![SEARCH](http://www.mustangworks.com/images/search.png)
![The Mustang Works](http://www.mustangworks.com/images/mw_footer_logo.gif)
© Copyright 1995 thru 2008 - The Mustang Works™. All Rights Reserved.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
![]() |
#1 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Athens, LA, USA
Posts: 6
|
![]() I am thinking about buying a 4cyl mustang. How would swapping a 2.5 in place of the 2.3 affect performance? They are the same engine from what I can tell, only the 2.5 has a bigger stroke. Would this even be worth the time and effort to pick one out and bolt the other in? Any weak points in th 2.5 that I should know about?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Leamington, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 767
|
![]() i think u should pickout a 302 or a 351 and drop that in=).......are u talking about the 2.5l mazda engine they put in the probes?
cause i know the 96 probe gt's move along pretty good my buddy has 1 ------------------ Black 1990 gt cobra bonestock not for long |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: alamogordo,nm,usa
Posts: 23
|
![]() forget about the lil 4 banger, go something mean like a 5.0 or a 5.8 or hell why not a 392 gt-40 stroker. with 430 hp
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Mustangs
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,938
|
![]() The 2.5L 4 cylinder was used in newer rangers and is a dual plug engine, so you'd either have to use the 2.3L's head and the bottom end of the 2.5L to use it in a '87 to '90 mustang, whereas it's a direct bolt in to the '91 to '93 mustangs(which i believe are exactly the same). The '91-'93 mustangs with the 2.3L had 105hp stock, whereas the '87 to '90 2.3's had only like 88 horsepower, i believe both engines made 135lb/ft of torque or maybe the earlier ones a little less. I believe the extra displacement would add like 10 to 15 horsepower, but really isn't worth the trouble. A turbo would be a much better swap though. Why are you thinking of building up a 2.3L (or 2.5L). It would cost about twice the cost of a stock 5.0L mustang to make a 2.3L as fast as a stock 5.0L mustang.
- Another note is that 4 cylinder mustangs came with weaker springs, weaker shock/strut valving, no rear sway bar, puny front sway bar, small radiator, weaker 7.5" rear end, non-heavy duty ball joints, smaller brakes, and incredibly weak transmissions (both the auto and manaul were different than the 5.0L although the manual was a weak duty T5 based on the GT's heavy duty T5 Good luck, if i were you, i'd either mod a 5.0L or get the 2.3L just for commuting and good mileage. ------------------ previous name: 84stangLX '84 Mustang 5.0 LX my LX '89 Mustang GT my GT |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Engine Swap 4Cyl To V8---HELP PLEASE | Coupe Devil | Windsor Power | 6 | 01-29-2008 08:20 PM |
4cyl. to a 5.0 swap | Ieatcamaros | Windsor Power | 6 | 10-11-2002 10:02 AM |
swap... 302 ---> 4cyl. Mustang | GreeceLightning | Windsor Power | 1 | 10-26-2001 01:53 PM |
4cyl - 351 Windsor swap useing a c6? | ekoms | Windsor Power | 1 | 06-17-2001 12:23 PM |
Engine Swap 4Cyl To V8---HELP PLEASE | Coupe Devil | Blue Oval Lounge | 1 | 03-30-2001 11:36 PM |