1988 merkur xr4ti

[capri1979]

are these the same as 88 tc engines? same trans (t5 and hydraulic clutch setup?)

[Davis]

no they have a t-9 which is crap apparently and the clutch is a cable setup i think.

[Sevensecondsuv]

More or less. The 88 tc engines had a larger VAM (vane air flow meter) and an intercooler, as well as the ECM (computer) to match the larger VAM and an intake air temp sensor since it was intercooled. The XR4Ti had the same engine with a small VAM, no intercooler, and no intake air temp sensor, as well as a different ECM. The difference in electronics and intercooling puts the tc's engine at about 205 HP vs. the XR4Ti's 175 HP.

Other than that the 87-88 tc engines have a really small IHI turbo that allows the engine to make boost at low RPMs but really becomes a drag with much over 200 HP. The XR4Ti's, and older TC's had larger Garrett T3 turbos that didn't spool as quick but don't limit power pontential nearly as soon as the IHI's.

So basically the best swap parts are the 87-88 tc electronics with a T3 turbo from an XR4Ti or older tc. Unless the engine is going in a 4x4 and all you want is 200 HP, then the IHI turbo might be a better bet.

[capri1979]

thanks for the help! i would like to get the intercooled setup on the 87-88 tc (or a svo setup, but doubt i can find that) i think i found another stock ranger 5spd for cheap, the write here says they can handle 200hp, but not more.

[Sevensecondsuv]

It depends which ranger 5-speed you're talking about. The early five speeds (88 down) weren't that great. The 1989+ M5OD will handle any reasonable 2.3 turbo so long as you upgrade the clutch and don't go around side-stepping the clutch pedal with the engine at 5 grand. I've been running the M5OD my ranger came with on my 2.3 turbo for a while now. It had lots of miles on it when I swapped the new motor in along with a centerforce dual friction clutch and a resurfaced flywheel. It's been great for me. It holds 17 PSI (probably close to 300 ft-lbs) without and sign of clutch slippage. The tranny itself is showing no signs of wearing out faster from the extra power after 15000 miles behind the turbo engine.

Unless you're building a 300+ HP motor I'd say just stick with the M5OD if that's what your truck has. The T-5 from a turbocoupe really isn't any huge upgrade in strength except that you've got more clutch options and the input shaft is supposedly stronger so it can withstand high rpm/boost clutch popping better than a M5OD. If you need a tranny stronger than an M5OD, start looking for the 2.3 C4 bellhousing from a pinto and get a C4 built. Or you could get the small block trans adaptor from www.stinger-performance.com and run any ford auto of your choice, such as an AOD, 4R70W, E4OD, etc. By the time you're making that much power you'll want an auto anyways, because the engine will be powering through the gears faster than you can shift.

[sycophuk]

o.k. so i got a merkur turbo and manifold,valve,etc,etc. well i got my 15yr daughter a 63 ranchero we been workin on it. the car is to beat to ever be a resto queen. great as a first learner guinea pig. i would like to put the turbo on the i6 any body have clues, oh and we decided to cal top it also(removeable roof) like we used to do with the mini's in the late 80's

[Sevensecondsuv]

Carbed turbo's are "interesting". It can be done and work well, but it's a heck of a lot harder to do than EFI. Those straight sixes really just become huge torque monsters with a turbo. I've seen a few 300s (the 240's big brother) pushing about 10 psi. They barely made 200 horsepower but they put well over 400 ft-lbs to the ground. I'm not sure that's the kind of engine you want in a car.

[ILLEGALCONCEPTS]

Check this out:

http://www.mustangmonthly.com/techar...ide/index.html

That should give you some ideas!

James