TCCoA Forums banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

Registered
1996 Cougar 4.6
Joined
63 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has anyone swapped the 4 banger from the current mustang in to a mn12? Would love to do a "SVO" restomod. 300hp in base trim aint so bad
 

Registered
1996 Cougar 4.6
Joined
63 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I'd say Turbo Coupe restomod ;)

Not that I know of but I think it would be a cool swap, would be worth it alone to have such a wide open engine bay for a change
Would definitely get more cool points in a Turbo Coupe but i was thinking the same thing about having the extra space in the engine bay. Plus the fact that it would be pretty unique. Would love to slap a SVO badge on the trunk lid lol. Not to mention the turbo motors are very tuneable. Would be really happy with mid 300 hp
 

Registered
1996 Cougar 4.6
Joined
63 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Why not use a 3.5 eco boost?
i was thinking about that too. would be sick as kind of a pseudo Super Coupe. The 3.5 is a little more expensive though and harder to find with a manual trans. honestly it will come down to whichever comes in at a lower price. Although I am a little bias to the 4 cylinder. I know 4 bangers get a lot of hate but I love em. Always loved imports and high revving/ turbo 4s.
 

Super Moderator
Joined
11,414 Posts
I have a buddy with a Turbo Coupe engine in a Ranger; it's a beast.
He also has a black TC; the ranger is way faster, as long as there aren't any curves, lol.
 

Super Moderator
Joined
8,041 Posts
That says 鈥減ackaged weight鈥, so that includes everything that comes with it, and the crate and packaging itself. I suspect you can probably knock at least 100lbs off that for the engine鈥檚 actual weight. I can鈥檛 find a figure for the 2.3鈥檚 weight, but the 2.0 ecoboost weighs 328lbs, so I can鈥檛 imagine the 2.3 being that much heavier. Even the 2.7 ecoboost is only 440lbs, so there is no way the 2.3 is 100lbs heavier than the 2.7.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Martim

Registered
1996 Cougar 4.6
Joined
63 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
That says 鈥減ackaged weight鈥, so that includes everything that comes with it, and the crate and packaging itself. I suspect you can probably knock at least 100lbs off that for the engine鈥檚 actual weight. I can鈥檛 find a figure for the 2.3鈥檚 weight, but the 2.0 ecoboost weighs 328lbs, so I can鈥檛 imagine the 2.3 being that much heavier. Even the 2.7 ecoboost is only 440lbs, so there is no way the 2.3 is 100lbs heavier than the 2.7.
Yeah i was wondering about that. The other crate engines on the site specify the weight of the engine separately but not that one
 

Administrator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
19,485 Posts
That says 鈥減ackaged weight鈥, so that includes everything that comes with it, and the crate and packaging itself. I suspect you can probably knock at least 100lbs off that for the engine鈥檚 actual weight. I can鈥檛 find a figure for the 2.3鈥檚 weight, but the 2.0 ecoboost weighs 328lbs, so I can鈥檛 imagine the 2.3 being that much heavier. Even the 2.7 ecoboost is only 440lbs, so there is no way the 2.3 is 100lbs heavier than the 2.7.
Even with 100lbs off that's still about as heavy as a 4.6 DOHC. Here's the really crazy part, Ford has the package weight for a 5.0 Coyote at 564lbs! 4 less than the 4 cylinder 馃槸

 

Registered
Joined
242 Posts
That I would have to agree with. Having literally no weight in the nose.

But in that regard Id rather rotary swap one of these things.
Rotary? So the car would ride jackstands more than a SC? 馃槀 I love RX7s but never see them on on road 馃槳
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top