Once again, the author is misinformed. The only things it has in common with the Ecoboost engine are displacement (2.3l), fuel injection, turbocharging and an intercooler. The SVO motor has roots back to the Pinto in 1974. It was an economy based engine with no powerful aspirations. The intake had strange unequal runners to accommodate a 2 barrel carburetor. They kept the head design for the fuel injected, turbocharged variations from 84-88. It was lipstick on a pig. With aftermarket parts, you could barely crack 300 horsepower. The Ecoboost 2.3L STARTS AT 300 hp.

@@RJMay3 But couldn't you say they thought about the SVO when making the eco? Why did they choose specifically a 2.3l? I don't think they just randomly decided to do a 4 banger. Just like the SVO the eco is very fast for what it is at this current time when compared to other 4 cylinder.

@@RJMay3 buddy of mine has a 1500 HP svo. You can get 400-500 off stock block.

@@bricklayerlzdp9825 The current 2.3 engine is also used in other applications, e.g., Focus RS, Ranger, and Explorer come to mind. Ford along with many other manufacturers tend to practice parts commonality, which means it is less expensive to make cars. To say they were thinking about SVO could be answered a lot of ways. But since SVO-which became SVT in 1993, is long gone, I am fairly certain the only thought of SVO (and SVT) in the designers' minds were simply a memory. The current 2.3 engine does not have the same displacement either. it's actually slightly less displacement. Lima 2.3's werre 2301cc. Ecoboost is 2261cc. They share zero in common, not even the fasteners. the original Pinto 2.3 was built for torque, as much as it's counterproductive (4 cylinder? Torque? LOL!). It gave the driver a feel of power initially It was an economical engine (cheap to make). They are not rev happy like a lot of other brands' 4 cylinders. But it was a stout foundation that lasted a LONG time in stock form. Similar to the old 300 six, properly maintained they'd easily last 300,000 mi+. Turbocharged Lima's in stock form and maintained, would easily last too. But we learned that the Lima's respond great to basic mods-air and exhaust-and increased boost, increasing the engine power to up around 250 easily, and it wasn't designed for it, which led to longevity issues in the long haul. But they're still legendary in my book, and I still own one. Brash, vibrating, noisy thing. A reminder that what we have nowadays is FAR superior in so many ways. Those old Lima's could make a ton of power with the right parts, and they still have a following to this day. Unfortunately the days of "cheap" power from them, are GONE. 300hp was easy in the early part of the millenium. Parts supplier discontinuations have led to internal engine parts' expense hikes, which nowadays it's about as easy and costly to build a 300hp V8 than it is to build a 300hp Lima 2.3.

Oldbmwr100rs ford only made (from memory here maybe off) 4508 84’s of which 250 were in Canada,1515 85’s 19 in Canada,85 1/2 they made roughly 439 and the 86 they made 3382 which is 9,844 in total. These cars are INDEED as you said Rare.

They were supposed to sell 10,000 a year, they didn’t even make that many over the whole three year production

xr4tis weren't intercooled and got mated to a t9 trans that isn't as good as the t5. have one sitting in my driveway, gonna see if installing a new fuel pump will get it to actually run.

They were getting hard to find in the mid 90's because they were not popular new and so many of them got "upgraded" to a 5.0 or were beat like a red headed step child until they died or got wrapped around a large fixed object or became airborne and then slid on their roof for 200 feet. Oh yes and don't forget fire as they had that wonderful Motorcraft alternator pigtail that tended to ignite. I've had one since 1989, my dad bought it new in late '86. Back in the day it was good but you had to choose your battles. Off a dead start you couldn't beat a 5.0, but if you were rolling or could get the bust on a 5.0 they couldn't keep up. Unlike later 5.0 Fox bodies the SVO did not have rev limiters in 4th and 5th gear. As far as the first Fox body with 5 lugs or 4 wheel disc brakes what about the Lincoln Mark VII? After all that's were Ford sourced the brakes for the SVO.

Turbo coupes are easier to find

hot2warm my son drives one daily to school everyday. They are easy to find but most are messed up and take time to get running right.

Got one in my driveway

hot2warm I have one

Your not looking in the right places. Join some svo facebook groups. Cars get crushes all the time because there aren't enough owners willing to put the ffort in to keep them alive.

Me to. 👍

I almost bought an 83 GT Turbo 18 years ago. Guy wanted $1000 and it was in good condition :( The sad part was I had a ford intercooler kit for it. I didn't buy it because I already had an 86 SVO and was a little too poor back then

Didn't know that

Same with my Mercury Capri RS, Turbo but no inter cooler

@@h-guns3336 they made lots of little one off 2.3 turbos. Had some in the 79 pace car, the gt350s, hell even the mclaren foxbody had it, but none were as good as the svo

@@RogerRabbitt Miss my SVO to this day. So easy to modify. You could add 50 horsepower for about $50

Wow I can totally relate to your comment I worked at a car wash back then, also I wasn't old enough to drive the cars back then but we vacuumed and cleaned the glass worked only weekends but for 2 days pay including tips $500-600 easy

Wow wildman

Don't forget the super rare 84-86 Escort GT Turbo (1.6)

Throw in the 84-85 Ltd lx in there too, brother. My favorite car of all time

You forgot the 84-87 Merkur XR4-ti. For those don't 4 door sedan, built by Ford Germany, same 2.3l motor as SVO except bigger turbo, intercooler and different tuning. One was pulling away from me at 130mph one scary night

87/88 Tbird TURBOCOUPE

79-81 T/A's have always been a good looking car. A friend has a White Turbo w/T-tops.

Efrem Williams Very nice! Mine was a metallic blue t-top. She was definitely a gorgeous ol’ girl. Tell your friend to take care of his. 👍

But it had less horsepower than this. That was a cool car though. A friend of mine in high school had one that was solid black with a thin red pin stripe down the side and black leather interior. It handled awesomely.

@@christopherwalker6056 yeah they were super fun on the corners. I had 2 , one for parts. Drove a silver one.

No intercooler on the XR4ti.

neighbor had one but got rid of it last year :(

Sierra Cosworth lite....i think has nothing to do with lotus but anyway. :)

Was it missing the wing? Or was it one of the rare 86 wing delete cars?

I have an 88 Turbo Coupe. I love it.

80s 5.0 Mustang guys love those 87-88 4 lug TCs for their disc brake 8.8s with 3.55 or 3.73 gears already installed. Easy swap

So did the 06 Monte Carlo LT

John smith yeah but it had a 4 Speed auto

Yup

Keith Bjelland gay. Get a v8 🤦‍♂️

The secret 16v 2.3L would dominate the 5.0 🐴

please no more people will know

It's a 7.5

Sadly no. Though I swapped an 8.8 into mine pretty easily.

Nope the 86 5.0 was the first year for the 8.8

They snuck that 2.3 Turbo into several rare Fords.

Bullshit....

Or the turbo coupe thunderbirds...

Or the turbo gt, just a non intercooled svo basically. Or the Merkur xr4ti.

Or the 83-86 Cougar XR7 Turbo

Metpet Garage no it was not the same. It was a regular 2.3 and no inter cooler. Not at all the same.

Clevelands rock.

Mines at 400+ hp lots of work and e85 30lbs of boost

I had an 86. -3" down pipe Blow off valve from the junkyard Larger 87 T-Bird TC intercooler from the junkyard with an 800 cfm fan strapped to it :) Aquarium bleeder valve in the boost reference line to the waste gate (tuned for 18-20 PSI) Ditch the old air box and run a conical K&N filter on a cold air tube straight to the awful vane air meter. I have no idea what power that SVO made but it could run away from most IROC Camaros and Mustang GTs in the mid 90s when I had 92-100 octane gas in it. It weighed 2910 pounds after some weight reduction:) All of that was very cheap to do.

Esslinger made a proper aluminum head and intake for this engine. Expensive then, probably a mint now.

@@RJMay3 We have a ford racing aluminum head for a 2.3. But it's a basket case. Someone tried to modify it before we got it. It would take a lot of money and work to finish it

@@331Grabber was that one of those heads developed for Formula cars? My friend John had a XR4ti that he raced autocross with. He bought the Esslinger setup. I was a V8 guy all the way.

Days Gone for PS4

Yup. The SVO was not faster than the GT. But as a former SVO owner I can tell you adding about 50 horsepower was dead simple on those cars :) Ford put too large a turbo on it and you could safely run about 5 to 7 pounds of additional boost if you had decent high octane gas in it. All you needed was a aquarium air bleeder valve and some patience :)

@@331Grabber I mean, you can mod most any car and make one model quicker than the other, the 302 had plenty of simple mods to add another 50 hp without resorting to turbo or supercharging it as well. The SVO was an interesting car, it was fairly expensive at the time, but was really Fords attempt to go after european cars (BMW) and were more designed for handling and balance vs. straightahead quarter mile times.

jeff jackson from a stand still the svo didn't have the torque to launch better,but from a rolling start it would hang.

@@jeffjackson9679 Yeah. But no 5.0 could pick up 40-50 horsepower for 35 cents like the SVO could :) For about $100 and a trip to the junkyard you could get a lot more. At about the 250 to 270 hp mark you ran out of cheap tricks and had to start doing real mods like exhaust, porting, cams, ect. But you could make them run hard pretty easily. They always had lag due to the T3 being too big. But the top end payoff made the T3 worth it.

I have one in my pinto.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/pbp2fbOWxKiYg30.html

Deadass B! I got a baconeggcheeseonnaroll near that spot

I owned an 1986 SVO. I cannot figure out where all of that extra money in price came from. I know the 4 wheel disk brakes and electronic stuff cost a little more but it wasn't exactly mind blowing even for the time.

@@331Grabber aluminum 5 lug wheels, intercooler, the electronic stuff you talked about, 4 wheel disks, unique front fascia, Hurst shifter, knob and boot, Unique seats, and all the upgraded suspension parts

There are guys pulling 600+.

@@Nickvanscandal on 93 octane? Or E85?

@@easycomeeasygo8901 93+. I'm making 300 now on my 84, but am limited by fuel, 91 is all I can get here. So my timing is pulled a bit. These engines will freaking scream

@@Nickvanscandal thanks for sharing. Maybe you're lucky enough to have E85 where you're at? I don't have E85 close by but I do have 93. So I stick to whatever 93 can make. I'm assuming then that 600 + is on E85.

@@easycomeeasygo8901 I'm in Alaska, no e85...

205 in 1985 and 200 in 1986, not sure about 84

175 hp in 84

Ford had a DOHC head for the Turbo 2.3 in development in 1984-86 for the proposed 1987 SVO. It made 275 HP. Unfortunately the sales flopped and Ford dropped it. You can find pics of the 84 SVO test mule and engine on the internet