T-bird Supercharger.

I was hanging out with my cousin and he has a 93 t-bird Supercharged. it has the 3.8 v6, and i was thinking would it be possible to put the supercharger from the t-bird on the SOHC of an explorer? it's belt driven and looks like the kits from EE.com, as far as visual goes.. Possible?

Justin

 

[RockyMtnHigh]

I was hanging out with my cousin and he has a 93 t-bird Supercharged. it has the 3.8 v6, and i was thinking would it be possible to put the supercharger from the t-bird on the SOHC of an explorer? it's belt driven and looks like the kits from EE.com, as far as visual goes.. Possible?

Justin

I don't know if you can make that work...I do know that the SouperCouper's had a specially designed 3.8, not the stocker from the Mustang and minivans. It had different heads, crank, rods and pistons, not to mention a fairly hefty air pump that gave it Mustang Cobra (of the day) style performance. The heads had to be ARP'd and failures were high...that's why Ford finally gave up on it and just went with the 5.0 - much the same as the Mustang SVO with the 2.3 Turbo.

You should check out www.moranav6racing.com. Tom Morana may know more about modding Ford V6's for power than Rousch and Penske combined. He has stroker kits, cams and other parts for the Explorer 4.0's. I'm surprised more people do not talk of it here, or maybe I'm just not listening...again

 

[Spdrcer34]

The heads had to be ARP'd and failures were high...that's why Ford finally gave up on it and just went with the 5.0 - much the same as the Mustang SVO with the 2.3 Turbo.

Ford didn't 'give up' on the 3.8L in favor of the 5.0L. On the contrary, the 3.8L (N/A or SC'd) outlived the 5.0L. The last year for the 5.0L in a Mustang was 1995, the Last year for the 5.0L in the `bird was 1993. The last year for the 5.0L in ANY Ford Product was the 2001 Explorer.

The last year for the N/A 3.8L was 2004, in the Mustang. The last year for the SC3.8L was 1995, in the Thunderbird..2 years AFTER they quit putting the 5.0L in them...

Almost every Ford V-6, (90 deg. and 60 deg.) seemed to be more prone to Headgasket failure for whatever reason...

And the fact they started Supercharging the `Birds starting in `89.....it didn't make things any easier on them....

And you need to learn some facts about the SVO program, and the 2.3T....Which car was FASTER? The SVO, or the GT from the same year? AND which got better mileage? Here's a clue...the answer is the same for BOTH.

And as for why don't more people use Tom's parts? Well, they are STILL overpriced and unproven in a 2.5 tonne (I spelled it that way on purpose) Daily Driver. And even if you were able to overcome those 2 HUGE hurdles, how many transmissions will you break before you realize that there is NO WAY to put THAT MUCH power to the ground using the standard array of transmissions available for the 60deg. Ford V-6...

TO ANSWER THE ORIGINAL POST:

Yes it has been done before....There is a whole write up on the build up on the internet somewhere. I have it saved on my computer, but I don't have time to find it right this minute. Very little fab work was required. Making a manifold adapter was the hardest part, and it just required basic MIG welding skills, and a 2x4 steel tube.

Ryan

 

[reserved50]

if you dont want to make a lower intake manifold you can make a bracket above a valve cover or something and bolt the blower there and a manifold bolted to the blower for the inlet and outlet. The lower intake on the supercoupes actually wasnt directly connected to the blower, it was just designed to house the blower under the hood. Check out the very early 5.0 BBK superchargers

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/foru...90-supercharger-work-stock-5-0-eaton-v8-2.jpg

 

[Turdle]

That is one thing I do know about the S/C supercharger-
the compressed air comes out of the top. Unlike most compressors.

 

[RockyMtnHigh]

And you need to learn some facts about the SVO program, and the 2.3T....Which car was FASTER? The SVO, or the GT from the same year? AND which got better mileage? Here's a clue...the answer is the same for BOTH.

And as for why don't more people use Tom's parts? Well, they are STILL overpriced and unproven in a 2.5 tonne (I spelled it that way on purpose) Daily Driver. And even if you were able to overcome those 2 HUGE hurdles, how many transmissions will you break before you realize that there is NO WAY to put THAT MUCH power to the ground using the standard array of transmissions available for the 60deg. Ford V-6...


Ryan

I have owned a few Mustangs over the years, including an 84 SVO, 85 3.8 and an 86 GT Cobra. I bought the SVO and the 86 new and I traded the SVO in for the 86 GT Cobra. I started to autocross the 85 3.8 as a cheap way to keep the racing bug of my youth in check. But with all of the limitations it didn't take long for the mods to start and by it's 10th birthday it was a scraped and welded, dedicated race car. Tom's parts and know how helped that car reach it's potential with the V6 until I had a 5.7 built for it. I guess I came to the same decision as Ford - there is no replacement for displacement and 8 get there easier than 6. I raced that car in Washington state quite a bit...maybe you even saw me run. As far as I know it is still active in SCCA.

You make it sound like Ford just dumped the 5.0. They replaced it over time with the 4.6 mod in various models. The 4.6 mod made it easier to reach the EPA numbers while producing more power than it's pushrod precursor.

Speaking of the 4.6 mod, it's sunny here in the Rockies today. I think I'll fire the 4.6 mod in my GT vert and go for a scoot...maybe I'll learn something about Mustangs while I'm out there :

 

[Spdrcer34]

I don't see anywhere in my post where I make any reference to Ford just 'dumping' the 5.0L. It's quite the opposite actually. Please refer to Paragraph 1 where I gave the 3 different dates, where I indicated the 5.0L was discontinued in 3 different lines spanning across 8 years....

I found the article I was looking for, and I was mistaken on the use of the SuperCoupe's M90. They did use an M90, but it wasn't from a SC. It was from a Buick 3.8L, with the rear inlet.

Ryan

 

[Sams01XplrSprt]

i remember when my parents had an 89 thunderbird it also had the 3.8 liter it was a nice car but sadly some hit it on the passenger side real bad and it was totalled i wish it wasnt totalled it would of been a good project car to work on.

 

[RockyMtnHigh]

i remember when my parents had an 89 thunderbird it also had the 3.8 liter it was a nice car but sadly some hit it on the passenger side real bad and it was totalled i wish it wasnt totalled it would of been a good project car to work on.

Too bad about that T-Bird! The 3.8 was a nice motor, but always a challenge to build after FMS put an end to developement of performance parts.

I always find it best to not get too sentimental or emotional about cars...after all, they are just cars. Just drive 'em, have fun with'em, and when they become the focus of your life, sell 'em

Then buy another...unless someone is willing to pay you to drive theirs!