Need advice-again

[lugbolt]

Dilemma! Major one.

I sent my daily driver to paint shop Dec 2020, never got nothing done to it. 17 Dec 2021 I picked it up and the day after another shop asked if he could do it, and the owner is a friend of my boss-and my boss helped me out with it. I'm blessed. Anyway, car's home now and back in color again rather than multi-colored like it was.

While it was in paint, in Feb 2021 I bought a used 2019 Mustang Ecoboost Premium. Nothing special, 10 speed auto. Nice car, and I like it for what I need it for.

The painted car is a 1993 Mustang, notchback coupe. It is an original 2.3L 4 cylinder car of which I have swapped in a 2.3L 4 cylinder TURBO engine. It is an original SVO 2.3. 5 speed manual. 3.73 rear gear. It, too, is a nice car (for it's day) and I like driving it. Puts a smile on my face every time I'm in it! It really is, well, FUN.

On the marketplace, I figure the 93 is worth maybe $8000 at the most. It's nice but it's not show quality and I wouldn't try to sell it that way.

The 2019, I paid $20k even for it and owe exactly $17,100 which I can pay off anytime should I decide to.

Here is the dilemma. I like both cars. I can't keep but one. The '19, Vroom offered me $26,100 to buy it. That's $6100 more than I paid for it and leaves me with a cash amount of $9000 leftover should I sell it. If I sell it, I'll be debt free (100%).

Or, sell the '93 and pay the '19 way down and probably just pay it off with some 'boot' money.

What do you think? Sell the '93 or sell the Ecoboost?

 

[Fordtech86]

Sell the 19

 

[jimh406]

Sounds like you aren't driving either one as a DD, so keep whichever you want. I think I'd sell the '19.

Just curious though, you should find out what your 93 might bring, and maybe sell both.

I have an '07 Convertible GT, manual, 4.6 and a few other things like lowered etc. My issue is I barely drive it. Like you, it puts a smile on my face. Not the fastest car out there, but lowered and tuned, it's a lot of fun. I'm considering selling it. It's got about 40K miles on it. It's likely worth more to me than anyone else.

 

[DustyRusty]

Sell the 2019 before the market drops like a stone as soon as the chips become plentiful and the showrooms are again full of new cars.

 

[NCL4701]

I’m with Dusty Rusty. Sell the 19. Unlikely you’ll ever get more for it than you will right now. If you want another toy later, pick up something else when prices aren’t so crazy.

That and if you can be 100% debt free that would be a significant bonus for me. Maybe not a big deal to you as it sounds like the debt is burdening you substantially. I’m just not a fan of personal debt when it’s avoidable. Business debt often makes economic sense. Personal debt that’s avoidable, not so much.

 

[GreensvilleJay]

sell the 19 for sure, though I can't figure out how you make 9K profit when you say it's $6K over what you paid for it.....
actually, I'd sell them both and buy a real nice '67..

 

[mikester]

$8K on a '93? Yikes, soon it will cost $1,000.00 to buy a loaf of bread.

Don't sell anything because your cash is worthless.

 

[DustyRusty]

$8K on a '93? Yikes, soon it will cost $1,000.00 to buy a loaf of bread.

Don't sell anything because your cash is worthless.

Cash isn't worthless, but in inflationary times, cash sitting idle loses purchasing power. Never fall in love with something that can't love you back. A car is a good example of something that can't love you back. Some cars can appreciate in value, but a 1993 or a 2019 car will not appreciate in value for decades. The fastest appreciating cars are the muscle cars of the 1960s, and even those are destined to lose value as the population that loves those cars ages, and even those cars have to be in pristine condition to be marketable at a high dollar amount. Sell the cars, invest the money wisely in high-rated bonds and get some interest on your money.

 

[lugbolt]

$8K on a '93? Yikes, soon it will cost $1,000.00 to buy a loaf of bread.

I also have a 1992 Mustang GT. It is nicer. I've been offered $18K for it and almost sold it on the spot. BUT, I'm emotionally attached to it and couldn't let it go. There is a pretty good following for the 85-93 Mustangs. Notchbacks bring a little more than hatchback/GT's but only if they are V8's and my 93 is not a V8. That's why I figure I can get $8000 but probably not much more and even at 8k it'll take a minute to sell. What it does have going for it is that it's fairly nice, comfortable, and I've done some tasteful mods to it that accentuate handling and comforts. Perfect A/C and heat, added bluetooth, backup camera, homelink mirror, and a few other things that make it "more modern". Also, it's a factory Royal Blue single-tone color which as I understand, were only 65 made in that color in 1993 with this trim level. I'd say rare but not everyone sees it that way. Manual roll-up windows and manual locks. Basically it is the lightest 93 Mustang that was made--something that many folks kinda want if they are looking for a spirited daily driver, which is exactly why I made it the way I did. Tasteful mods, but not your typical 1990's stripped down street rod.

My 93 notchback, before I had it painted I have had some folks offer me $4,000 for it as a roller (if I pull the 2.3L engine and 5 speed transmission out). That's about what coupe rollers go for if they're anywhere close to decent. Anywhere North of about Missouri/Arkansas border and from the East coast westward to, say, Idaho, everything rusts out in short order. So finding a rust-free fox body coupe is getting harder--and there are people that will pay VERY good money for them, as long as they are V8's. Seems like nobody wants a 4 cylinder. And with that, there are VERY VERY few 4 cylinder fox body cars that are still driven. If you've ever driven one, you'll remember and know why. The pre 1990 models didn't even have 100hp, I think they were about 90hp if I remember right. The 90-93's had 112hp. They were dangerously slow. But it was the exact same engine block as the 84-85-85.5-86 Mustang SVO, and the Merkur XR4Ti, Thunderbird Turbocoupe--all same engine, so the SVO turbo 2.3 bolts right in and with little following, parts are free (I had a guy pay me to take a bunch of his turbo 2.3 stuff...). So I swapped in the computer, did a couple wiring changes, built the engine and off it went. It is a hoot. Turbo lag is severe enough for a non-enthusiast to hate it, but to the rest of us, it's is, well, a hoot. With the 5 speed trans, you can lug the engine from 1000rpm to about 2200 and it might make 50hp at the most. If you keep your foot flat on the floor between 1000 and 2200 it is painfully slow. From 2200 to 2500 it gains about 200 more horsepower, it is honestly a seat of the pants kick that holds from 2500 or so to 6000. Kinda fun. Not really fast per say, but a lot of fun. Like an old 2 stroke dirt bike except you don't have to worry about wheelie, just tire spin.

 

[Daren Todd]

I also have a 1992 Mustang GT. It is nicer. I've been offered $18K for it and almost sold it on the spot. BUT, I'm emotionally attached to it and couldn't let it go. There is a pretty good following for the 85-93 Mustangs. Notchbacks bring a little more than hatchback/GT's but only if they are V8's and my 93 is not a V8. That's why I figure I can get $8000 but probably not much more and even at 8k it'll take a minute to sell. What it does have going for it is that it's fairly nice, comfortable, and I've done some tasteful mods to it that accentuate handling and comforts. Perfect A/C and heat, added bluetooth, backup camera, homelink mirror, and a few other things that make it "more modern". Also, it's a factory Royal Blue single-tone color which as I understand, were only 65 made in that color in 1993 with this trim level. I'd say rare but not everyone sees it that way. Manual roll-up windows and manual locks. Basically it is the lightest 93 Mustang that was made--something that many folks kinda want if they are looking for a spirited daily driver, which is exactly why I made it the way I did. Tasteful mods, but not your typical 1990's stripped down street rod.

My 93 notchback, before I had it painted I have had some folks offer me $4,000 for it as a roller (if I pull the 2.3L engine and 5 speed transmission out). That's about what coupe rollers go for if they're anywhere close to decent. Anywhere North of about Missouri/Arkansas border and from the East coast westward to, say, Idaho, everything rusts out in short order. So finding a rust-free fox body coupe is getting harder--and there are people that will pay VERY good money for them, as long as they are V8's. Seems like nobody wants a 4 cylinder. And with that, there are VERY VERY few 4 cylinder fox body cars that are still driven. If you've ever driven one, you'll remember and know why. The pre 1990 models didn't even have 100hp, I think they were about 90hp if I remember right. The 90-93's had 112hp. They were dangerously slow. But it was the exact same engine block as the 84-85-85.5-86 Mustang SVO, and the Merkur XR4Ti, Thunderbird Turbocoupe--all same engine, so the SVO turbo 2.3 bolts right in and with little following, parts are free (I had a guy pay me to take a bunch of his turbo 2.3 stuff...). So I swapped in the computer, did a couple wiring changes, built the engine and off it went. It is a hoot. Turbo lag is severe enough for a non-enthusiast to hate it, but to the rest of us, it's is, well, a hoot. With the 5 speed trans, you can lug the engine from 1000rpm to about 2200 and it might make 50hp at the most. If you keep your foot flat on the floor between 1000 and 2200 it is painfully slow. From 2200 to 2500 it gains about 200 more horsepower, it is honestly a seat of the pants kick that holds from 2500 or so to 6000. Kinda fun. Not really fast per say, but a lot of fun. Like an old 2 stroke dirt bike except you don't have to worry about wheelie, just tire spin.

The 4 banger was the same one that went in the under powered rangers wasn't it??

 

[ve9aa]

Sell the 19...the older car has more soul.

The 19 is worth something RIGHT NOW, but next month, who knows. Could be worth $10k less as chips
come off the assembly line and dealership lots begin filling up again.

A guy at work just traded in a 2013 Kia 4dr sedan (I forget the model) with 193,000kms on it and the dealer
gave him a silly amount for it. I want to say $8500.....for about a $2000 car.
A few months from now you won't be able to give away this kind of car.

 

[hagrid]

The 4 banger was the same one that went in the under powered rangers wasn't it??

AND the ubiquitous Tempo.

 

[Daren Todd]

AND the ubiquitous Tempo.

I never really noticed the under powered 4 banger in moms Mustang, or grams tempo. But they were both automatics. So the gearing may have been different.

My Ford ranger that had it was a manual transmission. I had to keep it pretty close to red lined when going up the mountain I lived on if I wanted to get up the hills sometime this century.

 

[58Ford]

You might be surprised what that notchback will bring. Have a look at yellowbullet.com - huge demand for an unmolested notchback for drag racers. It will get cut up and caged though - so if you care that would suck! It’s no longer original and worth less as a restomod as is right now. It will take a while for Mecums to be interested and likely only as original. Just my 2c. Sell the 19 now while you have positive equity as others have said.

just an FYI - YB is not like here. Real rowdy bunch there. Be warned!

 

[lugbolt]

same basic engine that came in the Pinto, way back when. 2.3L.

It got a bunch of changes made over the years an in 98 (I think) became a 2.5 for a few years.

They are called "Lima" 2.3's, which are different than Mazda 2.3, Honda 2.3, Ford 2.3HSC (Tempo), etc.

There were a bunch of different Lima 2.3's

originally I think they were 78hp or something. Sometime in the 80's they got EFI, and power went up to 88, as I remember. This lasted until about 1990 when they got 4 more spark plugs (8 plugs in a 4 cyl), MAF EFI, and a roller camshaft, those had 112hp I think. The 2.5, had about 120-ish hp. Mind you, these are all naturally aspirated.

In the very early 80's a few Mustangs were made with a turbocharged carbureted 2.3, I think they were about 130hp or something. Still gutless, and problematic. In 83, they got EFI AND turbo. Originally, non-intercooled. The 84 SVO Mustang got an intercooler, power was up to 175hp which lasted to 85 1/2. In mid 85, the SVO's got a little different intercooler, better EFI tuning, slightly larger turbine housing (same compressor), and a different intake manifold, power was up to 205hp which carried through the 86 model year. In 87 the Thunderbird got the same engine but smaller turbo, power was down to I think 200, but it came in a lot quicker with the little bitty IHI turbo. This carried to the 88 model year when the Turbocoupe was ditched. Merkur XR4Ti's also had the turbo Lima 2.3, non-intercooled, most were either 145hp (automatic) or 175hp (stick shift). The higher power rating for the manuals was because the C3 automatic was trash, and would slip at under 200hp. It was absolute junk...

The engine in my little Mustang, is an SVO engine, but with a better front-mounted intercooler, better air filter, and 3" exhaust-and upped the boost from 16 to 20. Fuel pressure is slightly elevated too. It does good. I have had many of them, and they can make good power with more internal mods. Ported head, better rods, more rpm better tuning, they can make 500hp and even more if you really lean on them. I'm happy with what I have and have no need to go faster.

The 2.3HSC (HSC=high swirl combustion as I recall) was a decent engine, so long as it was not overheated and the driver and all passengers were not in a hurry to get anywhere. They were 'extremely' sensitive to fuel quality and ignition timing which was one of their many downfalls. It was taught to me that the 2.3 and 2.5HSC would have combusted it's entire mixture by 15 degrees of crankshaft rotation, which is entirely too quickly-leading to detonation and damage. The HSC design was loosely based on the Thriftpower 200" six cylinder, meaning it was cam-in-block (OHV). THe 2.3 LIMA (including turbo, and the later 2.5L) were belt driven single overhead cam.

The Lima's were pretty good engines, without a turbo they were absolutely gutless. The stocker that was in my 93 was ~112hp. But you know, the car wasn't heavy like cars today are, so it wasn't horrible, especially with the 5 speed manual. Automatics were just painful to drive. The weird thing, with my stock 112hp 4 cylinder, you could drive it on the floor continually at 80mph on the freeway and it'd get 28-29 mpg. Or you could baby it and it would get 28-29mpg. It simply didn't care. It just got 28 or 29 mpg on the highway, and about 25 in town. Rangers used the same engine and they were even more sluggish, and got a couple less MPG. My turbo version, typical turbo car if you keep your foot out of it, it'll get up close to 30mpg, but that's impossible. I have the larger turbo, and open air filter. I WANT to hear it as any gearhead should. And it sounds sweet as it's winding up. Not loud, but it's certainly audible.

with all that said, now you know why you never hardly see a 4 cylinder fox body Mustang. People who buy Mustangs want power and the 2.3's just didn't have it. They were painfully slow for the 80-something percent of Americans who can't drive a stick shift and those that could, it was still slow-just not "as" slow. it served the purpose, get back and forth from point A to B, and did it reliably, so long as you wasn't in a rush. So, seeing a 4 cylinder fox body, is quite rare now as most of them are converted or cut up into race cars.

The 2.3 Lima's still live in the dirt tracks.....pretty good following. Esslinger makes a ton of stuff for 'em, as does Stinger Performance, Bo-Port, among others.

Here's a turbo version, well it "was" a Lima, I think it's mostly aftermarket stuff.

 

[58Ford]

It also spawned the 2 Ltr used in the ford Ranger here but was used extensively in Europe and Fords Global markets. The ford 2 ltr pinto in the Mk2 Escorts was a really strong performer and could produce similar output to the lotus twin cam versions. The TCs were notorious for expensive repairs. I was getting 200 HP out of worked versions in the late 80s. At that time 200 HP was fast and in a car that light when the competition was a lot of 4dr sedans with V8s pushing 150-175 HP the little escorts were a hoot.

Lots of variants from the Lima!

 

[lugbolt]

Funny, and ironic

I took some scrap metal to the yard earlier. While there I seen where they had a new crusher. The old one gave up the ghost. I mentioned it to the yard guy and he said the pump went bad on it so they just bought a new one rather than fixing the old one (cheaper probably). So I looked at it, and guess what? Powered by a 2.3L Ford Lima. Oddly enough, I spied an RF-E6SE exhaust manifold on it, which led to a straight pipe like a tractor, and then a straight through "tractor style" muffler just shoved onto the end of it and half rusted off. The manifold is a turbo manifold. The RF E6's have a little more meat in them and can be ported nicely, and flow/perform just as good as a tube header. I asked him what they were gonna do with it, he said probably just scrap it. I told him I'd give $50 for the engine and he said you can take the whole thing for that. It followed me home where it sits on the trailer til I can get the engine off of it. It runs perfect. I don't know what else I'll find "in" the engine. May be some sort of special industrial engine that differs slightly from the passenger car 2.3. Who knows. I'm really interested in tearing it apart, maybe find a good oval port head. May just be a turbo head, dunno yet. Dark out and I ain't got time to play with it.

 

[hagrid]

You will find a forged crank, heavy duty con rods, and forged pistons... all adding up to an engine that can run 30psi of boost on E85.

 

[58Ford]

^^. What? No 3/4 race cam? What about the radio? Does it work?

 

[D2Cat]

^^. What? No 3/4 race cam? What about the radio? Does it work?

You need a simile face at the end of your questions as evidence you read the post!