View Full Version : Computer Question

09-09-2002, 10:21 PM

09-09-2002, 10:42 PM
some say that the 85.5 computer is a little better than the 86.

They are both PE computers, and I believe they are the same part #.

I personally think there is NO difference... but I can't really back that up.

the 205 / 200 HP ratings were all marketing bla bla bla... IMHO

But maybe someone can prove me wrong --:)

09-10-2002, 03:33 PM
I agree Eric.

I have heard there is 1 PSI difference between the 85.5 and the 86, but not having owned either, its just an internet rumor at this point.

My point with bringing that up, is if you know how the BCS works, then you will notice that the difference between 200 and 205 would come down to the T fitting on the turbo.

09-10-2002, 03:39 PM
there's no difference between a 85.5 and a 86 - not one iota bit. Except the "SVO" on the fender and a federal standard 3rd brake light ...or maybe the presence of a production line fluke. The reduction from 205hp to 200hp was a marketing decision.....so a 4cyl turbo wouldn't be making more hp than a 5.0 V8.

The fact that a half year car was even produced was because Ford couldn't wait to get it out the door. Especially once they had their DOT approvals for the headlights and such.

09-12-2002, 12:45 AM
Somewhere in my mass of unorganized literature, I have a book or magazine article that SAID the 85.5 had a couple of differences which was the reason it had the 205 rating. Been a long time since I read that, but if my memory serves me correctly it seems they said something abount the computer being programmed for a longer duty cycle for the injectors.
When I get a chance, I will look for that and report back.

09-12-2002, 01:18 AM
that cant be it. the standard injectors are 100% duty cycle.

Goes back to the "whole lot of bad info out there" about these cars and 2.3 T's in gereral.

Jeez, i just found out my TC is not the color everyone says it is. Everyone says its Light regatta blue and its really Med Shadow Blue. Anyone know where to get Med Shadow blue touch up paint by the way?..............

09-12-2002, 02:00 AM
I heard the difference came from the octane of gas they were using at the time (85.5 used a higher octane)...but that is just what I heard:wall:

09-12-2002, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by pegasus.v.o
they said something abount the computer being programmed for a longer duty cycle for the injectors.

nope....same exact computers in both years.

Originally posted by izzy
I heard the difference came from the octane of gas they were using at the time (85.5 used a higher octane)...

what? where do these rumors start?

again....engine, computer, etc-wise...they are exactly the same. except for the 3rd brake light and svo emblem on the fenders. The rest of the 'rumors' are just that. Ford decided to reduce the advertised HP so it would be the same as the 86 GT EFI 5.0. A marketing ploy. That's it. "Americans" had a different perspective of a 4cyl back then...and if a car company could not make a V8 produce more HP than a 4cyl, then why buy it?

09-18-2002, 02:20 AM
Havent gotten around to looking into what mag said that. probably wont since its wrong and doesnt matter.

But, Bud... You were asking how these rumours get started.

Its by people and magazines saying and writing things which are poorly researched and unsubstanciated.

Funny example.. A friend sent me an article from a Hemmings Rods and Performance. It seems that 2.3s have aluminum heads. LOL!!! Thats a new one on me but hey its right there in black and white right???? LOL!!!

Oh, by the way.. one of the pictures in the article shows a flat top piston next to a 2.3 piston and the caption reads"Ross makes a complete flat top forged piston (left) to replace the stock unit. Normally aspirated 2.3 engines can be updated to a turbo by installing these pistons and drilling an oil return line from the turbocharger in the block."

Hows that for excellence in journalism??LOL!!!

The article list Modern Performance as a source and in one paragraph mentions Nick Mannarino as "one of the countrys top experts on 2.3 performance, and he guided us through this story.

STORY describes it pretty well I think. I think they shouldve had the expert proofread theyre article.

Oh it also mentions there being an all aluminum 2.3 in the new Rangers. Dont know about that, Anyone else???


09-18-2002, 06:27 AM
that last bit is true..

the new rangers have a all allumnimum 2.3

it is a completly different engine than what we have, and most parts won't swap.


09-18-2002, 10:16 AM
I asked a local dealer about the 85.5 and 86 computers, he looked it up and said that there was one letter difference between the two. All the PE's that I have seen had E3A in the part #'s. The 85.5 has a letter J in the last 3 #'s some where. I don't know if that would be part of the hp difference or not ?

09-18-2002, 10:32 AM
I believe that is just the year indicatior in the part number