jinx44
Boosting 5 psi
Posts: 19
|
Post by jinx44 on May 27, 2009 21:58:37 GMT -5
I am new to the 2.3Ts, and looking to build one for a mustang.
Engine I have now is an '85 TC. A friend has an '88 that is sitting out in a field somewhere, and he offered any parts I need.
I know the intakes are obviously different between the early years and later, since the later valve cover has the notch to clear. I have never compared the two, and can't find anything online.
My question: Which lower intake is the best for a high power, iron headed engine? I plan to make my own upper with a short runner and large TB. Lower will of course be ported too.
Are aftermarket fuel rails available for both? I see rails sometimes listed as "inline" intakes. Which ones are they referring to?
|
|
|
|
Post by Strangeleak on May 28, 2009 7:32:58 GMT -5
The upper intake on an 87-88 TC is slightly shorter, than the earlier models. Therefore, in theory, it should provide better low end power. Although I don't think it is enough to make a significant difference. The lower intakes are the same throughout the 2.3 Turbo's, excluding the inline of course. But I don't believe the inline was ever on a production 2.3 Turbo. The inline intake is as it sounds. Four individual runners feeding each port. Similar to this intake.  Aftermarket fuel rails are available, but from what many people have said, and Stinger or Matt correct me if i'm wrong, but the stock fuel rail is capable of handling upwards of 450 horsepower. So unless you want to run an inline intake and matching fuel rail, the stock fuel rail should be sufficient enough for daily application. |
|
|
|
Post by merc460 on May 28, 2009 8:37:39 GMT -5
Your 85TC will have an Inline intake and the 88 will have a square port intake. Early TC and SVO came with inline intakes, I think 86 was when they switched to the more common square intake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Strangeleak on May 28, 2009 9:48:50 GMT -5
I stand corrected, thanks Merc. I wasn't sure about the inline intake. I have an 86 TC engine that's a square bore.
|
|
jinx44
Boosting 5 psi
Posts: 19
|
Post by jinx44 on May 28, 2009 13:06:46 GMT -5
Hmm. Well, my intake is obviously not an inline then.
So, my next question.... Is it worth trying to find an inline intake? The only advantage I see would be more consistant flow between cylinders since all runners are the same length. That would keep individual cylinder AFR more consistant as well.
As for the fuel rail, I have had issues in the past with lean cylinders in the back due to cavitation as fuel passes over the first injectors. I prefer to have an overly large fuel rail now. That is a gremlin that I don't care to chase again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on May 29, 2009 1:12:21 GMT -5
Inline intakes are easier to use for a plenum upper than the 4 square, they all have the same basic potential once ported. The #1 port on the lines is "squished" and needs to be welded then ground to the proper shape, or it can be enlarged in its oblong shape to maintain port volume throughout.
|
|
