Mustang SVO?

In reply to ddavidv:

I think the craziness is spilling over to the non-SVO Turbo Mustangs. There is a 1980 Turbo Cobra, auto trans, looks decent enough for its age, but has one flat tire. They are asking $2995 for it. Seems a tad much.

these things sound pretty interesting

http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/cto/2090489883.html

I rebuilt mine completely thinking I would autocross it in stock class. Just as I finished it my funding dried up, so now it sits under the car cover waiting for me to finish college in a couple years (sold my business). I have taken mine to a few track days, and it is amazing how well a stock SVO with some decent tires does. It has a lot of torque once the turbo hits, so I found leaving it in 3rd, braking early, throttle on as soon as you are off the brakes makes the boost just hit as you start to unwind the wheel.

Daily driver, the SVO has some issues. The achilles heel is the dizzy gear and TFI. Lets put it this way; I drive mine to school once in a while, but never on test day. Jeff

Jcamper wrote: I rebuilt mine completely thinking I would autocross it in stock class. Just as I finished it my funding dried up, so now it sits under the car cover waiting for me to finish college in a couple years (sold my business). I have taken mine to a few track days, and it is amazing how well a stock SVO with some decent tires does. It has a lot of torque once the turbo hits, so I found leaving it in 3rd, braking early, throttle on as soon as you are off the brakes makes the boost just hit as you start to unwind the wheel. Daily driver, the SVO has some issues. The achilles heel is the dizzy gear and TFI. Lets put it this way; I drive mine to school once in a while, but never on test day. Jeff

Okay, I am appending this post and eating some crow at the same time. My 100 mile a day commute in a corolla has finally taken its toll. My soul was nearly snuffed out, I was just tired of it. So I am selling the corolla, and have ordered parts for the SVO and drove it all week. So I guess the SVO works pretty well for a daily driver, and its pretty good at making everything in the rear view mirror shrink drastically on the on-ramps. A little bit buzzy at 70mph maybe (3.73 final and a short overdrive), but I get a lot of what-the-heck-is-that looks. Going to upgrading the suspension/steering , trying to figure out the front LCA issues. Jeff

I looked at one of these when they were new but the salesman at the dealership knew nothing about them - absolutely nothing. I couldn't believe somebody selling these could be so clueless. I was so disgusted that I waited a year or so and then bought a Dodge Shelby.

Definately a unique 'stang however.

In reply to ddavidv:

You should post on their board you want to do a V8 swap and see what the response would be. :-)

I want one of these to put an F2T in.

In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:

Adapters exist to mate the Volvo redblock motors to the T5 trans already in an SVO. Or just build your own SVOlvo (see what I did there?) with a garden variety four cylinder Mustang. The more time I spend looking into Fox/SN95 Mustangs the more impressed I am with the ease and cost of parts to make them really perform.

In reply to pres589:

Or just build your own SVOlvo (see what I did there?)

^^^love it...lol

TR8owner wrote: I looked at one of these when they were new but the salesman at the dealership knew nothing about them - absolutely nothing. I couldn't believe somebody selling these could be so clueless. I was so disgusted that I waited a year or so and then bought a Dodge Shelby. Definately a unique 'stang however.

I think that is a common story. They were about 5k more than a GT, but the same power. Salesmen probably used them to sell GTs for the most part. Plus the offset hoodscoop and bi-wings were probably not winning any redneck hearts.

Javelin wrote: Not really. There's no "real" differences between the SVO's. All 4 models (84, 85, 85.5, 86) had the 2.3/T5 with an intercooled T3 and an 8.8" rear axle w/LSD and 5-lug disc brakes. The "power" differences were pretty much in the computer and a Gillis valve with the boost at 15psi solves that. The 85.5-86 did get the plastic headlights. Interiors were basically the same. All should have the WC T5 (at least all the 84 and later 2.3T Turbo Coupe's did), though it wouldn't really matter much behind the 2.3 if it wasn't. Just buy the best one, keep it close to stock, and enjoy it. IMO if you want to modify a fox-body a lot you are much better off with a plain V8 car (why change brakes, rear end, suspension, etc on the special SVO?).

My 84 had a non-WC T5.

pres589 wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: Adapters exist to mate the Volvo redblock motors to the T5 trans already in an SVO. Or just build your own SVOlvo (see what I did there?) with a garden variety four cylinder Mustang. The more time I spend looking into Fox/SN95 Mustangs the more impressed I am with the ease and cost of parts to make them really perform.

This interests me. V8 Foxes are usually expensiver than I like, but 4s, particularly notchback 5 speed 2.3s, are a dime a dozen.

In reply to Lugnut:

I think the hatchback 2.3 is the cheapest Fox, but either way, you're going to want something more stout than the 5-speed that came behind the n/a 2.3. I think the gearing in the W/C T-5 that they slid behind V8's would be better for this anyway.

But yeah, it seems silly to me that there are guys doing Volvo head swaps onto 2.3's when you could just use the whole Volvo motor and be done with it. I know the 2.3 is stout but when 250 hp out of a red block Volvo seems so straight forward and streetable, it doesn't make sense to me.

pres589 wrote: In reply to Lugnut: I think the hatchback 2.3 is the cheapest Fox, but either way, you're going to want something more stout than the 5-speed that came behind the n/a 2.3. I think the gearing in the W/C T-5 that they slid behind V8's would be better for this anyway. But yeah, it seems silly to me that there are guys doing Volvo head swaps onto 2.3's when you could just use the whole Volvo motor and be done with it. I know the 2.3 is stout but when 250 hp out of a red block Volvo seems so straight forward and streetable, it doesn't make sense to me.

Putting a Volvo motor in makes less sense than a 2.3T, with bigger injectors, a tune, and an intercooler you're looking at numbers like what a red block can put out...