2.3 internal buildup

Turbo RANGER · December 2nd, 2008, 11:29 AM

Ok, decided to go with a 2.3 with an Eaton M90 sc, a Hedman hedder, and numerous other mods. Will the regular internal mods for a turbo motor work for an sc?

TurboLX · December 2nd, 2008, 02:42 PM

duh, your gonna hate that SC, that seup is gonna be so pointless... have fun.

Turbo RANGER · December 2nd, 2008, 07:08 PM

Quick question, why does everyone hate superchargers? People act like they are the devil

Turbo RANGER · December 2nd, 2008, 11:12 PM

Also, will the stock forged pistons hold up to high boost for any period of time, or will I need to get some aftermarket pistons? On the other end, what about the mains, any problems with them?

TurboLX · December 2nd, 2008, 11:15 PM

the piston's will be fine, i've held 30psi on them for more then 15 minutes no problems.

and superchargers take power to make power

15psi on a supercharged 2.3 is gonna be less powerful as a turbocharged 2.3 at 15psi

Turbo RANGER · December 2nd, 2008, 11:36 PM

Maybe peak HP will be higher with a turbo, but average HP will be way higher with a roots type sc. And the torque will be higher all across the board. All that aside, is there anything in the lower end besides rod bolts that needs attention?

TurboLX · December 2nd, 2008, 11:59 PM

if your rebuilding throw in some new rings

Turbo RANGER · December 3rd, 2008, 12:06 AM

OK, so the mains are ok stock? I just don't want to have to pull this every weekend to work on it. Also, would you recomend head studs and an MLS gasket with that high of boost?

TurboLX · December 3rd, 2008, 12:49 AM

i would recommend the ARP head studs an a Fel-Pro #1035

Turbo RANGER · December 3rd, 2008, 09:04 AM

Ok, that's what I've been hearing from most people. I've got a cam and valves coming, but do I need to get better valve springs with 30psi?

TurboLX · December 3rd, 2008, 10:04 PM

How bigs the cam and valves?

Turbo RANGER · December 3rd, 2008, 11:32 PM

The cam is- duration 274/ 274, Lift .500/ .500 and the valves are sealed power of the stock size. The head and intake are getting extrude honed to better the flow.

TurboLX · December 4th, 2008, 05:02 PM

get some double valve springs an HLE's

Turbo RANGER · December 4th, 2008, 07:42 PM

HLE's?

Racinjason81 · December 4th, 2008, 10:47 PM

superchargers arent that efficient on small displacement engines the only success was the early cobalt SSs if you wanna call it that.Did you come up with an 8 rib pulley setup yet?you might be better of with a 10 rib setup to reduce belt slip which could be an issue at 30 psi.Boost is boost you would basically build an engine the same way for a blower as a turbo you need enough valvespring .while your at it why dont you make it a 2.5 stroker?what year thunderbird did that blower come from?the 94 and up supercoupes came with coated rotors which are better than the earlier M90s.you could have the blower ported profesionally too to improve performance.

Turbo RANGER · December 5th, 2008, 08:47 AM

It's a 94 blower, but i've ordered an MPx case with the MP inlet from magnum powers as well as the 10 rib 25% overdrive kit for a supercoupe because Ive already figured out how to run with a stock supercoupe pulley system

Racinjason81 · December 6th, 2008, 11:16 AM

Im glad you have this stuff figured out.Keep me posted on the build up.

Turbo RANGER · December 6th, 2008, 10:51 PM

QUOTE=Racinjason81: superchargers arent that efficient on small displacement engines the only success was the early cobalt SSs if you wanna call it that.

I got to lookin at old stuff, and BMW had roots type supercharged 500cc(30 CID) motorcycle in 1937 that made 108 hp and ran 173.3 MPH. Also, in 1951, Alf Romeo had a 1500cc(90 CID) grand prix car that made 425 bhp at 9,300 rpm. It too was roots type supercharged. I'm tellin you guys that superchargers aren't as bad as they're made out to be. Yes, I'll agree that they are less efficient than a turbo and they won't make as much peak power, but they make unflinching boost, have gobs more torque and a much better power band. Look into those old outdated and inefficient roots type superchargers and you'll find that they aren't really such a bad idea on any engine.

Racinjason81 · December 7th, 2008, 08:09 PM

what i meant was recent 4 cyl roots combinations.the old outdated ones are exactly that
the newer roots type are far more efficient than the old stuff.one of my friends is making
well over 1000hp with an old 6-71 on a 392 hemi obviously the old stuff works but the newer stuff makes the gap between superchargers and turbos a lot smaller

TurboLX · December 7th, 2008, 08:35 PM

look here for your cam selection.

- BOPORT Racing Heads - Fremont CA

December 2nd, 2008, 11:12 PM	#4
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	Also, will the stock forged pistons hold up to high boost for any period of time, or will I need to get some aftermarket pistons? On the other end, what about the mains, any problems with them? __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne Last edited by Turbo RANGER; December 2nd, 2008 at 11:16 PM.

December 2nd, 2008, 11:36 PM	#6
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	Maybe peak HP will be higher with a turbo, but average HP will be way higher with a roots type sc. And the torque will be higher all across the board. All that aside, is there anything in the lower end besides rod bolts that needs attention? __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne

December 3rd, 2008, 12:06 AM	#8
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	OK, so the mains are ok stock? I just don't want to have to pull this every weekend to work on it. Also, would you recomend head studs and an MLS gasket with that high of boost? __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne

December 3rd, 2008, 11:32 PM	#12
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	The cam is- duration 274/ 274, Lift .500/ .500 and the valves are sealed power of the stock size. The head and intake are getting extrude honed to better the flow. __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne Last edited by Turbo RANGER; December 3rd, 2008 at 11:38 PM.

December 4th, 2008, 07:42 PM	#14
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	HLE's? __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne

December 2nd, 2008, 11:29 AM	#1
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	2.3 internal buildup Ok, decided to go with a 2.3 with an Eaton M90 sc, a Hedman hedder, and numerous other mods. Will the regular internal mods for a turbo motor work for an sc?

December 2nd, 2008, 02:42 PM	#2
TurboLX I Post Entirely Way Too Much 1988 Mustang LX Turbo Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NY Posts: 8,792 Blog Entries: 1 iTrader: 0 reviews	duh, your gonna hate that SC, that seup is gonna be so pointless... have fun.

December 2nd, 2008, 07:08 PM	#3
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	Quick question, why does everyone hate superchargers? People act like they are the devil

December 2nd, 2008, 11:15 PM	#5
TurboLX I Post Entirely Way Too Much 1988 Mustang LX Turbo Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NY Posts: 8,792 Blog Entries: 1 iTrader: 0 reviews	the piston's will be fine, i've held 30psi on them for more then 15 minutes no problems. and superchargers take power to make power 15psi on a supercharged 2.3 is gonna be less powerful as a turbocharged 2.3 at 15psi

December 2nd, 2008, 11:59 PM	#7
TurboLX I Post Entirely Way Too Much 1988 Mustang LX Turbo Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NY Posts: 8,792 Blog Entries: 1 iTrader: 0 reviews	if your rebuilding throw in some new rings

December 3rd, 2008, 12:49 AM	#9
TurboLX I Post Entirely Way Too Much 1988 Mustang LX Turbo Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NY Posts: 8,792 Blog Entries: 1 iTrader: 0 reviews	i would recommend the ARP head studs an a Fel-Pro #1035

December 3rd, 2008, 09:04 AM	#10
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	Ok, that's what I've been hearing from most people. I've got a cam and valves coming, but do I need to get better valve springs with 30psi? __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne

December 3rd, 2008, 10:04 PM	#11
TurboLX I Post Entirely Way Too Much 1988 Mustang LX Turbo Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NY Posts: 8,792 Blog Entries: 1 iTrader: 0 reviews	How bigs the cam and valves?

December 4th, 2008, 05:02 PM	#13
TurboLX I Post Entirely Way Too Much 1988 Mustang LX Turbo Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NY Posts: 8,792 Blog Entries: 1 iTrader: 0 reviews	get some double valve springs an HLE's

December 4th, 2008, 10:47 PM	#15
Racinjason81 Hardcore Enthusiast Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New jersey Posts: 1,559 iTrader: 0 reviews	superchargers arent that efficient on small displacement engines the only success was the early cobalt SSs if you wanna call it that.Did you come up with an 8 rib pulley setup yet?you might be better of with a 10 rib setup to reduce belt slip which could be an issue at 30 psi.Boost is boost you would basically build an engine the same way for a blower as a turbo you need enough valvespring .while your at it why dont you make it a 2.5 stroker?what year thunderbird did that blower come from?the 94 and up supercoupes came with coated rotors which are better than the earlier M90s.you could have the blower ported profesionally too to improve performance. __________________ Heres a real funny video youtube.com/watch?v=ojB7KkaR03I VTEC stands for Very Torqueless Economy Car Honda stands for Hold On Not Done Accelerating 1991 LX 5.0 H/B(T-70 turbo coming soon)

December 5th, 2008, 08:47 AM	#16
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	It's a 94 blower, but i've ordered an MPx case with the MP inlet from magnum powers as well as the 10 rib 25% overdrive kit for a supercoupe because Ive already figured out how to run with a stock supercoupe pulley system __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne

December 6th, 2008, 11:16 AM	#17
Racinjason81 Hardcore Enthusiast Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New jersey Posts: 1,559 iTrader: 0 reviews	Im glad you have this stuff figured out.Keep me posted on the build up. __________________ Heres a real funny video youtube.com/watch?v=ojB7KkaR03I VTEC stands for Very Torqueless Economy Car Honda stands for Hold On Not Done Accelerating 1991 LX 5.0 H/B(T-70 turbo coming soon)

December 6th, 2008, 10:51 PM	#18
Turbo RANGER Regular 1990 Ranger Custom 11.60@116.19 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mtn. Grove, MO Posts: 53 iTrader: 0 reviews	QUOTE=Racinjason81: superchargers arent that efficient on small displacement engines the only success was the early cobalt SSs if you wanna call it that. I got to lookin at old stuff, and BMW had roots type supercharged 500cc(30 CID) motorcycle in 1937 that made 108 hp and ran 173.3 MPH. Also, in 1951, Alf Romeo had a 1500cc(90 CID) grand prix car that made 425 bhp at 9,300 rpm. It too was roots type supercharged. I'm tellin you guys that superchargers aren't as bad as they're made out to be. Yes, I'll agree that they are less efficient than a turbo and they won't make as much peak power, but they make unflinching boost, have gobs more torque and a much better power band. Look into those old outdated and inefficient roots type superchargers and you'll find that they aren't really such a bad idea on any engine. __________________ Superchargers are where it's at Verne Last edited by Turbo RANGER; December 6th, 2008 at 10:57 PM.

December 7th, 2008, 08:09 PM	#19
Racinjason81 Hardcore Enthusiast Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New jersey Posts: 1,559 iTrader: 0 reviews	what i meant was recent 4 cyl roots combinations.the old outdated ones are exactly that the newer roots type are far more efficient than the old stuff.one of my friends is making well over 1000hp with an old 6-71 on a 392 hemi obviously the old stuff works but the newer stuff makes the gap between superchargers and turbos a lot smaller __________________ Heres a real funny video youtube.com/watch?v=ojB7KkaR03I VTEC stands for Very Torqueless Economy Car Honda stands for Hold On Not Done Accelerating 1991 LX 5.0 H/B(T-70 turbo coming soon)

December 7th, 2008, 08:35 PM	#20
TurboLX I Post Entirely Way Too Much 1988 Mustang LX Turbo Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NY Posts: 8,792 Blog Entries: 1 iTrader: 0 reviews	look here for your cam selection. - BOPORT Racing Heads - Fremont CA

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
Forums at Modded Mustangs Advertisement Advertisement

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.moddedmustangs.com/forums/2-3-mustangs/99780-2-3-internal-buildup.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
2.3 internal buildup	This thread	Refback	December 2nd, 2008 11:44 AM

Threads Similar to: 2.3 internal buildup
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
the 2k s/c buildup.....	DeMello	99-04	27	June 23rd, 2008 12:16 AM
12.6 with no power adders or internal engine modifications	gx1856	2005 - 2010	5	May 24th, 2007 12:47 PM
4v Conversion then SC or built internal 2v SC?	sorrowfulkiller	96-98	10	May 21st, 2007 02:29 AM
what internal components do i need?	bricky77	99-04	12	July 3rd, 2006 10:40 PM
331-stroker buildup	173speed	5.0 Mustangs	10	November 3rd, 2005 11:19 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:19 AM.
Contact Us - Modded Mustangs - Privacy Statement - Top
Modded Mustangs is ©2005-2008, All Rights Reserved, And is Not Affiliated with Ford Motor Company. Forum is powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Ent. Ltd. & SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.