My 89 MKVII may be a fake LSC?

H

HOT ROD LCN

Active LVC Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
Location
Edison
While looking around on this site and LOL ive found info about vin # that determine model types. My # 1lnbm93e2..........., yet it has lsc tags on the dash & the 5.0 w/ dual exhaust. It says 93 is a base model. Was this avail. w/ 5.0? or did someone make this an LSC some time ago. There arent LSC tags behind side glass. Car was probably repainted long ago, hmmm. what makes it an LSC? anyone have info?
 
93 = Mark VII LSC
92 = Mark VII Bill Blass Designer Series

LSC came with 16" tires and alloy wheels, leather, and quick ratio power steering. Bill Blass came with steel wheels and 15" tires (I believe), regular power steering, and cloth or leather upolstery with the BB insignia on it (IIRC).

Your 93 is an LSC.
 
LSC's had the following differences:
-Bolstered sport seats as opposed to the pillowtop version of the BB, unless the sport-delete option was ordered.
-LSC badging and corresponding side trim, where the BB had more chrome trim.
-Analog gauges vs. digital BB gauges
-A higher ratio steering rack (20:1 vs 15:1 for the BB)
-Stiffer air springs than the BB
-16" rims where the BB had 15" rims

As Rick pointed out, you do have an authentic LSC. ;)
 
ILL VII said:
There was no 93 Mark VII.
Click to expand...

No one here is saying otherwise. The reference to 93 is from the VIN, which One_Way stated as indicating LSC while 92 is for a Bill Blass. You will have 9 in the sixth position of your VIN, and either a 2 or a 3 in the seventh position in your VIN, thus making 92 or 93, which has absolutely no bearing on the year of the vehicle.
 
Dont ALL mark vii's come with 5.0's besides the earlier year turbo diesels? Is there a difference between the LSC, and BB 5.0?
 
MarkVIII93 said:
Dont ALL mark vii's come with 5.0's besides the earlier year turbo diesels? Is there a difference between the LSC, and BB 5.0?
Click to expand...

Correct about the 5.0. The difference between the LSC and BB motors varies for different years, but after 1988 they both recieved the same 5.0 H.O. engine.
 
All Mk. VII's were 5.0's. The BB model had the 5.0 used in the 5.0 LX used in the Mustang, while the LSC recieved the 225 HP 5.0 used in the GT
 
1989 Mark 7 said:
All Mk. VII's were 5.0's. The BB model had the 5.0 used in the 5.0 LX used in the Mustang, while the LSC recieved the 225 HP 5.0 used in the GT
Click to expand...

Nope, you forget about the turbo diesel model in 1984-85.
 
So the LSC 88-up has the shiznit powerplant ala mustang GT with the luxury of a lincoln. May Be the epitome of hot rod lincoln in quite a while_(mark 3s)-this is THEE Bargain right now to invest in-lower it and up wheel size Myeah rocky-Hot Rod Lincoln ,See?
 
Lincoln Mark VII ENGINE TYPES
2.4L 149CID/115hp 6 cyl Turbo Diesel, Throttle Body, Electronic Fuel Injection, BMW Styr
5.0L 302CID/140hp 8 cyl Gasoline Throttle Body, Central Fuel Injection, Ford
5.0L 302CID/200hp 8 cyl Gasoline Throttle Body, Sequential Fuel Injection, Ford
5.0L 302CID/225hp 8 cyl Gasoline H.O. (High Output) Throttle Body, Sequential Fuel Injection, Ford
 
OldSchool1 said:
Lincoln Mark VII ENGINE TYPES
2.4L 149CID/115hp 6 cyl Turbo Diesel, Throttle Body, Electronic Fuel Injection, BMW Styr
5.0L 302CID/140hp 8 cyl Gasoline Throttle Body, Central Fuel Injection, Ford
5.0L 302CID/200hp 8 cyl Gasoline Throttle Body, Sequential Fuel Injection, Ford
5.0L 302CID/225hp 8 cyl Gasoline H.O. (High Output) Throttle Body, Sequential Fuel Injection, Ford
Click to expand...

You missed the 180HP LSC version of the CFI. ;)

And your TD engine was made by Steyr, not Styr. :p
 
JoshMcMadMac said:
You missed the 180HP LSC version of the CFI. ;)

And your TD engine was made by Steyr, not Styr. :p
Click to expand...
You'r wrong Josh! I splld it corrctly! I just hav a sticky kyboard!

Dude. I canot find any information (in my own resources) on the 180hp engine. Can you dig up like engine code and firing order and years installed in the Lincoln Mark VII? I'll update my engine schedule page accordingly. Also, if you like dig up the three page shop manual information (21-21-something) on the 180hp and beam it to me, that's cool too because you ~know~ I cannot have too much information.

Thanks.

JD
 
John, the 1985 LSC came with a roller-cam 5.0 that (along with a few other changes) pushed the 140HP base engine to 180HP.

Shame on me, though, as I overlooked the 1986 base model engine that gained 10HP (up to 150HP) from SEFI. Of course 1986 also had the 200HP LSC (same as the GT of the same year) that you mentioned.

I don't have any documentation of this myself, but Sajeev has tidbits on it here: http://blizzard.he.net/~foxbody/mark.html
 
JoshMcMadMac said:
John, the 1985 LSC came with a roller-cam 5.0 that (along with a few other changes) pushed the 140HP base engine to 180HP.

Shame on me, though, as I overlooked the 1986 base model engine that gained 10HP (up to 150HP) from SEFI. Of course 1986 also had the 200HP LSC (same as the GT of the same year) that you mentioned.

I don't have any documentation of this myself, but Sajeev has tidbits on it here: http://blizzard.he.net/~foxbody/mark.html
Click to expand...
Man.
Looks like I have to redo my engine schedule. I need equal facts on five engines:
140hp
150hp
180hp
200hp
225hp
 
Josh, you have the rack ratio backwards. The higher effort rack has a numerically lower gearing. Now, if I remember right, it's a straight 15:1 vs the 20:1 variable ratio. Even the 15:1 rack has too much assist.
 
OldSchool1 said:
Man.
Looks like I have to redo my engine schedule. I need equal facts on five engines:
140hp
150hp
180hp
200hp
225hp
Click to expand...

One of these days, we'll have to discuss Ford's little white lie about 5.0 HO output numbers. And you thought it was hard keeping it straight now...
 
ND4SPDLSC said:
Josh, you have the rack ratio backwards. The higher effort rack has a numerically lower gearing. Now, if I remember right, it's a straight 15:1 vs the 20:1 variable ratio. Even the 15:1 rack has too much assist.
Click to expand...

Correct, it looks like I typed that backwards. Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 343 (members: 0, guests: 343)
Back
Top