eyes!  - '83 Tbird Turbo - '85 Marquis LTS - '86 LTD Wagon

I found Parts

Reply #27 –
Yeah chuck  set them straight. I knew I read that the newer proceesors were faster and I knew the IC cars ran higher boost. As for a 18 year old car running higher than factory boost setting, well it is 18years old and had plenty of time for a previous owner to play with it.
84 Turbo coupe 2.3T Modded with 88 upper and lower intake, 88 injectors, E6 manifold, T3-4 AR.60 turbo, 31X12X3 FMIC, Homemade MBC , Greddy knock off BPV.
4 eyes see better than 2! 
Da Bird!

FreeBird

I found Parts

Reply #28 –
WoW, very good info. I will just go ahead and get the big VAM and the ECU. I got everything else may as well take it all.
 

I found Parts

Reply #29 –
Quote from: Superdavesds;228312
So still, what is the big difference in the 86 and 87. it rates 155 on the bird in 86 and 190 in 87. now excuse me for being a moron but that is 35 more ponies with a lesser turbo. I was under the impression that the rest of the motor was the same.  In 86 the bird had 10 more hp than the cat but in 87 it had 40 more. Please explain?


Quote from: tc²;228347
The main difference other than the turbo was the top-mount intercooler.  I'm not sure how much of an increase it gave the latemodel TC's, but it was definitely a good boost.  There were other subtle things as well, like a slightly larger VAM.  The motor is in fact the same, although in '87 Ford went to a slightly shorter upper intake for some reason?...  I can't really think of any other differences at this time.  Maybe someone will chime in...



Quote from: ipsd;228351
take a look at the boost settings for both 86 and 87-88. I bet you will see that the older cars were set lower that the newer inter cooled setup. The whole Idea is colder air means less chance of detonation. Witch in turn means you can run higher boost levels. Then you have a smaller turbo witch should help get into boost even quicker. I do believe they used the shorter intake to help hood clearence with the Air funnel. Then that calls for a notched V.C. even though I've used it with both short and tall intake.
[/b]

Quote from: Chuck W;228394

On the boost issue, save for maybe the 85.5-86TC's (manual), the max boost on the non-IC TC's from the factory was 11#.  The Merkur XR4's (also non-intercooled) also ran 15# boost on the manual cars from the factory as well.


Quote from: ipsd;228404
Yeah chuck  set them straight. I knew I read that the newer proceesors were faster and I knew the IC cars ran higher boost. As for a 18 year old car running higher than factory boost setting, well it is 18years old and had plenty of time for a previous owner to play with it.


ipsd - Being the internet I'm not quite sure hot to interpret your comment in bold above or your last post about 18 year old car and shutting them down.

Chuck has obviously built quite the library of factual information, however he did state that "save for"  the manual cars which tells me regardless of IC or non-IC that the 86 and older still made more than 11lbs - I don't know if that was ever a non proven issue with you or not. I believe the subject is auto cars here which I may have confused the thread with since mine is a manual (sorry). My car has not been monkeyed around with and is all stock (except the blown out factory ler) and if your comment was directed at any falsification toward me I assure you it's true info. It makes over 11lbs easy.

Thanks for the info Chuck W !

I guess a remaining question here might be: What was the difference rated between the older non IC Auto / Manual vs the newer IC units. I still see that as being unclear, were the manual pre 87 cars still rated that low? Jesus, I need to update processors and VAM. :)