PDA

View Full Version : TURBO or SC



secondchildhood
03-08-2011, 07:11 AM
IN MY SEARCH FOR AN ''SC' PROJECT I FOUND AN 88 TURBO COUPE ( 2ND OWNER 95K MILES)... I KNOW THIS ISNT THE TC SITE BUT WHATS YOUR GUYS OPINION ON THESE CARS?...I KNOW THE 'SCs' HAVE MORE POWER BUT I THINK BOTH ARE GREAT LOOKING CARS...ARE THE TCs EASIER TO WORK ON(PARTS AVAILABILITY ETC)...BOTH AT ONE TIME WERE 'MOTOR TREND' CAR OF THE YEAR SO BOTH IN THERE ''PRIME'' WERE GREAT VEHICLES...ANY INFO YOU GUYS HAVE WOULD BE APPRECIATED..THNX

whitecl0ver
03-08-2011, 10:27 AM
a TC, never heard of it, (but i'm new to the t-bird, SC world)

I love my 93 SC...It's fast and fuel efficient...I came from a 78 Ranchero with a big blog 460...So the 18-22 mpg I get on the SC, trumps the 5-8mpg i would get on that 460...

Good luck man!

Roadhawg
03-08-2011, 10:34 AM
IN MY SEARCH FOR AN ''SC' PROJECT I FOUND AN 88 TURBO COUPE ( 2ND OWNER 95K MILES)... I KNOW THIS ISNT THE TC SITE BUT WHATS YOUR GUYS OPINION ON THESE CARS?...I KNOW THE 'SCs' HAVE MORE POWER BUT I THINK BOTH ARE GREAT LOOKING CARS...ARE THE TCs EASIER TO WORK ON(PARTS AVAILABILITY ETC)...BOTH AT ONE TIME WERE 'MOTOR TREND' CAR OF THE YEAR SO BOTH IN THERE ''PRIME'' WERE GREAT VEHICLES...ANY INFO YOU GUYS HAVE WOULD BE APPRECIATED..THNX


A good place to find Turbocoupe info is here:
http://natomessageboard.com/cgi-bin/Ultimatebb.cgi

You may also want to check your Caps Lock, it seems to be stuck...........

XR7 Dave
03-08-2011, 11:52 AM
The SC is hands down a WAY better car. No comparison.

ricardoa1
03-08-2011, 11:57 AM
Turbo Coupes were on an old 80s body derived off the mustang and it had a solid rear axle, that alone should be a good indicator that the SC is superior in design. Also to make power the TurboCoupe with its lil 4 cyl will require a large turbo that will most certaintly lag quite a bit, the car is not that light to begin with. But It can be made to make good power for probably cheaper then you can an SC. Looks well I think the SC has it beat hands down. The TC had the weird back side that looks dated and odd. But the car can be made to look good with a nice body kit and some wheels. Still the SC simply needs a nice set of wheels to make keep up with new and old in the looks dep.
But gas prices are reaching $4 per gallon so maybe that 4cyl is not such a bad idea afterall. And with some Volvo DOHC heads or some Cossworth power it can be made fast and fun while being good on gas.

http://images.bradspictures.com/bpictures/b/blue_ford_t-bird_turbo_coupe-22292.jpg

Hock
03-08-2011, 12:10 PM
They make a perfect chassis for a big block swap.

Toms-SC
03-08-2011, 12:40 PM
Without a doubt I'd floss one of those. You can make them go fast for cheap but definitely start with the body mod's. You can get an aftermarket cylinder head, larger turbos, intake manifolds etc etc etc.

rzimmerl
03-08-2011, 12:45 PM
I've liked the body style of the Fox body Birds since I was a kid, but have always stuck to the MN12 platform for many reasons. My buddy has an '84 5.0 and the ride of the MN12 chassis is much better.

XR7 Dave
03-08-2011, 12:47 PM
Without a doubt I'd floss one of those. You can make them go fast for cheap but definitely start with the body mod's. You can get an aftermarket cylinder head, larger turbos, intake manifolds etc etc etc.

You guys are internet racing again. Back in 1990 my aunt had one which I thought was just completely cool - until I got the XR7 and both of us realized after 3.79457 minutes that the MN12 is just massively better. No way I'd go back to a fox body.

Roadhawg
03-08-2011, 01:09 PM
No way I'd go back to a fox body.

In a straight line a Fox body owns..................

Toms-SC
03-08-2011, 01:50 PM
You guys are internet racing again. Back in 1990 my aunt had one which I thought was just completely cool - until I got the XR7 and both of us realized after 3.79457 minutes that the MN12 is just massively better. No way I'd go back to a fox body.

It's true though. My internet connection is faster than yours.

XR7 Dave
03-08-2011, 02:09 PM
I'm just saying that you guys forget how those things drive/ride compared to your MN12. I had the distinct displeasure of driving a cherry 90 Anny Mustang GT the other day. No f'n way I'd go back to that. In 1989 it was cool, but these days those things are just horribly antiquated. Fine to look at, ~~~ to drive.

Roadhawg
03-08-2011, 02:38 PM
I'm just saying that you guys forget how those things drive/ride compared to your MN12.

My current daily driver is a 1991 4cyl 5spd Mustang, my wife's 1995 Tbird is a far better driving experience.

XxSlowpokexX
03-08-2011, 03:59 PM
My Current daily drivers a fox body stang and a fox body cougar. The fox body tbirds and cougars are definitely a much nicer ride than the fox body stangs. They are far from the same. If you want a car thats easy and cheap to work on the TC is a great option. They share many parts from the fox stang bin and can be made to handle and of course go fast. WHat it cant do is give you the same ride as a HEAVY IRS equipped Supercoupe :O)

shoalcracker
03-08-2011, 06:15 PM
My SVO's couldn't hold a candle to the SC but made the TBird look like it was parked in a straight line dash.

The turbo TBird was underpowered, and never did better than 25 mpg.

Nice ride though.

Paul

decipha
03-08-2011, 07:22 PM
i don't know why everyone dogs the little 4 that could

to this day the 4 has made more power than our beloved 6

most i've ever heard of anyone getting out a sc was 632rwhp, they got a BUNCH of guys cranking out 850rwhp+ out the little 4cyl

IIRC luis at paradise racing had a little svo he featured a while back on his site, it was making 800+ to wheels on 80#s of boost

CMac89
03-08-2011, 07:33 PM
i don't know why everyone dogs the little 4 that could

to this day the 4 has made more power than our beloved 6

most i've ever heard of anyone getting out a sc was 632rwhp, they got a BUNCH of guys cranking out 850rwhp+ out the little 4cyl

IIRC luis at paradise racing had a little svo he featured a while back on his site, it was making 800+ to wheels on 80#s of boost

That's because 1% of SC owners are hardcore drag racers and will do whatever it takes to be at that power level. They aren't talking about max power, either. They're talking about an overall car comparisons.

80PSI; you're silly. Even if they did run that much, then 800rwhp is doggable.

fasterthanyou
03-08-2011, 07:55 PM
I think we could get 800whp with 30psi and a stable bottom end..am I wrong? the most I've heard a person running was 21lbs of boost with a 3.8 and it made 650+whp over on v6power.

fasterthanyou
03-08-2011, 08:04 PM
http://www.dragtimes.com/Ford-Thunderbird-Timeslip-16820.html
if this guy's mods are true and he's not leaving anything out, then it doesn't take much to get 12.0 with a TC

sc4u2nv
03-08-2011, 09:03 PM
I have owned 2 turbo coupes and I think for their era, they were awesome!!!
It was nice racing 5.0 mustangs and beating them with a 4cyl. ofcourse boost was turned up, but whatever. I have now owned 6 super coupes and think they are far more superior than turbo coupes, but they still look sweet and I hope to own one again. I think parts are easier to get because of the fox body chassis, and the motor is easy to work on.

XR7 Dave
03-08-2011, 10:51 PM
i don't know why everyone dogs the little 4 that could

to this day the 4 has made more power than our beloved 6

most i've ever heard of anyone getting out a sc was 632rwhp, they got a BUNCH of guys cranking out 850rwhp+ out the little 4cyl


Casey made 660rwhp on 20psi without even trying. There has been leagues of high dollar product development done for the 2.3L for many, many years. Whatever you have seen with respect to the 2.3L is about all it's good for. We haven't started to scratch the surface on the 3.8L platform. When someone splits a block open without detonating the thing first, then we'll be able to talk about it's limitations. Ford back in 1992 claimed that 750hp with an old school roots blower was the limit. With a more efficient form of boost and some more displacement, who knows? ;)

XxSlowpokexX
03-08-2011, 11:04 PM
Bottom line is that extra weight is what will get you in the end. The fox body is just a better drag car. If we are talking comfort it sa different story..Allthough my fox cougar drives pretty nice

ricardoa1
03-08-2011, 11:53 PM
They are not that light.


"
•The 1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe was a large car at 202 inches long; it carried a 3,415 lb. curb weight. In Motor Trend magazine testing, the manual transmission Turbo Coupe accelerated from 0 to 60 miles per hour in 8.59 seconds and ran the quarter mile in 16.48 seconds. Its top speed was 143 miles per hour.

XxSlowpokexX
03-08-2011, 11:57 PM
They are not that light.


"
•The 1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe was a large car at 202 inches long; it carried a 3,415 lb. curb weight. In Motor Trend magazine testing, the manual transmission Turbo Coupe accelerated from 0 to 60 miles per hour in 8.59 seconds and ran the quarter mile in 16.48 seconds. Its top speed was 143 miles per hour.


Is lighter than my SC. I had done a automatic mustang drivetrain swap into an 87 cougar (many times actually). With just a cat back I ran 14.5. Just how fast did the mn12 5.0 HO's go? Thats about the difference

PLUS tubular front ends, and suspention parts are plenty of this car...And cheap

And they can be made to handle real nice. With similiar suspensions my cougars always drove nicer than my stangs

XR7
03-09-2011, 12:36 AM
In a straight line a Fox body owns..................

I am curious, what a fox body actually owns?.

XxSlowpokexX
03-09-2011, 11:47 AM
I am curious, what a fox body actually owns?.

many 1/4 mile win trophies:eek:

Swervin
03-09-2011, 04:28 PM
I have had four Turbo Coupes to my one SC. The both have their attributes. The Turbo Coupe was easier to work on and aftermarket was huge. Great style and a fantastic sleeper. The benefit with that Fox platform was all the parts you could get. I remember going to Dearborn for the 100th anniversary and talking to a former Ford Engineer who said that a Turbo Coupe could walk all over a SC at the Drag strip and I wouldn't disagree with that. There has just been more research into the platform with the Mustang.

In the meantime I became a service advisor and then a salesman.

What I realized with all my research and grand plans to put the 99 Cobra IRS and get newer seats and rear disc brakes and a 5 lug conversion etc. is that it is much easier to start with a car that already has all that stuff. If you want a GT style car then get the car that was engineered for that from the beginning. It is much either to modify than to re-engineer a car.

Ultimately it depends on what you want. All out race car that sees minimum street duty? A TC is a better place to start. Especially the 85-86 (my favorite years) the 87-88 got heavy and the 83-84's did not have the good cooling for the Turbo.

The 94 SC was built with IRS (which the car snob in me wanted) and came with a manual and had the nice interior and in my opinion a better exterior.
2nd choice would have been a Mark VII LSC but I was afraid of a manual transplant at the time even though I like the V8 engine on paper better. It turns out that most of the stuff that you would need to beef up was done at the factory with the 3.8. I may own another TC, SVO or XR4TI at some point but don't think I will ever give up my SC.

Swervin