Comments on: Retrospective: 1984-86 Ford Mustang SVO

By: Ford Turbocoupe Wiring Harness Sway | FordPhotosBlog.com

Ford Turbocoupe Wiring Harness Sway | FordPhotosBlog.com — Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:31:53 +0000

[...] TurboCoupes had a carthrottle.com [...]

By: James

James — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:28:51 +0000

yeah, they were way too pricey. But I don’t imagine the 2.3 Turbo/IC was cheaper to make than the 302ci V8 with a big holley carb. Way more parts.

Still, an interesting historical note. Thanks for commenting on the article. Now, Ford, where’s our EcoBoost-powered SVO Mustang?!?

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 16:56:11 +0000

I very much enjoyed this article! I agree that it was a far superior car to the v8 fox, too bad they were so much more expensive…

By: Ron Gibson

Ron Gibson — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:10:35 +0000

Kevin, it can be done and is not hard. Check out turboford.org. It has been done, multiple times.

By: James

James — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 16:39:11 +0000

Kevin, I can’t say I know a whole lot about Pintos, but I’d imagine there’d be more complication than simply bolting it in. After all, for one thing your Pinto might have the same 2.3L block but it’s not even fuel injected – you’d have to find somewhere to mount an ECU, wiring harness, all sorts of things. I’m not saying it can’t be done (in fact, I’m sure it can and has) but it would probably be easier and better in most ways to just stuff a Ford 302ci V8 under the hood of your Pinto.

By: kevin

kevin — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 04:13:48 +0000

i drive a 1980 pinto and i was told that swapping my stock engine with an svo 2.3L is a “bolt on swap” any thoughts or recomendations?

By: joey

joey — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:24:40 +0000

i need a couple of parts and im located on mississauga msg me if you know anybody close to me

By: Ron

Ron — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 23:43:55 +0000

Yes James but you state in the article above ” later build TurboCoupes had a 190-horsepower intercooled 2.3 Turbo, a Tremec T-5, and independent rear suspension”. The 2.3 turbo was never in a TurboCoupe that had an independent rear suspension.

’88 TurboCoupes were the last year of the 2.3 and it had an 8.8 solid rear axle with disc brakes. Still a very nice setup but no IRS.

By: James

James — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:46:16 +0000

you are correct about the intercooler; brain fade created a typo. The SVO indeed used an air-to-air, not an air-to-water.

However, late model Thunderbirds and Cougars did use an independent rear suspension -

http://carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=10373

see under suspension, rear? “I.CA.CS.ARB” stands for “independent, control arm, coil spring, anti-roll bar.”

By: James

James — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 15:24:31 +0000

well, you’re right on the first count – the SVO used an air-to-air intercooler. I think that was just a foggy-brained mistype on my part.

However, the Thunderbirds DID have an independent rear suspension – just like the Lincoln MKVIII. Here, take a look at the specifications of this later Thunderbird Supercoupe:

http://carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=10373

“I.CA.CS.ARB” stands for “Independent Control Arm Coil Spring Anti Roll Bar”