Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: I got a new DD (Read 4072 times) previous topic - next topic

I got a new DD

Its a 89 Mustang LX 2.3L 5spd. It has new shocks and struts, clutch, tires, radiator, heater core, brake pads and shoes, and rotors. It has 133,??? miles, gets 25mpg, and runs great. And I payed $1000. Does anyone know of any bolt on upgrades for this car. I plan on getting a magnaflow cat and 2.25" exhaust and maybe a indexing cam gear.




88 Cougar LS 5.0 .030 over, ported E7s with GT40 valves & trickflow springs, Proform roller rockers, HO cam, removed air silencer, K&N filter, smog pump delete, 2.25" dual flowmasters, Pacestter H-pipe & headers, HO computer, 65mm TB, Explorer intake, 19# injecters, 3.45s, rebuilt posi, and TCI shift kit.

I got a new DD

Reply #1 –
great deal!!!

I got a new DD

Reply #2 –
The headers from certain Rangers will fit those...or you could swap in a turbo motor. :hick:
Matt
1984 Thunderbird - 89 302 HO, GT40 heads w/ Trick Flow springs, E303 cam, Edelbrock Performer 289 intake and 600 cfm 4bbl, Mustang headers, Jegs o/r H pipe, Dynomax lers, Mustang AOD and shifter, Mustang 8.8 w/ 3.73s, 3G alternator, Mustang front and rear sway bars, KYB SN-95 front struts and shocks, and 11" front brakes.

1988 Mustang GT - GT40 heads, Explorer intake, 70mm throttle body, 70mm MAF, Crane 1.7 rrs, E303 cam, Kirban Kwik shifter w/ Pro 5.0 deluxe handle, aluminum clutch quadrant and firewall adjuster, o/r h pipe, Dynomax lers, 3G alternator, aluminum radiator, and 3.27 gears.
 
1986 Cougar 5.0, 1989 Mark VII LSC 5 speed, 1980 Mercury Zephyr 4 door (sold)

I got a new DD

Reply #3 –
Quote from: 5.0 bird;260427
The headers from certain Rangers will fit those...or you could swap in a turbo motor. :hick:


Ranger roller set up? I dont know anything about 2.3s but that seems to be popular.

I would go for the 302 bolt in myself:mullet:
1986 Cougar LS

I got a new DD

Reply #4 –
buy a wrecked turbo coupe. 25 mpg? I get about 35 all highway out of my 87 bird with the 5.0, and alittle over 18 in the city if there's not alot of stop lights.
Quote from: jcassity
I honestly dont think you could exceed the cost of a new car buy installing new *stock* parts everywhere in your coug our tbird. Its just plain impossible. You could revamp the entire drivetrain/engine/suspenstion and still come out ahead.
Hooligans! 
1988 Crown Vic wagon. 120K California car. Wifes grocery getter. (junked)
1987 Ford Thunderbird LX. 5.0. s.o., sn-95 t-5 and an f-150 clutch. Driven daily and going strong.
1986 cougar.
lilsammywasapunkrocker@yahoo.com

I got a new DD

Reply #5 –
25mpg average highway and city. My 5.0L cougar gets 19mpg average. I think the mustang would get better if it didnt have 4.11 gears the same goes for the cougar. It got better mpg with 2.70s. A turbo isnt going to happen. Im just looking for a little more power and mileage. If I wanted that kind of power Id put a 5.0 in it. I know alot about building 2.3s but not what is offered for bolt-ons. Like TBs, cold air, or shorty header etc.
88 Cougar LS 5.0 .030 over, ported E7s with GT40 valves & trickflow springs, Proform roller rockers, HO cam, removed air silencer, K&N filter, smog pump delete, 2.25" dual flowmasters, Pacestter H-pipe & headers, HO computer, 65mm TB, Explorer intake, 19# injecters, 3.45s, rebuilt posi, and TCI shift kit.

I got a new DD

Reply #6 –
Quote from: DVP;260474
Ranger roller set up? I dont know anything about 2.3s but that seems to be popular.



It already has one...
Long live the 4-eyes!  - '83 Tbird Turbo - '85 Marquis LTS - '86 LTD Wagon-  '81 Granada GL 2dr

I got a new DD

Reply #7 –
I got new DD again. The 96 Explorer finally worked out for me. The bank released the lean and the tranmission is in the shop. I should have pictures and have it driving by the weekend. If anyone is interrested the mustang is for sale you can PM.

It is a 96 Explorer XLT, 4.0, 4X4, four door with tan leather. Its fully loaded and every thing still works.
88 Cougar LS 5.0 .030 over, ported E7s with GT40 valves & trickflow springs, Proform roller rockers, HO cam, removed air silencer, K&N filter, smog pump delete, 2.25" dual flowmasters, Pacestter H-pipe & headers, HO computer, 65mm TB, Explorer intake, 19# injecters, 3.45s, rebuilt posi, and TCI shift kit.

I got a new DD

Reply #8 –
You aint gonna get 25 mpg in the exploder. You prolly wont even get 20.

As far as the NA 2.3. Its an NA 2.3. Tune it up and bump up the timing and thats about it. Itll never be fast. Itll never feel peppy. Its an NA 2.3.
93 Festiva L, 193k miles, BP+T/G25MR swap, T3 50trim .48/.42, SRT FMIC, Capri electronics/Rocketchip, 2.5" exhaust
bests: ET 12.86, MPH 110.25, 1.92 short
02 Subaru Impreza WRX, 129k miles
97 Subaru Impreza Outback Sport, 236k miles

I got a new DD

Reply #9 –
i had one of those with 2.3/aod. it ran  good with then 2.78 but when i put the 3.73in. it ran better plus my intown gas mpg went up to 20 and my highway mpg went up to 30.
remember it easier to fix them, than to find them after they been crushed.

V6 = juvenile delinquency!

I got a new DD

Reply #10 –
Quote from: bhazard;308090
You aint gonna get 25 mpg in the exploder. You prolly wont even get 20.

As far as the NA 2.3. Its an NA 2.3. Tune it up and bump up the timing and thats about it. Itll never be fast. Itll never feel peppy. Its an NA 2.3.


Quote from: rancheronut;308091
i had one of those with 2.3/aod. it ran  good with then 2.78 but when i put the 3.73in. it ran better plus my intown gas mpg went up to 20 and my highway mpg went up to 30.


Read my last post. the mustang is FOR SALE. I know that the explorer is not going to get 25mpg. I'll be lucky to see 17. I know alot about building 2.3Ls. I had a N/A 2.3 in a 87 ranger that put down 158 RWHP. I still have the motor it's just not very street freindly with 12.1 comp. ratio and thats not what I was looking for for the mustang. The mustang is pretty preppy NOW. With the 4.11 gears, cold air kit, better exhaust and a roller cam from a ranger. It feels like a differant car. If you'll would read the other post you'd see that I was trying to make it alittle faster and get better MPG and that I was asking about bolt ons for the mustang about nine months ago. After the short list of mods the MPG went from about 25 to over 30. And I only spent about $250.
88 Cougar LS 5.0 .030 over, ported E7s with GT40 valves & trickflow springs, Proform roller rockers, HO cam, removed air silencer, K&N filter, smog pump delete, 2.25" dual flowmasters, Pacestter H-pipe & headers, HO computer, 65mm TB, Explorer intake, 19# injecters, 3.45s, rebuilt posi, and TCI shift kit.

I got a new DD

Reply #11 –
I have a 99 Mountaineer with the 5.0 and I get 16Mpg on a good week...

I'm guessing you'll get maybe 1-2 higher than that.

I got a new DD

Reply #12 –
Quote from: Bruce M;308101
I had a N/A 2.3 in a 87 ranger that put down 158 RWHP. I still have the motor it's just not very street freindly with 12.1 comp. ratio and thats not what I was looking for for the mustang.


Exactly, you had to have 12:1 comp and basically make the engine useless to drive to make the power a stock non-intercooled 2.3 turbo makes for hundreds of thousands of miles.
93 Festiva L, 193k miles, BP+T/G25MR swap, T3 50trim .48/.42, SRT FMIC, Capri electronics/Rocketchip, 2.5" exhaust
bests: ET 12.86, MPH 110.25, 1.92 short
02 Subaru Impreza WRX, 129k miles
97 Subaru Impreza Outback Sport, 236k miles
 

I got a new DD

Reply #13 –
Quote from: bhazard;308112
Exactly, you had to have 12:1 comp and basically make the engine useless to drive to make the power a stock non-intercooled 2.3 turbo makes for hundreds of thousands of miles.


It was actually really fun to drive with it being 1K pounds lighter than a turbo coupe. And it was my daily driver for 5 years 30K miles with no problems. I wouldnt call that useless. Just because its not your cup of tea doesnt make it useless. Its just a matter of being able to afford a couple gallons of 110 fuel and topped off with pump gas. Im not a big fan of power adders but I dont bother people that like them. Why do turbo guys knock on N/A motors. Because you'll dont know how to make power with out power adders. I had alot less money in my N/A 2.3 then what a turbo set-up would have cost. And  I was very happy with what I had at that time. I was a teenager when I had that truck and it was all I needed. Being almost 26 now and if I still had that truck it would have a 289 in it by now and would blow the doors off of "MOST" boosted cars around here. It's not all about horsepower. The wait of the car and having it setup right is a big part of going fast too. Just removing one hundred pound from a car can pick up a tenth of a secound in the 1/4 mile. So a well built car thats a thousand pounds lighter should be about a secound faster with the same HP.
88 Cougar LS 5.0 .030 over, ported E7s with GT40 valves & trickflow springs, Proform roller rockers, HO cam, removed air silencer, K&N filter, smog pump delete, 2.25" dual flowmasters, Pacestter H-pipe & headers, HO computer, 65mm TB, Explorer intake, 19# injecters, 3.45s, rebuilt posi, and TCI shift kit.

I got a new DD

Reply #14 –
Okay not useless but seriously impractical. Though tuned for e85 would be a bit better than finding race gas and paying $6+ a gallon. Also lasting 30,000 miles ain't the same as 200,000
 Not saying it couldn't but its improbable.

I don't hate NA engines, but some engines are just better off boosted.
93 Festiva L, 193k miles, BP+T/G25MR swap, T3 50trim .48/.42, SRT FMIC, Capri electronics/Rocketchip, 2.5" exhaust
bests: ET 12.86, MPH 110.25, 1.92 short
02 Subaru Impreza WRX, 129k miles
97 Subaru Impreza Outback Sport, 236k miles