59 EDSEL 2.3 Turbo 5 Speed Conversion

[bhazard]

I just noticed youre using a garrett t3 from an 83-86 tbird/cougar or merkur. That turbos a bit bigger and slower spooling than the IHI from the 87-88 but has potential for more power. Its good for 20-22 psi with a good intercooler and adequate fueling. However for a daily you might find the slower spool a pain.

[Jim-Bob]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Does that mean one should be extra safe when driving an old car, and medium or low safe when driving a "safe" newer car?

Well....let's just say that older cars require much more defensive driving to be safe. The oblivious way in which most people drive isn't safe in any vehicle, but in an older one that is not designed to crash it is far worse. My point in my original post is that newer cars (starting with the Mercedes-Benz W123) are designed to crush the ends and be rigid around the passengers. Older cars are designed to look pretty. This is why the cars of the 50's have those very thin, vertical windshield pillars. They counted on the curvature of the windshield to provide a level of support to the roof that unfortunately shatters in a hard crash. GM actually did calculations to prove that the curved glass provided more support than steel back then but the truth is that the design of all of the structural components surrounding the passengers in a car that old is inadequate as a total system. This is especially true of older roof rails that tend not to be boxed sections and thus transfer the force upwards and allow the other vehicle to push back the firewall. This is also why pillarless hardtops are no longer made. They are a horror in a side impact (the other vehicle-be it a Cadillac or a Geo Metro-will drive right through the middle of the car as the doors provide little resistance) and worse than a pillared car in a frontal or rear impact.

Even if you compare cars of a much newer vintage, say 15-20 years old, to those of today the difference is substantial. I saw a British test from 5th Gear comparing a Renault Modus ( Nissan Versa chassis) to a Volvo 740 wagon from the early 90's. The Modus obliterated the Volvo-which was considered a extremely safe car at the time. It is because of Euro-NCAP and NHTSA and their 5 star systems that this has come to be. The standards have been consistently ratcheted up making the cars of today very safe to be in but very deadly to be on the receiving end of if you are in an older model.

Do I hate old cars? Not at all! I love them for their style and for being a representation of a simpler time. However, I think I would rather be in a Smart car in an accident than any of them. They just were never designed to crash well.

[amcpacer]

I took a pic of the intercooler. It is a cheap used ebay bought Dodge Neon SRT-4 aftermarket intercooler. It is the AGP mini SRT cooler. I pressure tested it in the bath tub and found a couple of pin hole leaks that I plan to fix with epoxy. It looks like a tube and fin design because of the externally rounded edges on the passages but upon closer inspection with a mirror I see it has internal fins that run parallel to air flow. This will probably be better at shedding heat than the small thunderbird cooler that I considered using. Also I must find a good turbo bypass valve. I assume it is not acceptable to vent pressure to atmosphere due to the vane air meter already cataloging the incoming air. Anyone with experience on bypass vs blow off valve on a VAM style Ford electronics.

HPT Motorsports - AGP Direct-Fit Intercooler (FMIC) 03+ Dodge SRT-4


It runs so nice! I want to drive it but I must have patience in waiting for the seat belts. I need to have an exhaust shop make a complete exhaust for the car. Right now it has a short pipe at the turbo outlet. It is actually relatively quiet with no exhaust system (nice turbo side effect).

I must sign up for youtube and post a video when time permits.

[EdKiefer]

Originally Posted by amcpacer

I took a pic of the intercooler. It is a cheap used ebay bought Dodge Neon SRT-4 aftermarket intercooler. It is the AGP mini SRT cooler. I pressure tested it in the bath tub and found a couple of pin hole leaks that I plan to fix with epoxy. It looks like a tube and fin design because of the externally rounded edges on the passages but upon closer inspection with a mirror I see it has internal fins that run parallel to air flow. This will probably be better at shedding heat than the small thunderbird cooler that I considered using. Also I must find a good turbo bypass valve. I assume it is not acceptable to vent pressure to atmosphere due to the vane air meter already cataloging the incoming air. Anyone with experience on bypass vs blow off valve on a VAM style Ford electronics.

HPT Motorsports - AGP Direct-Fit Intercooler (FMIC) 03+ Dodge SRT-4


It runs so nice! I want to drive it but I must have patience in waiting for the seat belts. I need to have an exhaust shop make a complete exhaust for the car. Right now it has a short pipe at the turbo outlet. It is actually relatively quiet with no exhaust system (nice turbo side effect).

I must sign up for youtube and post a video when time permits.

I have used a standard bypass valve off either Rx7 turbo or Supra 3.0L turbo (both are very similar) .
On the intake elbow of turbo inlet drilled an taped fitting for bypass then one in intake pipe before throttle body .
bypass control valve port goes to vacuum tree .

[bhazard]

You *can* run a blowoff but I wouldnt recommend it. Venting metered air can cause a momentary rich condition between shifts and sometimes even cause stalling/stuttering. If you do I would recommend an HKS style that doesnt require adjustment.

[Varn]

I don't think that seat belts were required before 1962. Come on test it!

[Jim-Bob]

Originally Posted by Varn

I don't think that seat belts were required before 1962. Come on test it!

The first seat belt installation in the US was in 1954 by Nash. it was designed to support a sleeping passenger though and not for safety. That would come to be in 1955 (if memory serves) and was done by Ford. However, the cars didn't sell well, so Ford only offered it for one year. The modern 3 point safety belt was designed by Volvo around 1957 or 59 ( doing this from memory so I may be off by a year!) and first installed on their cars around that time. US law did not require 3 point seat belts to be installed as mandatory equipment until 1968. None of those systems were of the modern inertia-reel style and instead required you to tension each piece individually! They were not even connected in a single buckle and you had to snap the two halves together. That didn't change until the early to mid 1970's, around the time of the first cars that had optional airbags. It was an expensive option at the time and first offered by GM. Not many sold and it was withdrawn from the market by 1977. Mercedes Benz was the first to install an airbag as standard equipment in the W126. I want to say it was in 1982 or 83 but am not 100% certain. I know they also offered them as an option in later incarnations of the W123 but am not sure about the year ( the W123 was replaced in 1985). As for ABS, I believe it was Chrysler that first offered it in the US around 1971 or 72. Less than 200 people opted for the Kelsey-Hayes designed system and so it did not last long on the market.

[amcpacer]

Yesterday i drove the car and took a video! The seat belts finally arrived, I just need to install them later today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lz1kibVAPV0

The car runs great! The car has quite a lot of power! It definitely accelerates better than the V8 did. I replaced all of the ball joints and tie rod ends so the steering has almost no slop.

Some issues that need to be worked out are: The engine transmits too much vibration to the car. Apparently those V8 dodge truck engine mounts are way too stiff for the lighter I4. I may try drilling a few holes in the rubber to promote more articulation of the mount. If that does not work I will modify the mount to accept the larger factory Ford thunderbird mount.

The 8.00-14 bias ply tires are terrible! They are very tall and thin. They do not seem to grip very well. I examined the tire after doing some careful left right rapid turns in a parking lot and observed the tire to flex and roll inward. I should take a video of this! They also seem to follow semi parallel groves in the pavement. I will try and sell them to someone looking to be 50's era correct. I must find a good set of radials to install and perform this white wall treatment: How to make wide white wall with Krylon Fusion - The VolksRodders Forum
What is a good tire? I have used Falken ziex-912 on other cars and had excellent results. I want to go to a smaller diameter tire at the same time which leads to the next issue.
Starting off in first gear on a hill requires a little bit too much clutch slipping. Also 5th gear at 50mph drops the engine to lower than idle speeds. Around 60mph 5th gear starts to become usable as the low RPM shuddering fades off. This means 3.1:1 differential ratio is slightly deficient in gear reduction. Also the speedometer reads about 12mph slower than my actual GPS verified speed. I think the solution to the situation is to get smaller diameter tires and keep the 3.1:1 differential. The question is how much smaller of a tire? I measured the tire and found it to be about 70cm tall. If I could find a smaller diameter radial it would fix the speedometer issue, make 5th gear useable at 55mph, and make starting off on a hill easier. I found a tire size calculator at Tire Size Calculator - tire & wheel plus sizing
I put in 225/75-14 as the original size since they did not have 8.00-14 and 185/60-14 as the alternate size. The calculator said it would be a diameter change of 16.65%. Does this sound like a good idea? Would tire rolling resistance suffer by going to a smaller radial?

The front was still sitting up too high so I used an oxy acetylene torch to selectively add many thousands of calories into the bottom three coils on each side. I carefully wrapped the rest of the springs with water soaked rags to help isolate heat transfer. The car is now perfectly level.

[usergone]

I would have to agree with the general consensus (and frank lee) that the most important safety feature of a car is the driver. As far as Frank's question, I would say that no, driving a new car doesn't mean that you don't have to be as careful, it just means that you have lower stakes than when driving an old car. You have people on motorcycles who have never crashed, but you also have people who drive a mercedes and die in a collision. Bottom line: don't be an idiot (but saying that here is preaching to the choir, most of us invest in a car until it dies).

Cool idea for lowering the front of the car! I don't think I would have thought of that.

Something else to consider with the smaller radials is that they will lower the car slightly - only a few cm, but anything is something. I think that changing the overall ratio to get you into 5th gear sooner would offset the (slightly?) higher RR

If you don't want to change the rear end ratio or the transmission's ratios, tires are the way to go. They are also a little cheaper than swapping gears, and are easier to change out if you don't like them.

I have noticed that my turbo really breaks up the sound of the engine at idle, too, even with my behemoth engine and straight pipe. It will still let you hear it once you start pushing it, though.

Once you get some FE figures, you aughtta take it to car shows and put "X MPG" in the window and wait for the barrage of questions

[Varn]

Nice conversion, Cute daughter. Where is the snow? Your tire choice sounds pretty good. considering the torque curve of the engine. Is there anything that you can do easily to lower the powerband? At any rate this is not the kind of a car that you are going to be doing the turns hard in.