David Guard said:
>Without *both* rules, wouldn't I still be able to:
>- add (I mean backdate to) a turbo on my '93 Cobra (remember, there > were
turbo Mustangs & SVO is listed on the same line as V8).
Time for some Listers to study up on the thermodynamics of automotive
turbochargers!
Have a $100 bill here that says it can't be done. :)
The SCCA might have let you (before the latest revision to 14.10) but Mr.
Physics wouldn't have.
Add the SVO turbo to the Ford V8, and you'd get to experience first hand the
terrors (OK, so I engage in a *little* hyperbole) of compressor surge,
exhaust backpressure, constant boost, and a continuously open wastegate.
The SVO turbo is about the size of a concrete drill, and just right
(literally) for a 2.3. Can you spell "broken"?
That's leaving aside the engineering problems including manifolding, 'cause
given sufficient motivation, imagination and skill, these things c/b
overcome.
Oh, you say you were going to run *two* SVO turbos. Someone would have to
study up on whether that would have flown under the old rule -- doubt it,
though. :) But Mr. Physics would approve, if you did everything else
right.
Don't even *think* about the turbos or turbomotors from the 79 or 82/83
Mustangs. Those setups had just about everything left off, that should have
been put in a turbocar (the 79s were actually carburetted), including
important features on the turbos themselves.
'Course you could have (and I guess still can) drop in the complete SVO
motor, so long as you've a Fox body (79-93). It's a conversion that makes a
lot of sense in the Pinto, and it's been done a lot because an early model
weighs in at less than 2000 pounds. Different classes, of course. But if
the 2.3TII works in the SVO Mustang, why wouldn't it work well in the 93
Cobra R (lighter -- less filling)?
Richard "have had 'em both (turbosvo and turbopinto) Nichols
rnichol1@san.rr.com
San Diego, California, USA
|