4 cylinder cars?

[art leong]

Rob I got the 88 motor whacked for my runs at Englishtown. And remember the 88 turbo 1 came with the mitsubishi turbo not the garret like the 87's
It really doesn't matter if you are not trying to run a week under.

[Joe Toller]

I can't wait to see the looks on the peoples faces up here at home when I drag the thing out and start running it! My home track is nothing but old-school bracket stuff.

[Harry 6674]

In my experience with the cosworth vega the bottom ends won't hold up to a well built top end. They are pretty weak considering the rpms you would need.There are parts available but they wouldn't be legal in a stocker.

[Rob Lloyd]

Originally Posted by art leong

Rob I got the 88 motor whacked for my runs at Englishtown. And remember the 88 turbo 1 came with the mitsubishi turbo not the garret like the 87's
It really doesn't matter if you are not trying to run a week under.

I didn't realize it had ever been hit. Well, it's still seems to be the softest engine factor for the turbo cars. Well, maybe the log intake cars are softer, but they also have a whole lot less potential.

Yep, from the deck up, the 88 T1 is just like the 89 T1 (mitsu turbo, roller cam, 1-pc intake) and from the deck down just like the early 2.2 T1. In a Shadow/Sundance, it would be a strong combination.

One question Art - did you ever have to tech that combo? The blueprint specs are confusing. NHRA lists the log intake manifold P/N, which is not correct.

[art leong]

Originally Posted by Rob Lloyd

I didn't realize it had ever been hit. Well, it's still seems to be the softest engine factor for the turbo cars. Well, maybe the log intake cars are softer, but they also have a whole lot less potential.

Yep, from the deck up, the 88 T1 is just like the 89 T1 (mitsu turbo, roller cam, 1-pc intake) and from the deck down just like the early 2.2 T1. In a Shadow/Sundance, it would be a strong combination.

One question Art - did you ever have to tech that combo? The blueprint specs are confusing. NHRA lists the log intake manifold P/N, which is not correct.

Yes they tore me down at Enghishtown for going 1.37 under I knew I would be torn down I showed them the difference in the log manifold. So only the 88 would get the hit. Wesely looked at the differences and agreed with me. but 3 weeks later they factored all the 2.2 turbo 1's from 84 to 88.
there are a couple of typo's in their classification guide, but I wouldn't count on them. They make the rules so it is perfectly okay (in their eyes) to change them. After all nobody, not even the turbo haters can come up with an ahfs factoring number that got me 13 horsepower at once. That was attributed to the "Artie Leong rule". figure out what number it took to move me 2 full classes (actually what it took to get me out of stock eliminator forever)

[Dennis P Chapman]

Art
I get second place for getting 8 hp on the 88 daytona intercooled.

[art leong]

Originally Posted by Dennis P Chapman

Art
I get second place for getting 8 hp on the 88 daytona intercooled.

Yes I remember that Maple Grove right, full 128 car field, and Kenny still wanted number 1.
That was before the AHFS was instituted. That was during the dartboard days. I went quick at Cecil the week before the E'town race and figured it was a done deal. Much to my amazement (after #1 at E'town)
I was told they had no intentions of factoring me, till I ran the 1.37 under there. I truly brought that on myself.

[Dennis P Chapman]

Yep but it was fun getting those winston hats and the check.

[Sean Kennedy]

I'm eyeing a 1989 plymouth voyager 2.5 turbo on craigslist.

Is that a good pick or has it been hit too hard? It's rated at 175 from 150.

[Rob Lloyd]

The minivan's have been hit, but they'll still go plenty under the index in at least 2 classes...