|
| fordzatmyplace |
|
||
|
stockstandard wrote: bradders wrote: the but the four litres have a smaller bore. you really think it'll be that small? Thought that this didnt sound right. Just checking the numbers - 3.9 bore is 91.9 and stroke is 99.3 4.0 bore is 92.3 and stroke is 99.3 lol thats what i was thinking. the difference in size between the 3.9 and 4.0L is only like 40cc
_________________ ^^^ What He Said
|
||
| Top | |
||
| adrian` |
|
|||
|
what about if you use the rods out of the 3.2l ea, are they shorter with a larger crank or same crank with longer rods? im not sure, i guess how ever long they are, they would probabli be weaker anyway
_________________ I LOVE MY DOG |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| adrian` |
|
|||
|
na never mind about that, i just thought about it and it would have to have a smaller crank. so yea never mind
_________________ I LOVE MY DOG |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| stockstandard |
|
|||
|
3.2's have a smaller crank and longer rods (about 1/2" iirc). these rods with suitable pistons would help a 4.0 rev harder.
_________________ Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| madmax |
|
|||
|
fordzatmyplace wrote: stockstandard wrote: bradders wrote: the but the four litres have a smaller bore. you really think it'll be that small? Thought that this didnt sound right. Just checking the numbers - 3.9 bore is 91.9 and stroke is 99.3 4.0 bore is 92.3 and stroke is 99.3 lol thats what i was thinking. the difference in size between the 3.9 and 4.0L is only like 40cc Thats right, because of rounding Ford market them as 100ml differance when in fact they are not.
_________________
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| adrian` |
|
|||
|
stockstandard wrote: 3.2's have a smaller crank and longer rods (about 1/2" iirc). these rods with suitable pistons would help a 4.0 rev harder.
would they be able to handle the extra pressure? they wouldnt bend or anything like that?
_________________ I LOVE MY DOG |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| muscle_18 |
|
||
|
youve got me thinking
|
||
| Top | |
||
| stockstandard |
|
|||
|
adrian` wrote: stockstandard wrote: 3.2's have a smaller crank and longer rods (about 1/2" iirc). these rods with suitable pistons would help a 4.0 rev harder. would they be able to handle the extra pressure? they wouldnt bend or anything like that? Depends on what you want to do with it. The 3.2 rods a not weak if thats what your asking.
_________________ Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| henry95ef |
|
|||
|
i've heard of people putting 3.2 rods in 4.0 litres to up the compression etc but would it work the other way ie, 4.0 rods in a 3.2 to lower compression for a good turbo set up?
_________________ Skidz are cooooool!
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| stockstandard |
|
|||
|
henry95ef wrote: i've heard of people putting 3.2 rods in 4.0 litres to up the compression etc but would it work the other way ie, 4.0 rods in a 3.2 to lower compression for a good turbo set up?
It doesnt work that way. If you put 3.2 rods into a 4.0 to 'up the compression' the pistons would smash into the head and the engine would be stuffed before it even started. 3.2 rods can be used with pistons with higher pins to reduce rod angles (helps the engine at higher rpm). I doubt the engine would even run with 4.0 rods in a 3.2 (the compression ratio would be F**k low)
_________________ Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 91 guests |
