TTAC Project Car: Getting Down To Business!

Sajeev Mehta
by Sajeev Mehta


Adios Amigo…

Farewell to our Ford Sierra’s reasonably adequate, high compression and emissions free 2-liter Pinto motor because it’s time to visit Lima, Ohio — not Peru — with a bonus question for the truly tech-savvy among the B&B.

There’s a guy named Bo that’s earned quite the reputation in TurboFord-land. I’ve seen his handiwork kicking ass at LeMons races, but was worried after clicking his dead website. Shockingly, I found Bo on eBay; a few emails explaining the stupidity excellence that is TTAC’s chocolate-toned project car, and he was Down With The Brown.

I wanted a roller camshaft swap without resorting to the gutless cams (from a ’90s Ranger) that are easily available in a junkyard. It’s more money, but more bang across the powerband! Bo suggested the torque-savvy, street-friendly “BoPort 2.1” kit: new cam, valves, roller rockers (obviously) and the miscellaneous bits for assembly.

While TTAC’s Ford Sierra won’t be nearly as aggressive as this 2.3 Thunderbird, it has the same cam. The end result will nearly triple the original horsepower figures, with better fuel economy (EFI and an overdrive gearbox) and far better emissions controls. Yes, that means it’s getting a catalytic converter; modern day units flow far more CFM than I will ever need, they are not a restriction.

So let’s take a closer look at the Sierra’s engine.

From the valve springs, retainers and rockers, this is a pretty serious bit of kit.

All machined and ready to go. The block came from a 1985 Thunderbird Turbo with 109,000 easy, stress-free miles mated to an automatic transmission. No surprise that it still had the factory crosshatching in the cylinder bores. The machine work was minimal, a new set of bearings was the biggest expense. The cylinder head was cleaned up a bit and the new valves dropped right in with the roller cam. Done.

The finished product is a thing of beauty. Except we forgot one thing: engine paint!

Bam, son! Chocolate brown engine block for Rio Brown Ford Sierra Ghia!

Along with the color choice, the observant among the B&B may object to overspray. I thought the same, until I talked to the Sierra’s builder. Mr. Brian Pollock, with years of racing experience under his belt, convinced me otherwise: hell, it might even protect things that can rust when there’s no good reason for it!

Now here’s the tough one:

Surprise, surprise! The Merkur parts car from our last update sported these aftermarket fuel injectors. Apparently it was a common replacement/upgrade for Turbo Fords and Buick Grand Nationals back in the day. A bit of googling found this:

Well then! We learn something new every day. And now I have an interesting alternative to the fuel injectors in my 1985 and 1988 Thunderbird donor motors.

So here’s the question: Assuming all injectors are in good working condition (they all ran fine), do you go with the factory FoMoCo pintle-based injectors or these ToMoCo rotary-discs?

Off to you Best and Brightest. This decision is entirely up to you!

Sajeev Mehta
Sajeev Mehta

More by Sajeev Mehta

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 21 comments
  • STRATOS STRATOS on Nov 21, 2015

    Why would anybody with any brain,paint the gasket surfaces,oil filter mount and other engine internals.

    • DenverMike DenverMike on Nov 21, 2015

      Nah, it's easier to wipe the fresh paint from machined surfaces with acetone, than to carefully mask and paper the thing.

  • Art Vandelay Art Vandelay on Nov 23, 2015

    I wonder if the Pinto forum on Facebook would have any interest in the old 2.0.

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
  • Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Next