Someone was telling me about a factory turbo charged 4 cyliner mustangs that came from the factory. He also said that it was as fast as a 5.0

Can anyone tell me about this car, if it even exists.

Thanks for any info,
Jason

 

Jason M,

SVO back in about 85-87 (not sure exactly what year(s)) made a 4 cylinder turbo mustang. It had a single hood scoop and a special front end that designated it from the other mustangs. Not sure about the performance, but I believe it could hang with the 5.0's, but being a small displacement turbo motor, I don't think it would be nearly as much fun to drive in city traffic.

------------------
00 Red L, adopted 2/29/00. 14.356 w/250 miles on odometer.
98 Red Dodge V10 4X4 quad cab.
96 Yellow Corvette LT1.
99 Arctic Cat ZR440 sno pro.
98 Polaris Super Sport 488.
97 Seadoo HX.
96 Polaris SLX w/PSI triple pipes.
97 Banshee completely tricked.
96 Polaris Scrambler.
87 Polaris Indy 600 SKS w/SLP 707 full mod.
RC CARS: Associated; RC10B3's, RC10T3, TC3. Lossi; XXCR Kinwald, XX4. Yokomo; MR4TC

peteb3@home.com

 

1983-85 Ford SVO Mustang's. 4 cyl turbo charger 210 HP. Change the boots presure with a modified orfice from 14psi to 25 psi and blow the doors off any 5.0 in those years. 50/50 balanced car would handle like a slot car. Wish I had kept mine as a keeper.

------------------
Rev. Andre Terranova
<*(((><
email: isa4325@flash.net
"1-BAD-TK" Texas Tag,
RED IN COLOR

• Red Premier Tonneau Cover.
• Red Shadow Cowl Cover.
• SuperChip #2.
• 3:73 Gears.
• K&N Filter.
• Edelbrock Performer muffler.
• ASP Pulley.
• G-Tech Pro.

Best Time 12.986 @ 107.54 with slicks. "Tweeked to the Max".
[05-11-1999 #1132]
"Certificate on the Wall"
"Only Little Boys Wear Bow Ties"

 

There was also turbo 4's in the '79, '80 and maybe '81. My dad had one and the thing had alot of problems, but when it did run it ran good. I believe they all came with the COBRA package, with a large cobra on the hood and COBRA on the sides.
Also the '84 anniversary model, you could get a turbo 4 or the 5.0.

 

I ran against an 84 SVO Mustang with my 85 5 liter (last year of the Holley 4 barrel carbuerator), and ate its lunch. The 85 also had no problem taking its fuel injected brethren that began appearing in 86. That was one sweet, swift Stang.

------------------
Sandy (Spider) Scott
Skydive69@msn.com
Apopka, Florida
99 White Lightning #2091 DOB 6-8-99
Airaid air box & Superchip
Honda Valkyrie - 2 Bros exhaust - K&N filter -Corbin Seat (after 30 yrs. of Harley riding)

 

The '86 EFI Mustang was a complete dog, but pardon me if I don't believe that the '85 carb'd car ran better than the '87-93 EFI 5.0s. They don't. An '85 carb'd car _might_ run high-14s (more likely 15.0s), and most '87-93 bone stock 5.0s run mid-14s...some low-14s. Modify either of them and they can run much faster, of course.

As far as the SVO Mustang goes, while it didn't have my powerplant of choice, I still don't understand why Ford couldn't put 4-wheel discs like it had on the rest of the Mustang lineup. Saved a few bucks, I guess.

They were very good open track cars for their time, though. Better weight distribution than the 5.0, far superior braking capabilities than the other Mustangs, and as long as the engine is in the sweet spot they make really good power.

------------------
Wes Tarbox
90 LX 5.0 (10.69 @ 134.7)
96 Cobra (12.63 @ 114.5)
97 SHO
99 Lightning (13.20 @ 103.3)
http://members.aol.com/Wa2fsT/index.html

 

------------------
Sandy (Spider) Scott
Skydive69@msn.com
Apopka, Florida
99 White Lightning #2091 DOB 6-8-99
Airaid air box & Superchip
Honda Valkyrie - 2 Bros exhaust - K&N filter -Corbin Seat (after 30 yrs. of Harley riding)



[This message has been edited by skydive69 (edited 03-13-2000).]

 

Wes - Although I never ran an EFI model with my 85 (was too busy cleaning up the local Z28's), Car & Driver sure tested them slower. I remember when the testing came out, I was amazed and pleased to see that the newer ones seemed to be running slower. Of course as we all know, there are many variables involved, and sometimes the tests are apples and oranges. Anyway, that 85 was one of the quickest "feeling" cars I have ever driven, and it sure kicked a lot of car butt. Interestingly, I was never beaten in that particular car - the closest being against a truck that looked like it should have lawn mowers in the back (which it may have)which I walked away from only slightly.

------------------
Sandy (Spider) Scott
Skydive69@msn.com
Apopka, Florida
99 White Lightning #2091 DOB 6-8-99
Airaid air box & Superchip
Honda Valkyrie - 2 Bros exhaust - K&N filter -Corbin Seat (after 30 yrs. of Harley riding)

 

Jason, Sal here. Ford produced 2 versions of the Turbo 4 cyl Mustang. The first was build in 79 to 81 (replaced by the GT in 82) and it had a carbed 2.3. That set up came in 2 models, the "Cobra" package, or the 79 Pace Car. Niether were really anything special. The second wave of turbo 4s, was the 84-86 SVO Mustang. They were quite different than the regular Stangs. Some differences included- Different nose (84-85 had sunken sealed beam lights, 86 had flush composite lights), different taillights (SVT used these same lenses on the 93 Cobra), a special wing and ground effects, and hood with a functional scoop to feed the intercooler. The performance upgrades were 4 wheel discs, 5 lug 16 inch wheels, posi 8.8 rear, and of course the turbocharged, intercooled, 2.3L motor. These cars were rated at 210 hp compared to the 195hp (84-85) and 215hp (86) 5.0L GT. They were lighter and handled extremely well. They were faster than the GT of the same years, but the 87up GT was definately quicker. Even though all three years had the same hp rating, Ford changed the cam in mid 85. Ford also made a competition version in extremely low numbers, that is very desirable even today. I've owned a few Turbo Coupe T-birds, and I can tell you that you can really make these cars run with some mods.

------------------
SAL
13.24@103mph
All stock with Power Surge Performance 99 Lightning Chip and Filter Kit
PowerSurgePerf@aol.com

 

Sandy,

I would never say the '85 was slow...not for its time. A very good friend of mine got one as a graduation gift in high school. It was the most awesome thing I'd ever ridden in. Z28s of that vintage ran high-15s, low-16s in the quarter. You wouldn't have lost to one of those unless you missed TWO shifts. :-P

I don't recall what every magazine came up with when they tested the various 5.0 Mustangs. I do know the '86 is slower than all the rest of the EFI cars (inferior heads, cam, intake design) and no matter if it was rated at a higher HP level than the '85 carb'd motor...it could not beat an '85.

Ford's notorious for bogus power ratings, IMO. (another subject for another time).

But, the '87+ 5.0 Mustangs in bone stock form were faster than the '85 offering in bone stock trim. Maybe only .3-.4 seconds in the 1/4 mile, but that's a good 5-6 car lengths...however, that is something that wouldn't show up as much in a shorter "street" race/encounter, especially if the slower car has a better driver.

That's why these L's are so cool. They are very tough in an 1/8 mile race and hook up very well if you don't powerbrake them from a dead stop.

------------------
Wes Tarbox
90 LX 5.0 (10.69 @ 134.7)
96 Cobra (12.63 @ 114.5)
97 SHO
99 Lightning (13.20 @ 103.3)
http://members.aol.com/Wa2fsT/index.html

 

Hey Wes:

I remember being startled at the difference in performance between that wonderful 85 Stang and the Vette I sold prior to buying it. I rarely keep cars very long, being an enthusiast, but I kept that beauty for 3 1/2 years. Interestingly, I caused a few of my friends to buy Mustangs after their thrill ride with me! Of course nothing has been as fun as these wonderful Lightnings!

------------------
Sandy (Spider) Scott
Skydive69@msn.com
Apopka, Florida
99 White Lightning #2091 DOB 6-8-99
Airaid air box & Superchip
Honda Valkyrie - 2 Bros exhaust - K&N filter -Corbin Seat (after 30 yrs. of Harley riding)

 

To my knowledge and my opinion,I believe you guys left out one of the fastest mustangs of that era.The 86 fuel inj.I believe they were indeed faster than the 87 .Something to do with Mass air flo sensors.Properly tuned ,The 85 carb was the fastest of the bunch.Just my .02There was absolutly no comparison between the Tuned port 350 irocs.Mustangs would eat um all day long.In my heart I still like the Irocs better.These are the cars I grew up with.I alway wanted 5.0s at the time and later on I had my share .Once I had a few,I believe the Irocs are better more fun cars in all stock form.Not many left in good shape.Plenty of mustangs.

 

I've been messing around with late model FI Mustangs for 10 years (not just my own). By far the '86 is the slowest of the group, and certainly slower than the '85.

86 was the first year of EFI and it had inferior heads, cam, intake compared to the '87-93 models.

The '87-89 cars were Speed Density and properly tuned, they were faster in _bone stock_ form than the '90-93 cars which were Mass Air computer cars. They weren't a _lot_ faster...I mean, we're talking the difference of driver error most of the time. Some of the California cars got MA in '89.

------------------
Wes Tarbox
90 LX 5.0 (10.69 @ 134.7)
96 Cobra (12.63 @ 114.5)
97 SHO
99 Lightning (13.20 @ 103.3)
http://members.aol.com/Wa2fsT/index.html

 

Well thanks for all of the answers,

But I am really looking for a early 90's sports car and I was wanting to get a turbo car like a (daytona, talon) or maybe a N/A 300ZX, or integra GS-R.