• Forum membership has its advantages....

Is Class 3000 Dead ?

Zac Reish

Well-Known Member
I’ve always wanted to lump short wheelbase 4 cylinder cars together into 1 class. A arm buggies should smoke 5 cars. The trophy lites could do well in real rough courses. But 5 cars for whatever reason are always faster. It would be a big fun class. But it will never happen.
 

B. R C Arrow

Well-Known Member
Damn, TL should have worn a mask ! Red Ford what are you doing about bump steer ? What is the HP for the 2.3 ?
330 HP in the 2.3 ecoboost.

There has always been talks of how to make the TLs faster then the utvs, first off thatll never happen on certain tracks, rougher track TL advantage, smoother track UTV advantage. I can however tell you that widening the trucks was not the direction to go to be faster and with the current 2.4l shortage coming the time to explore other engine options was a must. And with the new growing pains in the TL series it seems like it's the perfect time to get these tls fitted with more hp with a new and easily available engine program from Ford. I can't wait till our truck gets done!
 
Last edited:

swiftracing5

Well-Known Member
I’ve always wanted to lump short wheelbase 4 cylinder cars together into 1 class. A arm buggies should smoke 5 cars The trophy lites could do well in real rough courses. But 5 cars for whatever reason are always faster. It would be a big fun class. But it will never happen.
TL has always seemed to be under powered and “under-teched” due to the mefi rule. Not enough power to get On top of bumps that 5 cars can. The geometry of the 5 cars just works. Nimble in smooth and short enough to pop the front end in the big bumps when set up correctly

*didnt mean toot horn*
 

michael.gonzalez

Well-Known Member
TL was only underpowered because they were built too heavy.

Lighten them up and widen them and it should contend with the 5's IMO.

But now 5's and TL's can swap in a 2.3turbo and have fun with the 3000's
 
Hi all
Our new a-arms and tie rod to R&P plate have correct geometry and minimum bump steer. B. R C Arrow has a point, the first attempt to widen the trucks had the wrong geometry and to get the right camber you had WAY to much thread on the rod end exposed in the top a-arm and the lower did not locate the uni-ball properly or fully wrap it making it a week link. However 110 to 150 more horsepower, the turbo low end torque and a 4 inch wider truck is a good time! Ring gear numbers are much better with the Eco-boost, 5.38 instead of 6 plus makes for a much higher top speed.
 

43mod

Well-Known Member
Great. No just make the cob 8 inches bigger in every direction and yiu will get me back ! My utv is roomy compared to a tl
 

michael.gonzalez

Well-Known Member
7200 is a weird class IMO.

A bit stuck between a TL/3000 and a Spec TT.

7200 is similar to 3000 in that it doesn't care where your engine is or if you are IRS/live axle.
 

michael.gonzalez

Well-Known Member
I didn't know that the 2.3 turbo sucks?
Isn't it loosely related to the turbo engine from the Focus RS and the Mustang?

EDIT:
Did a quick search. It seems like the problem is known.
" The most well-known problem for the 2.3L EcoBoost engine is a failed head gasket. Dozens of Ford Focus RS engines had an issue with a leaking head gasket. The reason was the usage of the wrong head gasket belonged to the Ford Mustang engine. This 2.3l EcoBoost engine has a similar design but the coolant passages are different, which requires head gaskets unique to each engine. Also worth noting, that Mustang didn't have the problem with coolant leakage through a head gasket. "
 

Slippery P

Well-Known Member

Slippery P

Well-Known Member
I didn't know that the 2.3 turbo sucks?
Isn't it loosely related to the turbo engine from the Focus RS and the Mustang?

EDIT: Did a quick search. It seems like the problem is known.
" The most well-known problem for the 2.3L EcoBoost engine is a failed head gasket. Dozens of Ford Focus RS engines had an issue with a leaking head gasket. The reason was the usage of the wrong head gasket belonged to the Ford Mustang engine. This 2.3l EcoBoost engine has a similar design but the coolant passages are different, which requires head gaskets unique to each engine. Also worth noting, that Mustang didn't have the problem with coolant leakage through a head gasket. "
6945D3EC-2E68-4135-80AE-F242727CABBF.jpeg

The biggest issue with that engine is circled in red, no exhaust manifold or turbo header due to the exhaust ports being conjoined in the cylinder head. This causes 2 issues, #1 all the heat being backed up into the head causes the head to warp and as a result the head gasket fails. This is an issue in the production cars. #2 taking a production engine and using it as we do in this sport while turning up the boost and trying to get every ounce of power out of it poses a huge tuning issue with this type of cylinder head integrated exhaust. Because now there is no way to accurately trim the fuel curve for each individual cylinder being that you cannot put an 02 sensor and EGT sensor in each exhaust port. So you are relying on a collected average A/F reading from all 4 ports, this means one or more cylinders could be lean or rich and still have an acceptable average A/F ratio. Then parts fly out.
 
Last edited:

Slippery P

Well-Known Member
When tuning an engine on the engine dyno yes, if your engine builder is not doing this I suggest you find a different one.
 
Top