Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Introductions
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-09-2009, 11:15 PM   #11 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Madison AL
Posts: 1,123

The Geo - '93 Geo Metro
Team Metro
90 day: 45.16 mpg (US)
Thanks: 30
Thanked 40 Times in 37 Posts
You're going to have to keep it <40 maybe 50 mph to get that.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 08-10-2009, 12:18 AM   #12 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
Since you can't swap in a manual, how about swapping in a newer OD transmission from an Escort? I don't know if that's within your zone of comfort.

Aeromodding is a given, obviously, but the question is how far are you willing to go? You can easily make some paddle mirrors, vent the rear of the hood to slightly alter the windshield/hood angle, which also allows better venting in case you wanted to try out a grille block or a belly pan.

Not sure what you're into visually, but smooth wheel covers or rear wheel skirts will help. Check that your rear bumper doesn't create a parachute for air under the car. If it does, you can either trim it out and make a diffuser, or you can just make a tray from the spare tire well to the bottom of the bumper to keep airflow from getting up into the pocket that the bumper creates.

Tire spats, combined with at least outer side skirts, possibly a second set of side skirts mounted inboard of the first set to isolate underbody flow and keep air from splitting around the back tires.

Lowering the car will get you closer to the result of a belly pan without actually having one, if you're not into that kind of modification. Check/adjust your brakes, make sure they're not dragging at all.

If you want more power from an exhaust mod, and you already know that the 2.3 was a Torque Monster (LOL), you'd want to figure out what size of pipe is necessary to aid low-RPM flow at high throttle angles. If I had to give an opinion here, I'd say no larger than 2 inch, and probably 1 3/4 to 1 7/8 if you're not going to be revving it up at all.

Any transmission from a 1.6, 1.9, 2.3, 3.0, or 3.2 Ford engine (yes, V6's as well) will fit, if you want to swap the Trans for something with longer/more gears. With the low-end grunt, and a properly running engine, longer gears to take advantage of torque will ultimately help out greatly.
__________________
"ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 02:54 AM   #13 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,741

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,573
Thanked 3,510 Times in 2,197 Posts
I've piddled with exhaust mods and EGR block-off and seriously, didn't find an fe or performance difference. So it's a stock mandrel-bent exhaust on my DD, nice 'n' quiet.

The 2.3 does "lack HP" compared to OHC BUT it doesn't lack torque, and that is where most normals (outside of ricers) live. If you ain't winding it out past 5 grand that OHC isn't doing you much good.

bgd the "slob" part of Tempos is that dang automatic tranny. The 5speeds give your vaunted subie a run for their money, goll dang ol' 3 foot hermaphrodites notwithstanding.

P.S. I have one that's lowered, no fe difference but I do like the look and it seems to corner with more confidence.

P.S. I've also piddled with that airbox intake hose; yes it sure does look restrictive but deleting it did me no good whatsoever. Uh huh, stock one back on there.

One thing I did do was radius that sharp transition in the airbox lid right before the MAF. Did it improve anything? I don't know, but it makes me feel good.
__________________



Last edited by Frank Lee; 08-10-2009 at 03:09 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 02:59 AM   #14 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
I've piddled with exhaust mods and EGR block-off and seriously, didn't find an fe or performance difference. So it's a stock mandrel-bent exhaust on my DD, nice 'n' quiet.

The 2.3 does "lack HP" compared to OHC BUT it doesn't lack torque, and that is where most normals (outside of ricers) live. If you ain't winding it out past 5 grand that OHC isn't doing you much good.

bgd the "slob" part of Tempos is that dang automatic tranny. The 5speeds give your vaunted subie a run for their money, goll dang ol' 3 foot hermaphrodites notwithstanding.
I can personally vouch for this... the 5 speed swap really wakes the car up and makes it just that much more lively. Now if only that damn shift linkage wasn't so loose. (I fixed it with a Honda linkage... never did a write up or anything on it though... damn it all.)

OP - Is manual valve body an option?
__________________
"ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 07:50 PM   #15 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Offroadford4x4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New Cumberland, Pa
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I don't think they make a manual VB for the stock trans, though I have heard there is a shift kit avail.

As for swapping in an auto with more gears, I know there are some out there that will bolt up, but the reason Ford did not put them in there is that they just don't fit. The Tempo shares the same front platform, cradle, suspension, etc, as the 1st gen escort. which to the best of my knowledge never had an OD auto either due to size restraints.

As for the aeromodding, I'm willing to do somethings, but overall want to retain the stocksih look to the car. I don't want any of the huge fairings and such I've seen on some of the cars on here. I don't doubt they work, just I don't care for the look. I'm willing to try some things like air dams, rear difuser, tire spats and so on. Basically things you won't really see much of with out really looking. Can't really block the grill anymore than it already is. factory there isn't much air getting through there anyhow. I'd love to lower it, but I don't have the $$$ for custom springs or new stock spring to cut down.

Frank, how did you lower your car? Any pics of it?
__________________
1996 F150 4x4, My Daily Driver, 8 MPG
2002 Escape 4x4, Wife' Daily Driver, 18 MPG
1993 Tempo 2.3, Soon To Be My DD, in rebuild process, Unknown MPG (estimated 24 mpg)
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 08:04 PM   #16 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Offroadford4x4 View Post
I don't think they make a manual VB for the stock trans, though I have heard there is a shift kit avail.

As for swapping in an auto with more gears, I know there are some out there that will bolt up, but the reason Ford did not put them in there is that they just don't fit. The Tempo shares the same front platform, cradle, suspension, etc, as the 1st gen escort. which to the best of my knowledge never had an OD auto either due to size restraints.

As for the aeromodding, I'm willing to do somethings, but overall want to retain the stocksih look to the car. I don't want any of the huge fairings and such I've seen on some of the cars on here. I don't doubt they work, just I don't care for the look. I'm willing to try some things like air dams, rear difuser, tire spats and so on. Basically things you won't really see much of with out really looking. Can't really block the grill anymore than it already is. factory there isn't much air getting through there anyhow. I'd love to lower it, but I don't have the $$$ for custom springs or new stock spring to cut down.

Frank, how did you lower your car? Any pics of it?
"They" don't make one, but you can. There's a walkthrough for it somewhere on the interwebs... or you can go to FEOA.

Yes, the Tempo/Topaz share a platform with 1st and 2nd gen 'Scorts, and they also came OEM with 3.0's in them, which fit less than snugly in a Taurus front end. Trust me: Just about any OD 1.9L Tranny will fit in there - there's room. You can actually get the transmission from a ZX2 and control it manually, since it's electronic, not hydraulic. Obviously, this is probably a stretch, since your wife won't use a manual transmission, and without installing the TCU, you'd have to control it manually. Tygen1 from here did the manual controlled setup, but yours would have to be a little different.

I do believe that Escorts up to '96 still had hydraulic transmissions, though I could be wrong, and I believe they had OD ratios as well.

I can understand not liking the look of major aeromods - I don't like some of them either.

If you were into a complete engine swap, a 1.9 HO swap might get you closer to where you want to be, but that's probably a moot option as well.
__________________
"ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 08:29 PM   #17 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Madison AL
Posts: 1,123

The Geo - '93 Geo Metro
Team Metro
90 day: 45.16 mpg (US)
Thanks: 30
Thanked 40 Times in 37 Posts
Time for a new wife.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 09:43 PM   #18 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Offroadford4x4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New Cumberland, Pa
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
New wife, I'll keep this one cause she lets me play with and build cars and trucks. And she even helps time to time.



A trans swap I guess could be an option down the road once more funds are available. As far as a motor swap, I just finished that in this car about 2 weeks ago only I put in another 2.3, just with 130,000 less miles on it. also swapped in the low mile trans too. Just did it all as a whole.

__________________
1996 F150 4x4, My Daily Driver, 8 MPG
2002 Escape 4x4, Wife' Daily Driver, 18 MPG
1993 Tempo 2.3, Soon To Be My DD, in rebuild process, Unknown MPG (estimated 24 mpg)
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 10:28 PM   #19 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Madison AL
Posts: 1,123

The Geo - '93 Geo Metro
Team Metro
90 day: 45.16 mpg (US)
Thanks: 30
Thanked 40 Times in 37 Posts
I was just kidding about the wife.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2009, 11:47 PM   #20 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,741

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,573
Thanked 3,510 Times in 2,197 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Offroadford4x4 View Post
after the truck is done, than I will pull the exhaust, gut the cat out and find a better flowing muffler (not a fart cannon from some ricer). I will also look into the EGR delete, along with making my own highflow cold air intake which will probably require turning or relocating the battery so I can put a larger intake into the fender. I'm also going to look into insulating the intake manifold somehow since it's on top of the exhaust manifold. I'm sure that heat transfer does nothing to help economy or performance. I'll also be tearing down the original motor and looking over things like the cyl head to see where improvements could be made such as the bowls behind the valves and how well the ports match the manifolds. if I can increase the flow, I can increase the overall volumetric efficiency of the engine gaining both more power, and better economy (so long as I keep my foot outa it).

I'm not really shooting for major gains, but I would like to see an average of around 30-35 mpg combined driving while retaining the auto trans.
I can tell you with a very high degree of certainty that gutting the cat will not help anything at all unless it is a shot, plugged up cat- and I've never seen one of those. Don't go there.

EGR block off: go ahead and experiment; I have. Didn't help anything. If the system is functioning properly then "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"!

Same with cold air intake. Try it and let us know what it did. I removed the "restrictive looking" airbox intake and saw no gains.

Re: warm intake manifold: well if we are driving for economy that's a good thing I would think. It's not like it gets blazing hot anyway.

Port match- go for it. I've done it on one of my '84s (carb) but not on the '94. Remember if it is at anything less than WOT it probably isn't going to do anything as the throttle blade itself is the big gorilla restriction in the room. And if you're driving for econo on any particular tankful it will not see any WOT at all.

So then when everything's running right and without a bunch of do-nothing mods it should return up to 30-33 on good tanks. But not every tank unless you have better driving conditions (no extreme winter).

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com