1 2 3 4 5 6 7
turboswede
turboswede GRM+ Memberand PowerDork
3/26/12 1:06 p.m.
belteshazzar wrote:
belteshazzar wrote: does the dodge have a limited slip differential?

Nope. None of them do until the SRT4 (which is a great swap, BTW)

Quaiffe and OBX make ATB differentials and Phantom Grip makes their limited slip solution.

With any turbo L-body, the first thing to do is to get rid of the stock transaxle, then alter the computer programming to allow full boost asap. Shelby had to limit the boost at lower RPM's and vehicle speeds to keep the A525 alive for the warranty period.

In doing so, you usually lose the close ratio gear set as the 520/555 or 523/568 transaxles are geared for much larger cars. To keep the close ratio gearing, combine the guts of a A520 and 555 (or 523/568) to get the strength with a better final drive ratio. Add a limited slip and life is pretty good.

Or ditch it and plop an SRT4/PT Cruiser Turbo drivetrain into the car and enjoy roasting tires all day long and twice on Sunday (Church of the Heavenly Cone)

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 1:15 p.m.

No limited slip... stock... several aftermarket choices available for the GLHS cars..

I had a 87 GLHS.. and swapped in a 3.05 FD 525 tranny with a 555 gearset.. oh.. and a limited slip...

It had a 2.5 shortblock..

Popped off mid 30's gas mileage all day long... and surely a low 13 second car...

The 2.3 SVO just doesn't make sense.... the 2.3 isn't the same kind of beast a 2.2/2.5 is... Oh sure.. they can be fast.. but they require much more work and playing around than does a 2.2/2.5..

The mustang needs a V8...

and seriously.. back in the day I had more fun beating up on 5.0 mustangs than I could ever recall in wore out used up GLH cars..

Sure.. the GLH is a POS tin can.. but today.. You can't really tell me an early 80's rustang is really that much better of a car..

belteshazzar
belteshazzar UltraDork
3/26/12 1:17 p.m.

that sounds like another SVO advantage to me.

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 1:19 p.m.

These threads need far less bench racing

Conquest351
Conquest351 Dork
3/26/12 1:20 p.m.

I have quite a bit of SVO experience. I worked for 5 years at Motion Dynamics and the SVO was our specialty. The owners are kinda crazy and mostly cool. Very tight knit bunch once you get involved with them. That engine will hold quite a bit of power. We built a 2.7L stroker for a Turbo Coupe that put 650 hp to the ground. That being said, there are drawbacks though. Some parts are impossible to find. Left hand inner marker light is damn near impossible and if you do find one, you're paying $250+ for it. Latemodel Restoration Supply has the headlights, tail lights, and remainder of the marker lights. Spats are another thing, impossible to find and extrememly expensive if you do. Saleen had a body kit for the Fox body that looks pretty close to the SVO Spats FYI. Some turbo hoses are hard to come by as well as coolant and oil hoses. Now that I've filled you with doubt, let me fill you in on the fun! The cars are great fun to drive. All the Fox body suspension upgrades bolt right in, and the IRS from an 03-04 Cobra bolts in with the addition of 4 holes. That's it! My buddy had an 84' with all the Maximum Motorsports suspension under it and an 04 CObra IRS and that thing was awesome!!! Handled like it was on rails. Got destroyed by a Corvette at a HPDE event. All that stuff is now going under his 78' Fairmont Wagon.

Ford is coming out with a new 2.3L Ecoboost that's supposed to be in the 300 hp range that would be a great swap over the iron 2.3 SOHC. The fact it's a Fox body and the fact it's been around so long, there's pretty much nothing left to guess about. Everything's been tried and developed. Get it, play with it, and when you're tired of it, sell it. They're great cars.

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 1:21 p.m.
belteshazzar wrote: that sounds like another SVO advantage to me.

Ok.. so you have limited slip, a slightly larger turbo, and rwd..

So what... I am still laughing at you disappear in the rearview mirror while you screw around with the distributor and the VAM..

Conquest351
Conquest351 Dork
3/26/12 1:23 p.m.
ronholm wrote:
belteshazzar wrote: that sounds like another SVO advantage to me.
Ok.. so you have limited slip, a slightly larger turbo, and rwd.. So what... I am still laughing at you disappear in the rearview mirror while you screw around with the distributor and the VAM..

Don't get me started on the VAM. LOL Lots of guys used to "modify" them and all they did was end up screwing them up. There's a couple of MAF conversions out there. Well worth the money.

belteshazzar
belteshazzar UberDork
3/26/12 1:34 p.m.

as much as you all talk about beating up 5.0's, ever notice mustang guys don't particularly brag about having beaten fwd dodge's?

it's not because it didn't happen, it's because nobody cares that you did it.

turboswede
turboswede GRM+ Memberand PowerDork
3/26/12 1:57 p.m.
belteshazzar wrote: as much as you all talk about beating up 5.0's, ever notice mustang guys don't particularly brag about having beaten fwd dodge's? it's not because it didn't happen, it's because nobody cares that you did it.

Uh, because the FWD Dodge's are the considered the underdogs. They certainly wouldn't admit to being beaten by one, of course. Their Mullets wouldn't understand....

92CelicaHalfTrac
92CelicaHalfTrac MegaDork
3/26/12 1:59 p.m.

MX6 GT > *

Grizz
Grizz Dork
3/26/12 2:02 p.m.
belteshazzar wrote: as much as you all talk about beating up 5.0's, ever notice mustang guys don't particularly brag about having beaten fwd dodge's? it's not because it didn't happen, it's because nobody cares that you did it.

More because it's embarrassing that their almighty V8 stang got its ass handed to it buy an ugly little hatchback.

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 2:12 p.m.
belteshazzar wrote: as much as you all talk about beating up 5.0's, ever notice mustang guys don't particularly brag about having beaten fwd dodge's? it's not because it didn't happen, it's because nobody cares that you did it.

Right.. This is another big plus for the GLHS over the SVO in this contest...

So are your mullet head friends in their 5.0's going to brag about beating your SVO...

Nope...

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 2:13 p.m.
Conquest351 wrote:
ronholm wrote:
belteshazzar wrote: that sounds like another SVO advantage to me.
Ok.. so you have limited slip, a slightly larger turbo, and rwd.. So what... I am still laughing at you disappear in the rearview mirror while you screw around with the distributor and the VAM..
Don't get me started on the VAM. LOL Lots of guys used to "modify" them and all they did was end up screwing them up. There's a couple of MAF conversions out there. Well worth the money.

My comment of course pending I have all the stock vac lines replaced at this point and an extra hall effects sensor in the glove box..

:)

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 2:14 p.m.

So how many SVO's have been in the top ten of the GRM challenge?

92CelicaHalfTrac
92CelicaHalfTrac MegaDork
3/26/12 2:18 p.m.
ronholm wrote: So how many SVO's have been in the top ten of the GRM challenge?

I'm guessing that has more to do with the fact that the cost of entry isn't so low... because they're actually worth something.

(I like turbo mopars, too)

belteshazzar
belteshazzar UltraDork
3/26/12 2:23 p.m.
ronholm wrote:
belteshazzar wrote: as much as you all talk about beating up 5.0's, ever notice mustang guys don't particularly brag about having beaten fwd dodge's? it's not because it didn't happen, it's because nobody cares that you did it.
Right.. This is another big plus for the GLHS over the SVO in this contest... So are your mullet head friends in their 5.0's going to brag about beating your SVO... Nope...

contradictory.

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 2:39 p.m.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:
ronholm wrote: So how many SVO's have been in the top ten of the GRM challenge?
I'm guessing that has more to do with the fact that the cost of entry isn't so low... because they're actually worth something. (I like turbo mopars, too)

Ok.. Ford 2.3's.. in anything?

ronholm
ronholm Reader
3/26/12 2:40 p.m.
belteshazzar wrote:
ronholm wrote:
belteshazzar wrote: as much as you all talk about beating up 5.0's, ever notice mustang guys don't particularly brag about having beaten fwd dodge's? it's not because it didn't happen, it's because nobody cares that you did it.
Right.. This is another big plus for the GLHS over the SVO in this contest... So are your mullet head friends in their 5.0's going to brag about beating your SVO... Nope...
contradictory.

iRONic

92CelicaHalfTrac
92CelicaHalfTrac MegaDork
3/26/12 2:42 p.m.
ronholm wrote:
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:
ronholm wrote: So how many SVO's have been in the top ten of the GRM challenge?
I'm guessing that has more to do with the fact that the cost of entry isn't so low... because they're actually worth something. (I like turbo mopars, too)
Ok.. Ford 2.3's.. in anything?

I think the only somewhat cheap way to get a 2.3T in anything these days might be a Thunderbird? I wouldn't want to try to autocross one of those pigs.

I'm still sticking with MX6 GT.

belteshazzar
belteshazzar UltraDork
3/26/12 2:45 p.m.
ronholm wrote:
belteshazzar wrote:
ronholm wrote:
belteshazzar wrote: as much as you all talk about beating up 5.0's, ever notice mustang guys don't particularly brag about having beaten fwd dodge's? it's not because it didn't happen, it's because nobody cares that you did it.
Right.. This is another big plus for the GLHS over the SVO in this contest... So are your mullet head friends in their 5.0's going to brag about beating your SVO... Nope...
contradictory.
iRONic

if it were true.

i just didn't catch the sarcasm. i guess. i'm not sure where you're going now.

DrBoost
DrBoost UltraDork
3/26/12 2:52 p.m.

I'll just say, I never lost to a mustang, not even the Cobra I took on...twice. I was asked not to run at a Roush event because I was beating too many of them (come to think of it, I must have been beaten that day).
That tells me all I need to know. But then again, these cars are apples and oranges. One is FWD, one is RWD. One was built to be a performance car, one was built to be an econobox. One was breathed on by Shelby (that's a big draw for some) one was an economical way to get high-V6 power.
Neither one was a great chassis, but both can be made to handle very well. Time and technology has marched on and allowed folks to figure ways around the biggest problems, except rust and hard to find parts.

Moparman
Moparman HalfDork
3/26/12 2:52 p.m.

In reply to Travis_K:

I have owned my 84 Charger 2.2 for 20 years. It was my daily driver for 8 years. An autocross car for 12 years and my daughters driver and autocross car for three years. Still going strong.

Moparman
Moparman HalfDork
3/26/12 2:53 p.m.
ronholm wrote: In reply to moparman76_69: It needs a clutch cable and has a sticky caliper... and I bet it would still outrun an SVO..

I have no doubt.

Moparman
Moparman HalfDork
3/26/12 2:54 p.m.

In reply to moparman76_69:

I want a turbo Caravan!!!

Moparman
Moparman HalfDork
3/26/12 2:58 p.m.

In reply to ronholm:

I know of Quaiffe and Phantom Grip. Whom else makes a limited slip for our beloved Ls?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
wzJKwkGaO1VvIlMXUSpambVKcmMYTwDp5qZ0TPlZG1LW5rdcKuxMBbeIcebHM4SP