information on a conversion

It would be much cleaner just to buy a "full dress" 5.0L with all that crap already on it than to try to retrofit a carbureted engine into the EFI car. I'm not thinking plug-and-play, but... there are many other things you'd have to change, and you'd end up with a lot more loose ends and question marks than you would have going with EFI to EFI. The 2.3 to 5.0L swap has been done and is documented in detail somewhere. I'm sure there are websites to get you started.

And remember the 91's emissions standards... depending on where you live, this type of swap might not pass emissions or safety inspections.

Best of luck, J

Unless there is strong sentimental attachement to that particular car, you can buy a 91LX is excellent condition for less than it would cost you to convert the one you have (unless you have a donor car and can do all the work yourself), and you would still have the original car.

If you go ahead with the conversion, don't give any further consideration to going away from EFI. Adapting the wiring harness from the 5.0 to your car may take some rewiring, but I believe it's well worth it, and your car will be worth more if you sell it.

John

66 2+2

Ehhh, you should sell it and buy one with a 5.0 in it already....

Gerard Menard opined in news: snipped-for-privacy@storefull-3235.bay.webtv.net:

I've sorta done what you are considering, except it was a std 2.3 to an SVO

2.3 with all the undercarriage changes.

If you think the wiring harness swapout would make it too hard, you dont even want to start. Like the others say, going to a carb is actually tougher.

Hey,

Something silly I've considered doing... but haven't we all considered something silly (like my 67 Tremec conversion)

TURBOCHARGING my 2.3 TEMPO. I was thinking of finding a Turbo GT or Turbo Coupe engine and starting from there. But then again, why not just find a Turbo GT or Turbo Coupe in the first place? Because a turbo Tempo would be better in snow, to begin with, and unique. And it's a stick, in good shape. And those other cars have likely been beaten to hell by punks already. But yeah, but two grand into a one-grand car...

Was there a ever a FWD turbo 2.3 car? Can't think of one.. probably a good reason for that 8-)

Bear in mind the 2.3 in a Tempo/Topaz is not the same motor as the 2.3 in 'stangs and Turbo Coupes etc. The Tempo motor is actually based on the old 200 inline six used in Falcons etc. basically with 2 cylinders lopped off and is a pushrod engine. The Mustangs

2.3 is the European designed OHC motor that is an offshoot of the old 2.0 ( the motors used in Formulas Fords) About all they have in common is their displacement.

Chrylser was the turbo FWD king for North American cars with all those Omni and K car knockoffs in the '80's.

Stu

I actually didn't realize any of the 2.3s -were- OHC.

I was sort of surprised to find mine WASN'T, when I replaced the valve cover gasket a few years ago, but I sort of just shrugged at it. Interesting to note the difference, and the Tempo's roots to the 200 sixes from way back. Thanks for the info. I'd heard there were two varieties of the 2.3L four, but wasn't sure what the difference was.

Yes, the Chrysler four-banger turbos. My friend had a luxury "k-car wagon" turbo, green with vinyl wood paneling, whatever the model was called. It was comical when he stomped the gas. WHOA! Look out!! Here comes the TERRIBLE TURBO WAGON, "WOOOOOOO!!!"

Thanks for the info...

Stuart&Janet wrote:

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 04:43:49 +0000, 67RMod rearranged some electrons to form:

My 1983 T'bird Turbo Coupe (which I sold about 15 years ago) was the OHC variety. I sold it before the timing belt had to be changed.