Heat Soak Vs. Weight - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 4 Old 07-08-2011, 08:51 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: GTA
Posts: 156
Heat Soak Vs. Weight

What would be more practical for a street/open lapping car. A 2.3T which will be lighter but have more heat soak, or a 331 n/a which will weigh in heavier than the 2.3T but not have the heat soak of the turbo. Will be going with a good cooling system either way.

johnny2.3 is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 4 Old 07-09-2011, 05:40 AM
Registered User
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 226
Heat soak where? Intercooler or under hood heat? If you run a vented hood, the heat from the turbo shouldn't be an issue. A 2.3L engine is less metal to cool, so the radiator should be up to the task. If you run a front mount, your IAT's should be stable. A 2.3L is a shorter motor, isn't it? Meaning less weight in front of the centerline of the axles. Might be splitting hairs though as the FMIC is farther forward than the additional weight of the larger V8. The N/A engine is simpler and cleaner and I suspect most on this forum would sway you that way, what do you have right now?

'92 Crown Victoria w/SD 5.0 HO, GT40P top end, T5 swap, & bolt ons.

Words of wisdom:
Originally Posted by 91BlueGT View Post
Some girls can take a 15 incher in the A, but there is a good chance they will be wearing diapers for the rest of their life.
Mohater is offline  
post #3 of 4 Old 07-09-2011, 07:03 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: GTA
Posts: 156
right now just an n/a 2.3 mustang, so need to build a motor either way. And I have a 302 engine so open to either methods (331 will be carbed). Biggest concern is too much heat in the engine, and engine bay. I know the turbo will add a lot of heat especially with the boost level it would be run at. But then it will weigh less. Trying to see what people have used and find to be the best compromise.

Last edited by johnny2.3; 07-09-2011 at 07:06 PM.
johnny2.3 is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #4 of 4 Old 07-10-2011, 03:26 PM
Registered User
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 8
I vote for n/a302. Less things to go wrong. Also it sounds better. As far as weight goes, i would run aluminum intake and heads and take the slight extra weight from the iron block (with extra 4 cylinders) so i could power out of the corner better. You may be able to corner better with the weight reduction but it'll make the car harder to drive fast and IMO not as fun.
SGT2417 is offline  
Sponsored Links


Quick Reply

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2010 & 2011 & 2012 & 2013 "Official" WEIGHT LOSS Thread Here! Marc Lounge 747 02-08-2013 12:46 PM
Starter heat soak or something else?? cbibb 5.0/5.8 Engine Tech 25 11-11-2011 08:31 PM
Kenne Bell Heat Soak, and two radiators. Chipperdavis2305 Superchargers 46 01-18-2011 11:10 PM
Heat Soak stangbrain Superchargers 5 12-13-2010 08:50 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome