timmm55 Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 ........... Drop the current Focus's tubby weight and bad road manners................. Huh? It does weigh a bit more than some of it's competition, but at least it's solid unlike the Hyundai. Handling has never been a problem........it's best in class! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stray Kat Posted July 31, 2013 Author Share Posted July 31, 2013 For Ford to fully back these Ecoboost engines some effort on their part would be required in making these things relatively easy to work with. That is in north/south, east/west applications. I'm pretty sure like most modern Ford engines that all the bracketry for the ancillary components is either built on the engine or the component itself. Gone are the days of matching pullies and brackets. Also a little help in the transmission dept would be great. For a small investment Ford could engineer bellhousings and clutch housings that would couple to popular gearboxes like the T5, TR3550, C4, 4R70W etc. That'll get things moving I'll bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Huh? It does weigh a bit more than some of it's competition, but at least it's solid unlike the Hyundai. Handling has never been a problem........it's best in class! Not comparing it to its current competition. Drive one back to back with a decent 08-11 or a 04-07 2.3L car especially with the available 17 inch wheels. The current car pales. The numbers (skidpad, acceleration etc) favor the new car, but the driving experience doesn't. It feels huge and lethargic. Throw in the DSP6 auto vs the older 4F27 and the 'fun to drive' factor difference between the two gets even worse. Again, the new car supposedly outperforms the old in almost every arena. It simply doesn't FEEL like it. It just has lost something. Its less Focus and more Corrolla. All this is of course leaving out the ST/SVT etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 (edited) Not comparing it to its current competition. Drive one back to back with a decent 08-11 or a 04-07 2.3L car especially with the available 17 inch wheels. The current car pales. The numbers (skidpad, acceleration etc) favor the new car, but the driving experience doesn't. It feels huge and lethargic. Throw in the DSP6 auto vs the older 4F27 and the 'fun to drive' factor difference between the two gets even worse. Again, the new car supposedly outperforms the old in almost every arena. It simply doesn't FEEL like it. It just has lost something. Its less Focus and more Corrolla. All this is of course leaving out the ST/SVT etc. Considering all cars have gotten bigger due to mandatory safety standards. I had a 2011 Coupe rental and it was fun I admit but loose. The 2012 SEL w/ sport pkg held itself pretty well. To each I suppose. If you want the feel of a 05-07 but less power, take a Fiesta out. It needs more beans but in the corners, it's go cart time. My use of the DCT 6 is much more responsive when I feather the throttle instead of stab the 4A and wait. Regarding the overall FEEL is more comfort then fun is the end goal to make your second compact car or commuter a purchase you can live with and in day in/out. Edited August 1, 2013 by Hugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 1982-1985 Ford EXP/Mercury LN7 Series I Forgotten. With today's brakes and transmission and suspension, a 2.0 EB would be really quick. Only problem is that I don't think the chassis would be able to deal with all that power...heck it barely hold up to the 110HP or so that was originally in the 1985 1/2 cars I won't talk about the rear shock towers that rot out really easy either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmm55 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 The current car pales. The numbers (skidpad, acceleration etc) favor the new car So the new car doesn't "pale" in comparison. Only in Europe.....in a car we didn't get......was there any complaint of the Focus losing anything. I think it that "tossible factor" that a lighter car has. I've driven several including a SVT ZX3. I loved the 6 speed. But the new one (SE to SE for example) is just better in virtually every way. It's matured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 I have matured as well. Fatter, older, less appealing... Just ask my wife. It really is different strokes I guess. I still think an 08-11 SES with the 2.0 Eco would be an absolute gas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabfordeb Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Why a "late 69" Bronco? Was there a significant change then? X2 on any 66-77 early bronco! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBFlex Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 How can that predict YOUR real world economy in comparison to other models better than the EPA tests using those means? Tell me how the fuelly rating for my 2008 Super Duty (which sits at 13.2, BTW) will help you gauge real world mileage more accurately than you actually driving one? You have no idea how I drive, what I tow, how much city/highway driving I do, etc. Sure, you can look at all of those numbers and get an aggregate, but it tells you nothing if you don't know the circumstances. Obviously you cant't just look at one vehicle and assume you're going to get the same mileage. Lets be realistic here. If you read what I wrote, you'll find that I take MANY different outlets into account INCLUDING the EPA figures. And seriously, how am I supposed to drive a vehicle long enough prior to driving it to give me an idea what I will see? Again, that's irrational. That is why we have things like reviews and multiple sources. It's far easier to read a couple reviews on a vehicle than to test drive it for a month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Samaniego Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 My 1985 Ford Ranger Base 2.0l 5spd. You see unlike more modern Rangers, the 1985 base is a relatively light vehicle. With a full tank of gas it weights around 2600 pounds (i picked up some 500 pounds of sand last week, that's what the scale at the landscaping supply place said). Lets assume the eco-boost adds 100 pounds to my truck. I'd be looking at a power to weight ratio of about 11 pounds per horse power, not bad! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfpack219 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I would love to put the new one from the 2016 explorer into my 2002 ford ranger FX4. 310 ft lbs of torque would do that little truck wonders. Probably get gas mileage in the 20's around town too! I was getting 18 with the DOHC 4.0L V6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) I had a '90 Ranger regular cab 2wd that I swapped a 2.3T out of an '88 Thunderbird into. It had a ported head, SS header, 3" exhaust, larger injectors and a tune. Had the stock M5OD with stage 3 clutch and a 3.73 L/S 8.8 out of an Explorer. Made a lot closer to 300 than the stock 190 hp in thunderchicken form. It certainly made that 3100 lb Ranger move with authority. Nothing like breaking the tires loose at 70 mph in third gear. Unfortunately I decided to trade it to make room for my 2011 when I bought it. My best friend tried to talk me out of trading it at the time but I was thinking too logically and ignored him. I've wished I still had it ever since. Edited July 24, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 My first truck was a 90 Ranger reg cab swb 2wd. Burgundy. 2.3 manual. Came with A/C, sliding rear window, am/fm/cassette with FOUR speakers! and chrome wheels. $7995. 0-60? Yes. Traded it for a 95 ext cab 4.0L manual. Sometimes I wish I still had the 95. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Mine was burgundy too! Well the parts of it that hadn't succumbed to road salt by the time I got it anyways. I ended up fixing the body and painted it British Racing Green after I got done with the engine swap. Looked pretty sharp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Mine was burgundy too! Well the parts of it that hadn't succumbed to road salt by the time I got it anyways. I ended up fixing the body and painted it British Racing Green after I got done with the engine swap. Looked pretty sharp. Weird--I had a '97 Ranger long box that was green. I did an engine swap, too, for a 5.0. Of course, I also swapped the rest of the truck along with the engine, trading it to my dad for his '91 F-150. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 My 89 is burgundy...lol... This is a basic truck. No p/s and no radio (from the factory). 2.3L 5 speed with 331K miles. It's very tired and I'm tryting to make a decision on which way to go. Stock 2.3 rebuild, 2.3 Turbo swap, 5.0L swap or...?????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironhorse Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) The Ecoboost would be sweet in a '66-75 Bronco. Edited July 24, 2015 by ironhorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 My 89 is burgundy...lol... This is a basic truck. No p/s and no radio (from the factory). 2.3L 5 speed with 331K miles. It's very tired and I'm tryting to make a decision on which way to go. Stock 2.3 rebuild, 2.3 Turbo swap, 5.0L swap or...?????? I was actually looking into a 5.0 (302 OHV, not the Coyote) swap for my Ranger. All the parts were readily available for it (they even had adapters for Tremecs), but I ended up swapping trucks instead. BTW, I'd thought my Ranger was a Sally Rand Edition, but my '91 F-150 Custom was even more of one. It had AC, cruise control, 4WD, and the 302, but that was it as far as options went. It didn't even have a headliner, just painted metal above your head. It was weird--there was this rectangle of plastic trim around the upper seat belt mount, but exposed metal above and below. There's no way you could get away with that these days; people just expect more attention to detail, even in work trucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) My 89 is burgundy...lol... This is a basic truck. No p/s and no radio (from the factory). 2.3L 5 speed with 331K miles. It's very tired and I'm tryting to make a decision on which way to go. Stock 2.3 rebuild, 2.3 Turbo swap, 5.0L swap or...??????Go 2.3T. The power comes on just slow enough that it really helps the tires keep traction. The V8 swaps usually end up being tire burners. Mine would hook surprisingly well with the stock leaf spring setup. It won't be much extra work than stock 2.3 rebuild would be. The wiring/ECU swap is the easiest part - switch a few pins on the box connector and run a few new wires for the Vane Air Meter and MAP sensor and that's about it. I used an after market boost control solenoid on mine - much easier than trying to get the thunderbird system grafted in. The internal wastegate on the turbo was good for 9 psi of boost which resulted in more engine than the 4.0L V6 Ranger. The boost control solenoid upped it to about 17-18 psi boost which was about max on 93 pump gas and was a real hoot to drive at that point. Edited July 25, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 3.5 EB RWD conversion for Focus...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 3.5 EB RWD conversion for Focus...... That reminds me of an article I read about some dude stuffing a V-8 from a corvette Z06 into a Pontiac Solstice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 That reminds me of an article I read about some dude stuffing a V-8 from a corvette Z06 into a Pontiac Solstice There was a company that did those conversions. Millet? I think was their name. Mallett. http://www.mallettcars.com/v8-solstice/ I still say last gen T-Bird would be a worthy EB recipient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted July 25, 2015 Share Posted July 25, 2015 3.5 EB RWD conversion for Focus...... If a 351 will fit, I don't see why that won't. I doubt the Cobra rear end will hold the torque though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I would like to find a way to put an Ecoboost 4 into my old 1987 EXP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 3.5 EB RWD + ZF/Getrag transaxle and a Fiesta delivery van. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.