Esslingers Dyno Chart

Discussion in '2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech' started by fouredmustang, Mar 28, 2008.

  1. Got a 80s 2.3L Mustang recently (My 80s Daytona and Tercel is in being upgraded plus it was only $500 in great shape) heres some quick thoughts on it.

    Heres a link to the Esslinger dyno chart thats posted on the circletrack website.

    Esslinger Engineering made almost 230 HP out of that engine N/A. Fuel injected mind you as well. The engine costs $7000.

    Has anyone put their N/A 2.3 street car on the dyno to show results after upgrades? I'm guessing that a lot of 80s 2.3 Mustangs here including mine arent even meeting the standard 88HP because of age : ( I'd be interested to see if anyone got these cars to into the 150 HP range, or even a car that could keep up with some of the 90s Civics/Celicas or Neons. Even if the Mustang is not compact car!

    The top of the line V-Tec engine '92-'02 is rated at 160HP /w111 ft-lb @ 7000rpm
    The top of the line Pinto/Lima 2.3L (dual spark) is rated at 105HP /w135 ft-lb @ (rpms?)
    The regular Lima 2.3L is rated at 88HP /w132 ft-lb

    -The engine is nice and close to the center instead of being pushed up front which is nice so I give it congrats for that.
    -No DOHC (thats the 80s for ya) A nice cam will probably work though.
    -It has plenty of room to work in, unlike my Daytona
    -With all the space in the engine bay I'd imagine intake would be nice and cool, but looking at other's posts its a moo point.
    -The car seems heavy all the way around, does anyone know the weight of these vehicles. MSN Autos has them checked in at around 2819 LBS!!! Not bad for 80s but still pretty damn heavy. Civics weigh in 300 lbs lighter.
    -The 1.9L Escort GT engine is nice. But the Escort car is still 300 lbs heavier than the '89 Civic Hatch of the same year.

    I'm still a car newbie in terms of engine performance, but after doing a lot of research and it just doesnt seem like this car can keep up with modern 4 Cylinders easily without quite a bit of time and effort and $$$. This Mustang seems to only be meant for a Turbo or the Big American V8 or both : )

    I'm going to visit a local tuner shop nearby and see what can be done. I think that we can make a nice cruising car but nothing more N/A. Peace!
  2. you could always convert it to dohc like me and my buddy are doing:D
    most people that i talk to dont try to make a all motor 2.3. they go turbo.
  3. DOHC? You using the Volvo head? I heard the Volvo wasnt a direct bolt on so thats a bit out of my skill set/price range. I dont like too much fabrication work.

    Yea I know what you mean about people and the 2.3 N/A. My personal preference is all motor however. I wasnt alive in the 80's but its a shame that the 2.3L wasnt made better. At least to keep up with its rival American Camaro's 137HP V6. I saw specs on the Ford 80's V6 and its not the best performance engineering concept I've seen. The Ford 2.8 V6 had 109 HP and the inline 6 isnt even really worth mentioning.

    Of course thats just me babbling about Ford. I have a lot of respect for people who are willing to devote themselves to making what should have been that engine years ago. And Ford is still my second favorite car company so I'm happy to own a Ford product. Although I'd love to own the GT-40 or even a GT I would have love to seen that race in real life in the 60s. Americans are great at building V8s!
  4. You should buy the esslinger D-port head.
  5. Yeah I saw that on their product website. "Call for pricing" I can only imagine what that aluminum cylinder head will cost. Anyways I found a magnafluxed 2.3 turbo head in our classifieds. After reading posts on this website installing a turbo kit onto the stock cylinder head isnt such a great idea since apparently they are shaped differently chamber wise.

    Although I am going to visit a few race garages and street tuner shops in the area and see what they have for me. Like I said I seriously doubt the 2.3L will do much N/A without some good investments.

    I need a new hobby.
  6. If you want "all motor," quite honestly...keep looking.

    n/a 2.3's can make 300 hp in circle track trim, but those engines are more or less unstreetable. You have to dump a lot of money into an n/a 2.3 to even make 150 hp.

    BTW Esslinger's aluminum head is $1000+.
  7. if you want i can help you get a turbo 2.3 head for like 220$ it mite be little more if you dont have a core.. my step dad's work are able to get them. there straight from a ford re builder.
  8. Yeah I'd say for $7000 I'd go turbo (i did) For about $2000 you can hit 300hp with the 2.3 turbo. And if you wanna put 7grand in it you can be up around the 400-500hp mark quite easily.
  9. Just for reference. When I was 16 I had the local circle track guy who claimed to be a circle track god, price an engine. He said he could get me a 200rwhp for about $5000. I currently have a 10 second street car that I still don't have $5000 total.

    You're also looking at engines built to turn 10000rpm to be in the power and don't even start to make hp until 7000rpm.

    I've looked at all the angles so I'll break it down very quickly.
    230 flywheel horsepower from esslinger = $7000
    junk 2.3 turbo cranked up 240rwhp = $200

    7k will be one hell of a street car and I would save it.
  10. Its not street legal.
  11. Whats not street legal?
  12. My dads 1975 Pinto Runabout 2.3L was dyno'd at 215 hp back in late 80's. Naturally aspirated.

    It was a beast and was very fast but was barely drivable on the street and seemed to require constant maintenance.

    >11.6:1CR (water injection AND premium mandatory)
    >Fully ported and polished head with the big valves
    >Solid lifter cam and solid stabilizers from Racer Walsh (IIRC Stage 3 setup?)
    >Holley 500cfm 2bbl with Racer Walsh kit and adapter plate.
    >Racer Walsh adjustable cam sprocket (Which seemed to always be slipping)
    >Long tube header, 42" glasspack muffler with side exit in front of rear wheel.
    MSD box, dont know what kind of distributor but I think it was stock.

    Didnt idle well, the solid lifter stabilizers were held in with set screws that seemed to always be coming loose and seemed to always need adjusting.

    The car had a 3.89 Traction Lock rear with P265/50-15 rear tires. Leaving a stop light always seemed to be chirp the tires or stall at light.

    The Achilles heel of the 2.3L motor is the head. Get one of the aluminum aftermarket heads like Esslingers and you now have a motor that can make horsepower with the best of them.
  13. Woah I lots of responses for just my initial observation on the vehicle : )

    Do you have any pictures of your dads Pinto? I checked out the later history of the Pinto/Lima engine (pre-80s) The N/A HP was rated poorly as well. Must've been a lot of work and planning. What did your dad use the car for? I know its not a street cruiser like I'm building if I dont re-sell the car first. I'm a bit confused about the oil drain-back, did most of you drill a hole into the oil pan?
  14. No, we use the factory oil drainback hole in the turbo block...
  15. I welded a bung to the pan myself. The location of the stock drain hole sucks IMO.