|
| Private9 |
|
|||
|
You're fixated with weight and handling, yet you drive a 1992 EB Falcon raised half an inch, with a gas tank in the back, and with 75 series tyres all round.
What drugs are you on? |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Tommeh wrote: One down side with the modular engines is pure size, due to the quadcam set-up. here is a pic comparing the Windsor with a BOSS 4.6...
Imagine the 5.4L...  Wow, massive difference.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Private9 wrote: You're fixated with weight and handling, yet you drive
a 1992 EB Falcon raised half an inch, with a gas tank in the back, and with 75 series tyres all round. What drugs are you on? You've got to make up for it somewhere! Seriously though, the gas tank improves weight distribution and handling, although it's a bit high. I chose an EBII for a number of reasons, it suits my overall purposes well, and why not aim to make it even better? It's raised slightly because i want more ground clearance on rough roads, and the 75 series tyres go with that, and again, that's no reason to not think about ways to make it better. I think the main reason this site exists is because we want to make fords better. Weight distribution and handling are valuable in all cars, not just off road capable cars. That's why bmw and the like place a lot of emphasis on 50:50 or thereabouts weight distribution front to rear. Consider driving around a corner and either its wet or there is a bump or both and you're trying to get the power down, and the falcon rear slips and/or skips to the side. The better the weight distribution the less chance of this happenning.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake Last edited by relaxed_diplomacy on Sun Oct 05, 2008 10:58 am, edited 1 time in total. |
||
| Top | |
||
| Froudey |
|
||
|
all i am reading is blah blah blah etc etc...
the whole v6 into in a falcon is pointless unless you have a plug and play conversion.. in my opinon i would find a high grade jap motor and install that.. the money needed and time and patiance required it would work out better getting some forced induction. And what would be the go with getting it certifided?
_________________ R.I.P Tobias my son. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Froudey wrote: the whole v6 into in a falcon is pointless unless you have a plug and play conversion.. Mass conversions usually start with someone doing something well and everyone else seeing the overall picture and deciding to copy, and soon it becomes easier for everyone because methods and technologies are devised that make it so. Quote: in my opinon i would find a high grade jap motor and install that.. the money needed and time and patiance required it would work out better getting some forced induction. Are you saying one of these would be a plug and play conversion, or would it be as per your first comment, "pointless"? Just a moment ago i read a post of yours in another thread where you said amongst other things that you reckon a holden six might be the go, so maybe your thoughts are in development. If you fitted a V6 with less than say 3.5 litres capacity i agree you would want it to have forced induction, but if you fitted a 4.0 litre motor with 200kW that might be fine for many people. Quote: And what would be the go with getting it certifided?
I don't know exactly, but heaps of people do engine conversions so it must be quite do-able.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake Last edited by relaxed_diplomacy on Sun Oct 05, 2008 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
For those that want to go forced induction a twin turbo V6 would be an
excellent choice. It would provide all the power you want. It would be good for sunday blasts, track racing, drag racing, rallying, in std form good for commuting, and pretty much anything else you can think of. There would be heaps of room in the engine bay for the turbo hardware.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake Last edited by relaxed_diplomacy on Sun Oct 05, 2008 10:33 am, edited 1 time in total. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
A quick search revealed the following on nissan's 3.0L twin turbo V6 as
fitted to the 300ZX, the VG30DETT. This engine is surely smooth enough. http://autospeed.com/A_109870/cms/article.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_VG_engine#VG30DETT http://www.streetimports.com/product_details.asp?id=977 The following link has excellent photo's (look at the unijoint!): http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/90-94-NI ... 0102373219 But i'm not sure this engine has enough power to be worth all the complexity if used in stock form, i think you'd want to boost it. The stock auto version has 210kW and 384Nm and the manual version has 220kW and 384Nm. That's little more performance than the 4.0L V6 naturally aspirated motors fitted to the hilux and pathfinder (and little more than a BA/BF). Another engine to consider if you have tons of cash to throw at things is the TRD supercharged version of the hilux motor, but i think you would get much better bang-for-your-buck by fitting the VG30DETT and boosting it.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake Last edited by relaxed_diplomacy on Sun Oct 05, 2008 11:31 am, edited 5 times in total. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Tommeh wrote: But, in saying that, the 2JZ is about 60kg heavier than the falc I6 with all the turbo gear on, and i'm sure by adding a turbo set- up to your falc, the weight will still be less. Exactly. If you want to reduce weight you need to go a V6, or alloy block, or ideally both. Although a rover V8 would also be good in terms of weight and distribution, even the 4.6L isn't very powerful, and the fuel economy isn't great either. Quote: Btw, Have you done any handling improvements to your EB? I
recommend taking a Turbo falc for a spin, with handling enhancements etc, i'm sure it will change your mind! I don't want this thread to be about my car because i think the V6 idea has merit for all sorts of falcon users.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Here's a link to information about the mitsubishi gto/3000gt motor, the
6G7 "cyclone", another 3.0L twin turbo V6, with more power in later models than the nissan motor, but at a guess it's less available. Don't know about other factors like weight, space, smoothness, efficiency, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_GTO
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Actually the toyota prado engine is the best north-south toyota model, but
even then it isn't as powerful as i thought. Alloy block though. ENGINE Engine type Petrol Engine capacity (cc) 3956 Engine description V6/DOHC/4v Maximum Power 179kW @ 5200rpm Maximum Torque 376Nm @ 3800rpm (Note: Power and Torque test standards differ. Ensure comparisons use same test standard.) Configuration V-formation Valvetrain DOHC Number of valves per cylinder 4v - Variable valve timing Timing Only Fuel system EFI - Fuel type 91 RON ULP Fuel economy ADR 81/01 Test standard - Combined (L/100km) 13.1 4.0L DOHC 24V V6 with Variable Valve Timing with Intelligence (VVT-i), Horsepower: 236hp @ 5200 rpm; Torque: 266 lb.-ft @ 4000 rpm, Aluminum block with aluminum heads, Acoustically Controlled Induction System (ACIS) -- dual stage intake manifold, Compression ratio: 10.0:1, Emissions: LEV II. Ratios: 4.0-liter with 5-speed ECT 1st 3.520 2nd 2.042 3rd 1.400 4th 1.000 5th 0.716 Reverse 3.224 Rear differential ratio/ring gear size (in.) 4x2 3.909/ 9.5\"
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake Last edited by relaxed_diplomacy on Sun Oct 05, 2008 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
The nissan pathfinder/navara 4.0L V6 motor has 198kW at 5600rpm and 385Nm at 4000rpm. Seems kind of peaky, but not sure.
A 190kW alloytech might be a better choice than either of these options, taking all things into account.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake Last edited by relaxed_diplomacy on Sun Oct 05, 2008 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
The 4.6L all alloy pushrod very light range rover V8, a little over 144kg.
168kW at 4750rpm 1995-98 has 380Nm at 3000rpm 1999- has 407Nm at 2600rpm Plenty of bottom end. A cam change would make things nice up high, 200+kW would be a cinch, it's an oversquare design that can actually rev very hard. You could probably fit a distributor if you wanted to go ecu-less and run straight gas, making for a much simpler conversion. Engine Data Engine Type 90 deg pushrod aluminum V8, steel cyl liners, cross bolted main bearings Displacement 3950cc (4.0), 4554 cc (4.6) Bore/Stroke 3.70/2.80 in (4.0), 3.70/3.20 (4.6) Compression Ratio 9.35:1 Power (1995-98) 190 hp (4.0), 225 hp (4.6) @ 4,750 rpm (1999- ) 188 hp (4.0), 222 hp (4.6) @ 4,750 rpm Torque (1995-98) 236 lb-ft (4.0), 280 lb-ft (4.6) @ 3,000 rpm (1999- ) 250 lb-ft @ 3,000 rpm (4.0), 300 lb-ft @ 2,600 rpm (4.6) Engine Management sequential multiport fuel injection; Lucas to 1998, Bosch Motronic 5.2.1 from 1999 Ignition System Distributorless 4 coil direct ignition w/2 knock sensors Alternator 150 amp Fuel Premium Unleaded
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake Last edited by relaxed_diplomacy on Sun Oct 05, 2008 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total. |
||
| Top | |
||
| Nigel |
|
||
|
Didnt get through the whole thread (time), but have you considered either :
1. Ford Escape 3.0 V6, with the Supercharger from the states 2. Mazda CX-7 Turbo 3.5l V6 engine in current Mazda CX7. Both of these engines are fairly direct derivatives of the engine ford is talking up for the new falcons to come. I found the 3.0 a bit peaky towing an escape, but with the S/C it would be about right 
|
||
| Top | |
||
| ebxr82nv |
|
||
|
Forget your nissans, holdens, mitsus, and euro trash if you want to use a motor that has potential use the supra 2j. These motors support 600hp stock and you should be able to get a front cut, have it fitted and running for aroung the 10k mark. They fit without to many probs and are a very safe motor. But as some onehas already said why worry about handling and weight dist. When your car is set up like it is? This is a question you would expect from a kid
_________________ 9/98 AU1 XR6hp-about to retire from the road and be reborn on the race track. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
A while ago i found a site on the internet that gives a list of engine weights, some of which are reproduced below in order of increasing weight. I can't vouch for accuracy.
buick/rover all alloy pushrod V8 144kg ford I6 175kg steel head, less for alloy head version, add for DOHC buick pushrod V6 170kg alloytech dohc V6 170kg 1994 camry all alloy 3.0L V6 1MZFE 182kg volve 3.0L I6 all alloy 182kg jag XJ220 V6 194kg - whack this in your falcon! triumph stag V8 202kg - this should be the same as the buick/rover V8?! lexus dohc V8 213kg bmw M52 3.3,3.5 big six 227kg jag AJ6 4.0L 241kg My conclusion from this is that the SOHC alloy head Ford I6 is actually a relatively light motor, and the DOHC would be light to moderate. To reduce the engine weight a rover V8 or similarly designed V6 or 4cyl would need to be chosen. Otherwise improvements can be made in weight distribution.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 59 guests |
