How do they compare to the T-bird Super Coupe?

[Regal GSX]

regalgsx231

Actually, there is a FWD GTP with an M90 that ran an 11.0 last fall with no nitrous. There are also a couple of GTP's in the 10's without nitrous with different power adders, and a bunch in the 11's with the M90. There is also a Regal GS that run's 11.5's, and a Bonneville that runs 11.4's.

On top of all of that, there is a large aftermarket for them. Just to name a few vendors:

www.intense-racing.com
www.zzperformance.com
www.3800performance.com
www.thrashercharged.com
www.pfyc.com

The stock tranny is also not as bad as people make it sound. I currently have a PB of 13.1 on a bone stock tranny, and I will be running high 12's this weds. I have had no signs of tranny slippage or any other problems with it. I also have an M90.

One more thing. The GTP's and GS's have the same hp and torque ratings. I don't know where you got that info, but all 1997-2003 GS's and GTP's had 240 hp stock and 280 lb/ft of torque. In 2004 the GTP's hp was bumped to 260 with the same amount of torue.

On top of all of this, turbo kits are set to come out soon for them. There is already one GTP running 10.3's with a turbo and a couple more in the 11's.

 

[Bluto]

The one odd thing about the GS and the GTP is the GS hits its peak power at 3600 rpm and the GTP hits it at 3200rpm.

 

[Scott Long]

The GTP's and GS's have the same hp and torque ratings. I don't know where you got that info, but all 1997-2003 GS's and GTP's had 240 hp stock and 280 lb/ft of torque.

Are you talking to me? In reference to what, I'm confused, I never quoted hp or torque numbers for either car other than to say the SC even early models makes more torque than a GS/GTP stock.

 

[kshef]

3.8...hands down..no comparison

 

[TRYMY231S]

Originally posted by kshef
3.8...hands down..no comparison

Both the SC and GTP are 3.8's.

 

[kshef]

i was talking about the one and only....not the imposter

 

[TRYMY231S]

Hehe... That's what I was thinking but had to give you a hard time.

 

[TRYMY231S]

Originally posted by Scott Long
Just to clear things up the Thunderbird SC has an intercooled Eaton M90.

Just to clear things up pre '95 SC's had an M62.

 

[Scott Long]

Originally posted by TRYMY231S
Just to clear things up pre '95 SC's had an M62.

1995 was the last year of the SC. Lay down the crack pipe. Its obvious by that statement and the fact you think they have M62 blowers, you know little to nothing about them. Not trying to flame you, but you should realize the fact that the M62 was used on the GM 3.8 series 1 engines. Its a tiny blower with little potential for increased performance. The M90 as I have been learning has a lot of potential when you get into welding and porting the case and then overdriving the rotor speed. Just make sure you have a big ass intercooler because as I'm sure you all know, more boost, more heat. And your non intercooled cars would ping and detonate like crazy if you tried to run 13 psi through them w/o an intercooler. I have heard any more then about 8-9 psi on your cars will cause the computer to retard timing so by running small pullies you aren't really gaining, but rather hurting performance w/o and intercooler.

Where the hell did you get that information? I own 3.... count 1...2....3.... TBird SC's. 2 1990's and 1 1992. They all have eaton M90's. Just because your's is mounted upside down onto your intake manifold and doesn't have a top mounted outlet running into an intercooler and then back into a plenum that is mounted to the opening on the intake manifold doesn't mean that its a different blower on my car.

Go to www.magnumpowers.com and look at the blower port work they do FOR M90 TBIRD BLOWERS. They also do work on M112 blowers for the Lightning and Cobra. I'm sure they could do some awesome performance increases w/ a GS/GTP as well. GM used an M62 not Ford. Since 89 when they started producing the TBIRD SC all the way till its demise in 95 they had M90 blowers. The 94 and 95 SC have a different inlet plenum and a little bigger opening on the rear of the blower plus teflon coated rotors so they make a little more horsepower stock (210 hp 315 tq 89-93, 230 hp 330 tq 94-95.) I will bet you the title to all three of my cars that any year SC has an M90. These aren't series 1 3800 SC'd GM engines here which had M62's on them.

Here is a picture of the engine compartment in the 90 I rebuilt last summer. As you know the nose drives can be changed but its basically the same blower you have just not mounted upside down. Or in GS/GTP view, mine is upside down.

http://www.sccoa.com/member/images/long33.jpg

also if you feel like broadening your horizons, here is some more information about these cars.


http://www.sccoa.com/articles/sfbillhull.php

There is mention of the stock M90 blower..... this car is a 91. We have a bunch of cars in the 11's now, back when this article was written mid to low 13's was the best. We have guys in the high 12's with bolts ons and stock bottom ends. I guess we are going to find the limit of the stock bottom end, one guy recently installed a whipple 1.7L blower and put down 405 rwhp. Should be good for mid to high 11's. An M90 powered SC w/ 393 rwhp ran 11.91 and later the same setup in a different car (totalled the other car in a traffic accident) went 11.12 w/ a 90 shot of nitrous. The car was sold, and I have met the new owner who installed a gear vendors overdrive unit on it but I have yet to hear if it has surpassed the 10.9x mark. I would assume if they shot 150 hp into it it'd run 10.80's at about 125mph.

 

[OverkillGTP]

My previous car was a 1990 SC and my current car is a 98 GTP. Torque wise off the line, they both haul, god bless torque. Horsepower wise, GTP for sure.

The SC can be made very good at high horsepower with better intercooler tuning, a big mother air-air IC, head work and headers/exhaust. If you have a 89-93 with the M62, high hp its a lot tougher, upgrading to the 94-95 M90 is a must.

The GTP by comparison, 300whp is attainable with a cam/head package or an cam/intercooler, or 350whp with all 3. I'm currently at 320whp before the intercooler.

Both cars, once done up, can be made to scream. Both drive exceptionally well too IMHO, I plan to keep my GTP for quite a while and look forward to owning another SC along the way, hopefully as my first 5spd car

 

[Scott Long]

Ok, the 94/95 blower is better for a few reasons. Its has a different inlet plenum, wider opening in the rear, and teflon coated rotors. It also came with a bigger pulley to keep boost the same since its more efficient than AN EARLY M90. They never put an M62 on a Thunderbird SC> There are early m90's, late model m90's, and S-Model M90's which are late model m90's sent back to magnuson for port work. Now magnum powers and a few other companies have found that you can port the early m90's case, weld material to the back of it, port it open in the rear more, and make a new plenum for it, and put a smaller pulley and larger top on and they are making impressive numbers from them we thought we'd never see. The only downfall now is that the early blowers lack the coated rotors. But the Magnaport 2 blower from Magnum Powers (early model M90 w/ port work and new plenum) outflows the later M90 S-model so there isn't much of a disadvantage of having an early model SC.

It just torques my crank that you guys insist the SC had an M62. It never did. I own three, and an active member in 2 clubs, show my car multiple times a year, and go to the track and dyno frequently with other SC owners, and I keep up to date on new mods available for the cars, plus I have been an SC owner going on 6 years now. So don't argue with me that fact that they ALL HAVE M90'S from the FACTORY. Thank you.

 

[Slowpoke]

Yeah this discussion is driving me a bit batty...

#1 All Tbird SC's have an M90
#2 The 89-93 SC's have an Oval inlet M90
#3 The 94-95 have the rectangular inlet M90 with coated rotors

The 94-95 SC's have upgrades such as a widage tray, slightly better rods, slightly higher compresion, the better M90 blower and larger injectors.

Comparing an SC to a GTP you will notice the SC to be a better overall car but out of the box not quicker. Stock for stock an m90 powered GM will slightly outedge an SC from what I have seen..Very slightly...Handling and comfort wise the SC wins hands down.

As far as porting of M90's or M62's for the GM's as for Paul at

Salesbluetonguemotorsports.com

 

[Super Coupe Guy]

Just in case you missed it...

Ford has never produced any vehicle with an M62, only GM. All Thunderbird Supercoupes, from first to last with no reguard for anything have M90s as standard equipment. This is fact, my pal Scott was just trying to have intelligent conversation. Either you wish to annoy him or are just stubornly wrong but that's it.

If it was me I would find a nice SC, I've driven several of both and like the Ford much more.

Vernon

 

[steveX]

WOW...LOL.... It`s the super coupe fight.

I don`t understand why people talk about other people stuff. I think if you want to have a show down built you Owen 3 point 8

alot of people walk around talking about there car run dis and dat. when they never went to the track. just because your car has the same mod`s as someone who run`s 11 or what ever, does`nt mean you`re going to do the same.

WE get a fight ever time, when the BLT smoke the so call fast car (competitor). wining is alway better in a sleeper. your odds are alot better $$$. my god i have build my BLT with other people money. so check me out i am posting, take a picture.

 

[Scott Long]

Whoa there bud, no one is knocking your lesabre t-type. They are cool cars, and I'm sure yours is impressive with the new motor. My friend had a black one back in high school, out of all the rice and stuff we had there, I'd take that black buick over any other FWD car kids had at the time. I have often thought of taking older cars and swapping newer motors into them. Sleeper indeed.

This thread was started asking how does a GS/GTP compare to an SC. Me being a buick enthusiast and an SC owner I felt qualified to share some information about the Thunderbird SC. Obviously the info was needed since everyone who has posted here on the issue is mis-informed about the Ford. I was not here to fight or knock the GTP or GS. My friend Jay has a nice red 97 GTP lowered, 18" wheels, and some bolt ons. Its quick. Nice car too. My friend Tom had a GS and I lost to it with one of my SC's. Still being into muscle cars since I was little I prefer rear wheel drive and therefore I choose the ford. I don't mind that the GTP/GS's are a few tenth's quicker stock for stock. On the street its all about who can hook up better and I know from riding in my friends cars they are difficult to hook up. My 5-speed SC has taken down many GTP's on the street. Probably quicker than a stock one, but even modded ones that spin the tires bad and blotch the launch are in the mirror at 90 mph. Just saying, from a racers perspective, I prefer rwd, so I chose the ford.

I live in MI so they're not practical year round cars. I had snow tires on one of them this winter and still had a bitch of a time getting around. I would have LOVED a GTP. If I ever buy one, I'd go for a black 4-dr GTP or GS and take the badges off of it. I like sleepers too. (I'm putting a 460 big block into an SC, most people that think its a pushover will be unpleasantly surprised.)

 

[Slowpoke]

Hey Steve...Wanna run that lesabre..I got a lil SC fer ya:O)

 

[SCinCA]

Hey, I own a 35th Anniversary SC (its a 90) and its the only one that Ford put the M62 on. This was because they wanted it to be unique.






























lol ok so maybe not.

One of the main reasons Ford made these things so slow (relative to the 3.8 GTP's etc) was because they didnt want it taking sales numbers away from their pony car, the Stang.

You GM folk dont have that problem because no matter what, the LT1 and LS1 will always have more potential than the 5.0 and 4.6 (relatively speaking).

In conclusion, anyone know of a cheap T-Type or GN in the LA area

 

[TRYMY231S]

Originally posted by Scott Long
And your non intercooled cars would ping and detonate like crazy if you tried to run 13 psi through them w/o an intercooler. I have heard any more then about 8-9 psi on your cars will cause the computer to retard timing so by running small pullies you aren't really gaining, but rather hurting performance w/o and intercooler.

I run 15 psi of boost in my GTP w/o an intercooler.

All I know is my friend had a '92 SC and he INSISTS it was an m62.

 

[SCinCA]

Originally posted by TRYMY231S
I run 15 psi of boost in my GTP w/o an intercooler.

All I know is my friend had a '92 SC and he INSISTS it was an m62.

Your friend is wrong.

 

[Scott Long]

Yeah, your friend was a little mis-informed about his car. There is no way in hell you could even put an M62 on the SC unless you made a new manifold.... but why would you waste the money to make a manifold for a downgrade?

15 psi and no IC..... wonder how much timing retard your computer is enforcing at those levels. Are you injecting alcohol to cool that air charge? I could see it maybe with alcohol but not with 93 octane and no IC. You'd be surprised to see how much heat an unported M90 generates at 15 psi.