Mazda MX-6 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

814 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
just thought i would update my title

well i thought this should be a good place to start off with. seems there isent much i can do with a n/a 2litre dohc. so these are my plans, i will be doing over the next few months or so. but 1st let me introduce the tx5, most of yous have seen it and heard it. lol

year: 1993
make: ford
model: telstar tx5 ax
shapde: sed
engine capacity: 2litre
tare weight: 1150
engine: fs

plans i wanna achive.

cold air intake
lsd diff
oil catch can
new suspenion. maybe king springs aswell. at the moment i have dobsin lows.

new door trims
new dash surround
boot install.

injectors cleaned
fuel rail cleaned
tb cleaned
twin canon exhaust

thats all i can think of at the moment, but more will be coming soon.

so here is some pictures of what my car looks like, when i first got it.

then i got the new engine.

6months passed. the car was still the way it is in the first pic.

then i came across the dobson lowering springs.

few weeks later i got these for $300

they are hp 18inch rims with 215/25 diamond back tyres.

i started getting sick of the interior and dash, being dirty and cracked.

i bought, all new dash, carpet with kick panels all for $100.

so the pulling apart begun, with no [fizzle] up along the way. :D

starting to put everthing back togeahter.

end result. new dash and very clean.:D

i bought these rear tail lights of ebay. from a 1995 ford telstar tx5, with the middle garnish for $50. for now they are primed.

bonnet scoop i payed $30


814 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
this is how it looks on the car.

i allso have a volt meter, air/fuel ratio, vacuum gauges installed aswell all up they cost me $150.

pic of them installed in the car

i allso bouaght a lip kit from pick and payless in sydney. it cost me $60. its in great condition, apart from the paint under the skirts.

my subs and amps

current mods are.?
dobsin lows
kyb gr2 gas shocks brand new
pod filter
monza air breather

this is my sybomble.
copyright to me.


1,143 Posts
ditch the bonnet scoop IMO

Oh and LSD is a waste of money. You dont have nor will have enough power to even notice it. Unless you start doing motorsport... Even then its got to be motorkhanas before you would notice it.

but otherwise looking nice!. You should get some spray and fix the bonnet and roof though heh.

892 Posts
Good work for trying to keep the car looking good, there are more things you can do at a finer level to make it better, ie: bushes, oil changes, plugs, gaskets... etc.. props for trying to keeep the car in good shape tho ei,


ERgh... go back and reverse EVERYTHING after and including the bonnet scoop..., forget the cold air intake, LSD, and cams, theyre useless for you, and finnally.. stop dreaming... 1150? yeah right!..

7,061 Posts
1150KG might not be a true weight but it's whats listed for GE model 626's
even now some peoples V6 will just list that

RTA now use the lowest figure

Reason when they change the rules for engine V weight restrictions

It's there to pump you in the arse.

Yeah so what if your VB V8 was 1300Kg it's now 1200Kg so you can't drop in a 454 big block etc

Body kits are - well for some not others

LSD - Well I don't know - I got one - no I got 3 but I got one on my 2L and - okay yeah I know I'm mental.

but Come on guys don't discourage.

Personally I'd say for get Cams etc - Get off your P's and put a big fat puffter on it

then you will need the LSD LOL

or a good source of Coke

814 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
its getting a full re spray and panel beat soon thats a old list i pretty much cut and pasted it from fastfords when i posted it up so i do have to re do the list but i am looking into a f2t engine but just wanna see what others will think if the gearbox out of the 93 will bolt on to it

545 Posts
are those holden rubber floor mats? :O

814 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
because the v6 chews to mouch petrol

Premium Member
3,355 Posts
As I was saying on the w/e the V6 conversion would be easier.....And to be honest I dont think the fuel economy would be a reason I would try to fit an F2T.....

sure it'd be interesting to see an F2T go in.....but it'd be more work, where as a V6 swap would be relatively straight forward with a donor car

Premium Member
422 Posts
Mate, you dont know what you are on about. I have two mates with KL-ZEs and i can guarentee you right now they are getting more fuel efficiency than me. I still have the KL-DE. It comes down to how your engine runs, and the tune you have with it. Im the first to think that ZEs run rich, but they are still running more economically than my POS. Also you do realise what turbod engines do dont you? Dump petrol. Thats right. If you think a ZE is heavy on petrol then you have another thing coming. Besides the extra money you will most likely spend doing the conversion to a F2T and new gearbox and running gear is hardly worth the extra fuel efficiency you claim you will get.

Premium Member
3,096 Posts
Pft. stock.

The F2T's torque is superior to the lowly KL-ZE's higher revs, smoother running and better flowing heads..........:freak:

It's easier and cheaper to make good power with the turbo.........

2,128 Posts
yeah, but that Ze noise :p :p *not hating on the f2t though, id love a turbo wagon, dish chop in the ultimate sleeper :) *

because the v6 chews to mouch petrol
Sorry son, in real world driving i get 9L / 100K out of my ze 626, and got about the same out of my De, and i give her a bit of stick too, i doubt your going to do that much better from the 4, spesh since its pulling around all that weight and having to work harder

7,061 Posts
WOW lets not start another fight over KL VF2T etc goes back ot 1st gen V 2nd gen

And all Wagon owners wil just point out a 10year chassis Run V the shorter era of the other two

Lets look at this logically

What makes are car use more fuel then another

First off weight
2nd of all revs
3rd and most of ALL DRIVER.

because when it comes down to it all POWER = REV X Torque
what is Torque - Torque is MAX CYLINDER FILLING
Max cylinder filling occurs when you maximize the air fuel ratio and this is usually when you peck torque

This is why Car makers have been chasing the FLAT torque curve.
Now none of you KL owners go on and cal lit flat because it ain't

A real flat torque curve GO drive a E55AMG - or a slk230 kompresosr etc. They have true flat torque curves

Even the SAAB's and a new favourit of mine the Volvo S40 engine T5's

So the Car in question is a TX5 2nd gen.

With a FS pulling around 1200Kg proberly more with the add on additions Subs - fancy stuff add driver
your looking at 1300KG's

Now to maximize Fuel useage you need to Maximize torque without reving. Because if you use less revolutions to fill the cylidners to the max you end up with less fuel because each stroke is proving it's best but your not required to make it do it 5000 times minute - EG your not making torque honda style.

So best engine - F2 - N/A - will out do any mazda engine because you can drive it below 2500rpm in traffic = good economy. Please note I mean normal driving speed limit no silly buggers.

But in terms of our CAR - it ends up as the FS- motor.
unfortunatly it lacks t added real long stroke aproach of the F2 and does need more REV's to keep it going along.
But it does work quite well.

Now power wise. I won't bugger around FE DOHC Turbo - will make the most power Across the range.
the KL will make the most top end at an equivlant boost level and build.
Lets take note I am talking a all out build from the ground up.
The extra capacity of the KL will make up for a bit but it will still be on top end car.
The KL turbo being the most logical chocie for the car it self.

But so far what is the best option.

Neither of the 4 options are viable and one is already there.

Turbo the FS - hmmm
install a KL-ZE.
and last of all
but a V6 tx-5/626.

Turboing the Fs is quite good and if turbo charger and overall build of the motor even leaving stock compression and using the right tune and turbo selection.
A motor making approx 200HP at the flywheel is not problem.
The idea being to create a setup where the turbo would come on by 3000rpm at full boost but allowing off boost drivng on the freeway.
This may not give the greatest response overall but will give the best of both worlds.
A capable driver will be able to keep the motor on boost when require and smart driver off the boost when in cruise.
But you would still have enough resposne for drop from 5th to 4th for overtaking on the freeway.

An option - If I owned a GW station - I've looked into it hard. Let me note this woudl have cost me the same as my current wagon with out the respary on my wagon but as I do drive Agressive NOP gearbox would last my ability.

we come down to KL-ZE conversion
Many will tell you how - what's need etc.
The results are if done right.
A factroy fit - 200HP, A more balanced package.
Cons' are it's results are not huge in comparison to turbo but
the PRO's out weight it all.

Being a FWD car and one primarily desgined for the ROAD USE.
The chassis wants a bit more poke but not tyre turning poke.
It wants smooth progressive power.
A KL-zE package in well set up GE or even BA (it's 323 cussin built on the same desgin principles)
With right suspension modifications don't require anything but a competent driver to enjoy the grip - power to redline and ease of driving that can be offered.

Anyone who has driven a import Mx-6 even in auto form will know
Even a BA Astina v6 with thr right suspension setup can feel it wanting just a bit more then the 2.0L KF v6 can offer.

It's a perfect balance because it's what it was desgiend for and even the mazdaspeed engineers at the time knew this.

that last one is logical.
Mainly because, it does in some ways amke the conversion easier but as some have demonstrated you can still do it go from auto 2.0L to 2.5L ZE V6 5 speed manual.

But if your looking for just a bit more go and only slighty fule useage increase it's the logical answer.

Another thing to think about is where you going to use it.
These days is it worth making a car faster - So what you can loose your license quicker.

Maybe think if you just using it at the drags NO2 is your friend.

Oh and the only reason you don't want to modify your FS-DE with n/a mods
the factroy only went ot 98Kw in Aus delivered or US with out turbo
and even in japan it only hit 115kw's or so. That was on high compression with matching fuel -adds cost because one imported = constant hi premium fuel.

But it's not got much further. Because it lacks tow things
Capacity and bore to stroke ratio. Reving it harder produces more problems = more $$$
Then it looses bottom end That is does not have enough capacity to Cover.
Think of it like a old 250 ford straight 6 SOHC 16valve in 3.9 4.1 and 4.L
in a cortina a cammed up 250 with nice carby was weapon with all the other great mods of the 80's. 4.0 and 4.1L they worked okay the 4L capacity hid the less efficent bottom end.
because it was not pull a large load.
Same motor in a Falcon - XD XE XF - different story. EFI helped in the XF.
But the bigger body meant it was 351 or nothing else.
They went hard but a mildy modded version in manual
would eat a cammed up 250 untill it got above 80km/h
It also meant racing in traffic on parramatta road the worked falcon with the big cam hard a lot of trouble keeping it in the right rev zone. Even with shroter ratios.

Oh and fuel consumption - Worked N/As are not as frugal as one would think.

My wagons now 2.0l from 2.2L
My old auto 2.2L still the most frugal engine /capacity I've ever driven.
1 tank over 650km. best they say is 7.8L -highway.

The FE DOHC sucks - why - needs more revs to do the same work.
1 - 20 of 35 Posts