Ward

iTrader: (1)

Heres an idea im seriously considering. I was thinking about getting something very light like an old ranger or an s10. I am favoring the ranger because im fairly sure that a turbo thunderbird engine would fit into a ranger. And there are countless turbo thunderbirds in the junk yards around here. So would a turbo t bird engine fit into a ranger? What about taking a ranger engine, and putting the exhaust manifolds from a turbo t-bird on it so that I could install the turbo??

------------------
1983 Pontiac Firebird SE
LG4-Based Chevy 400
700R4 Tansmission
Modified 4 Barrel Q-Jet Carb
Accel Super Stock 8mm Wires
Edelbrock Pro-Flo Air Cleaner
3.23 Posi Rear
14X7" Cragar SS/T Wheels
Clarion 45X4 CD/AM/FM Head Unit
100WX2 Amp
2 Pioneer 12" Subs in Custom Box
Third Gen Performance
"A four cylinder is only half an engine"

snakeskinner

I imagine it would work but you'd be stomped by every stock 4.3 s-10 that came down the road unless you tweak that 2.3 pretty good. the thunderbird/cougars only run like mid 16's with those and you're putting it in a worse chassis. If you're looking for something original, go for it but if you're looking for something quick like a sleeper, I'd look elsewhere.

------------------
Kyle Osterholt
Okarche, Oklahoma
ASE Master Certified
86 T/A 383 TPI
89 TTA #1002 T-top/Leather
89 TTA #1358 Hardtop/Leather
80 T/A Pace Car
73 Opel GT
73 bronco

Bort62

Welll.....

First off There is a Differance In design between the 2.3L NA Motor and the Turbo2.3L, All the parts bolt up, but there are subtle differance i cant recall right now.


Secondly, I dont know weather it would Fit In a Ranger Or not. That Turbo mounting on the side Sticks out and takes up alot of Room. Tbirds have big Wide engine bays, Ive got one sitting in the driveway as we speak.

Ive Toyed with the Idea of Putting a Turbo 2.3L In the Ranchero, But its More expense than I want to deal with right now. It wouldnt Be to hard, except For the Fitment issues, and All the Wiring. Ive already got an exotic enough motor Lined up for that.

I will probrably Put one in an early Falcon Or Cortina someday, IM Young yet.

These Motors can Be Made to Run, But that stock T03 Turbo Isnt gonna Do it.


You need More boost. A friend of Mine Made his Mustang SVO ( 2.3Lturbo mustang, Incase your not familar ) Make ~300 HP on a Chassis Dyno, Running 18 PSI and No Other mods aside from larger Injectors.

Then The Motor blew up

But then Again, Its a ford, Thats what its Supposed to Do.


If You want to hit the Sleeper truck aspect, How about a GN 3.8 Into an S10 ? Running 13's easy




------------------
60 Ranchero - Project ( Money Hole )
85 Sport Coupe LG4 - Daily Driver

Just another Hot Rod kid, or thats what they all tell me.
Livin' the Stereotype

Guest

It will fit, but from what I can tell the AC if you have it is history. I think the diff in the engine is the oil pressure hookup for the turbo, which to me really isnt a big deal... there are ways around that. You have to do something about the puter too, seems like everyone swaps in the SVO one IIRC.
As for 16 seconds... I think not. Ive seen a few of these in the 14's. Traction is your main problem if you do this.

I am really thinking about doing this to my truck, but I dont want to lose my AC. If I do venture into this, Ill keep you posted. Dont hold your breath tho. I figure if I do it, Ill throw it on and see how much boost I can run before it blows

Ward

iTrader: (1)

Well the only reason i favor a ranger/tbird over an s10/GN is because its impossible to find parts, or better yet an engine for a grand national. But on the other hand, there are at least 10 turbo tbirds in just one junkyard i know of around here, and plenty more in others. Okay heres my current idea: I want something extremely light, like under 3000 lbs, like an s10 or a ranger, but it needs to be RWD (i hate FWD). Then, I want to get a pair of T03 turbos from a couple turbo tbirds, and put them on a V6 or a V8, and drop it in the light *** car. I believe I can break into the 10s that way. Maybe i'll invent an S10-SS or a Ranger Lightning. I want to do this whole thing for cheap too, so im looking for a car under $2000. Anyone have an idea how much a junk yard would charge for a turbo??

------------------
1983 Pontiac Firebird SE
LG4-Based Chevy 400
700R4 Tansmission
Modified 4 Barrel Q-Jet Carb
Accel Super Stock 8mm Wires
Edelbrock Pro-Flo Air Cleaner
3.23 Posi Rear
14X7" Cragar SS/T Wheels
Clarion 45X4 CD/AM/FM Head Unit
100WX2 Amp
2 Pioneer 12" Subs in Custom Box
Third Gen Performance
"A four cylinder is only half an engine"

JETHROIROC

Don't think the Ranger is under 3,000 lbs, and I'm sure the s-10 isn't but it may be close in 2WD trim and no extended cab. My s-10 Blazer 4X4 weighs over 4,000, and I'd say most s-trucks are within the 3,300 to 3,800 range, at least those with the newer body styles. I agree with snakeskinner, a healthy 4.3 with an intake and good exhaust will most likely eat your lunch. What you should do is stuff a 350 into an s-10 for a real sleeper .

Bort62

You can get Junkyard turbos for about 40 bucks.

You can get Remaned T0-3's for around 600, and Remanned T04's For about 800.

I woulndt count On 10's with T03's Its sorta a weak turbo.


Thats right madmax, it is the oil feed for the turbo.


I think possibly that it may have a differnt shaped combustion chamber too, but I may be thinking of somehting else.




------------------
60 Ranchero - Project ( Money Hole )
85 Sport Coupe LG4 - Daily Driver

Just another Hot Rod kid, or thats what they all tell me.
Livin' the Stereotype

87RS402

My 92 4 door and my 89 2 door weigh 4400. If your wanting a sleeper I'd look at a 2wd S-10 with a V-8 and a blower. There is enough room for that and nobody will ever expect that.

I knew a guy that had a paxton supercharged 92 4.0 V-6 ranger. 13's in the 1/4. My mom's bone stock 93 dakota is almost that fast.

JETHROIROC

Right on, 87RS. S-10's are hardly light nor do they have a good aerodynamic profile. But a V-8 with a blower would be perfect for such an application, or perhaps a setup from a Cyclone or Typhoon (probably hard to find and muchos $$$).

Ward

iTrader: (1)

Well then what is very light, RWD, and has plenty of room under the hood for a twin turbo v8? I thought about my car, but I dont know if SB400s are good motors for turbo, since they dont like to rev.

------------------
1983 Pontiac Firebird SE
LG4-Based Chevy 400
700R4 Tansmission
Modified 4 Barrel Q-Jet Carb
Accel Super Stock 8mm Wires
Edelbrock Pro-Flo Air Cleaner
3.23 Posi Rear
14X7" Cragar SS/T Wheels
Clarion 45X4 CD/AM/FM Head Unit
100WX2 Amp
2 Pioneer 12" Subs in Custom Box
Third Gen Performance
"A four cylinder is only half an engine"

89ragtop

How about a late 70's Monza. These are lighter RWD, kinda ugly, but who would expect it. I bet you can find one cheap too. Slap a built V8 in it and you'll be smokin! I don't know if twin turbos would fit, but I've never seen anyone waste their time with these cars (other than the occasional car craft article or something). You could get a V8 in it from the factory, but they were VERY WEAK! It could be the ultimate sleeper.



[This message has been edited by 89ragtop (edited March 01, 2001).]

87RS402

If I was going to do that I'd be thinking 2wd S-10, 383 with vortex blower, and around a 3.90 posi rear.

Not light enough? The same combo will fit into a toyota pickup with some more light fabricating. Toyota's are cheap to get and weigh around 2700 lbs IIRC.

Your not going to fit twin turbos in a compact engine bay with a V-8. Futhermore the turbo Thunderchicken is a 4 banger. Want to be a sick person? The late 80's Dodge conquest TSi is a 250 hp 4 cylinder turbo, it's also the same engine block as a 4 banger D-50 and the predicessor to the turbo eclipse. The TSi is rear wheel drive and a bolt in to the D-50. If your looking to get a fast compact pickup look at the dakotas, a engine compartment designed for a V-8 and more than enough room in there fit a twin turbo V-6 if your into heavy fabricating. Want worse? I have seen a 454 in a 84 toyota 4X4. Not sure I'd want to tackle that project though.

El Guapo

Most "non-third gen" topics are at least GM....So now Ford people are now coming to GM people about advice on cars? Humm, this could be interesting.

Seriously, here is my thoughts about this project. The S10/Ranger trucks arent featherlight, however, little of that weight is over the rear wheels except for maybe w/ a full tank of gas. Even then, they have a problem w/ wheel spin. Note that that observation is w/ the standard engines. (My brother has a 97 Ranger and my wife drives a 96 S-10) l would imagine that the older models would be the same as far as weight over drive wheels. If you put some serious power to the wheels you are going to have traction problems.

Due to barn door aerodynamics, you wont be able to make it up at the top end either.

l just lost my train of thought. lf l remember l'll edit this post.

Clayton