|
| gogetta |
|
|||
|
whats the weight of the falcon I6 sohc complete?
must be 220kg +
_________________ |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| xcabbi |
|
||
|
edfairmont4.0 wrote: FairmontXR6 wrote: Time to stop fishing mate, I think you've caught more than the bag limit for this type of thread.  (I am assuming that your not serious about a V6 transplant, if you are that desprite, wait for the duratech) Its the "Duraturd" get it right.  +1 For the Duraturd. Its only 18 short months away till we see it in the FG II |
||
| Top | |
||
| GeZza200 |
|
||
|
mate you can put any motor in it, it will still handle like s**t. You have a 1/2" lift kit with stockies and dual fuel. I would get your suspension completely worked over first before even worrying about weight distribution
_________________ EL Futura: CVE head, Wolf V500, ICE Ignition and Coil, 36lb injectors, Walbro 255lb, Paci comps, 3" exhaust, T5, Harrop Truetrac with 3.9s. Now with 198.9rwkw, (~185rwkw and 13.80 @99.1mph) with more power to come |
||
| Top | |
||
| edfairmont4.0 |
|
|||
|
GeZza200 wrote: mate you can put any motor in it, it will still handle like s**t. You have a 1/2" lift kit with stockies and dual fuel. I would get your suspension completely worked over first before even worrying about weight distribution
well said lol
_________________ ED Fairmont, Ghia mock DOHC-T 11.6 @ 118 Trying to get back to the 1/4! |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| ebxr82nv |
|
||
|
I votethis thread gets locked.
_________________ 9/98 AU1 XR6hp-about to retire from the road and be reborn on the race track. |
||
| Top | |
||
| TROYMAN |
|
||
|
I think he is serious?
or he is on a fishing trip lol.. there is another thread where he asked if a commo auto would fit on a 4.0l.. i dont know why? |
||
| Top | |
||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
TROYMAN wrote: I think he is serious?
or he is on a fishing trip lol.. there is another thread where he asked if a commo auto would fit on a 4.0l.. i dont know why? i saw that too. hmm maybe he should just fit a complete commodore driveline into his falcon. 
|
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
In this and other threads i have already given information that answers most of the criticisms and comments found in above posts. Some people are being malicious.
I like I6's and falcons, indeed, i have four of them, and no other cars. I am in the process of finishing putting an AU I6 into an EBII, a falcon that i have put a fair amount of work into, and i very much figure i'll be happy with it. That doesn't mean i will shut off my mind from ever exploring new ideas that might or might not lead to a way to improve a falcon. To try to shut off such explorations is anti-falcon, in my view.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
gogetta wrote: whats the weight of the falcon I6 sohc complete?
must be 220kg + I'm not sure. The information i sourced the weights i gave earlier in this thread from says at the top; "You'll sometimes see more than one weight listed. Some weights are for just a long block, some are complete and ready to run, and of course everything in between. Some engines varied in weight during their production runs - for example, some later Chevy V8s use thin wall blocks and aluminum heads." I don't even know what the weights i've given are for, it doesn't seem to say.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Tommeh wrote: Mate your fixated on changing the weight distribution in a falcon, and why? it will never handle like a European or Jap car. Adjusting the suspension and associated components along with brakes will improve the car's handling greatly. f**k this weight distribution s**t, you've had your head stuck in too many Automotive engineering text books. I don't consider weight distribution to be the be-all-and-end-all of good handling, and i haven't stated or given that impression. It's just one factor in a vehicle's handling. One factor that is worth considering. Quote: A falcon isn't a race car, for one, the chassis isn't the strongest. If someone races a falcon then it is a race car, and a good roll cage etc does wonders for any chassis, including the V8 race cars. I don't race falcons and i'm not specifically talking about race cars. I'm talking about falcons for most purposes, which includes race falcons. Quote: And i don't see why your going to all this effort, when it will only be used on the road, a boosted falcon + Suspension and brake upgrades will handle great and have extremely impressive acceleration for the weight. I've enjoyed doing the research. I agree such conversions would be a lot of effort, and my current stance is that you would want to choose an engine that makes it well worth it. I have stated previously, and i restate, that, for example, i do not think an alloytech is worth it. Quote: I really don't see what your trying to accomplish here mate?
I am exploring better weight distribution in the engine bay, which leads to better traction and handling.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| tickford_6 |
|
||
Posts: 6449 Joined: 11th Nov 2004 |
relaxed_diplomacy wrote: In this and other threads i have already given information that answers most of the criticisms and comments found in above posts. Some people are being malicious.
I like I6's and falcons, indeed, i have four of them, and no other cars. I am in the process of finishing putting an AU I6 into an EBII, a falcon that i have put a fair amount of work into, and i very much figure i'll be happy with it. That doesn't mean i will shut off my mind from ever exploring new ideas that might or might not lead to a way to improve a falcon. To try to shut off such explorations is anti-falcon, in my view. i just can't see the sence in paying big dollars for a sideways step. think about it for second, a V6 in a falcon, just to help with handling, Now look a commodore, basicly same the weight as a falcon with mac' struts in the front. ask your self DO THEY HANDLE BETTER THEN A FALCON? call it what ever you want. i just call it a waste of money. no mater how you look at it. it's just a dumb idea. |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
TROYMAN wrote: I think he is serious?
or he is on a fishing trip lol.. there is another thread where he asked if a commo auto would fit on a 4.0l.. i dont know why? I asked about that in relation to the commo box having a lower first gear. After finding out that the commo box is not a btr, and a bellhousing adapter plate would be required, plus other work which might be significant, i dropped the exploration.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
tickford_6 wrote: think about it for second, a V6 in a falcon, just to help with handling, It does seem it would be a lot more work than putting a ford I6 in. I haven't done a major conversion and the research i'm doing is helping develop my understanding of it. Maybe consider a scenario for example where someone has an e-series (~150kW @ 4250rpm, ~350Nm @ 3400rpm) and the motor dies and they want forced induction. They could fit an AU motor (say $450) or a BA/BF (say $1000?) and a turbo (i don't know the cost) plus costs, or say a VG30DETT (say $1800 for motor and gearbox?) plus costs. Both would supply most people's power needs. In answer to your last comment i add that there are traction benefits as well as handling to improving distribution. Quote: Now look a commodore, basicly same the weight as a falcon with mac' struts in the front. ask your self DO THEY HANDLE BETTER THEN A FALCON? Unfortunately thats not a meaningful comparison for two reasons. The first and major reason is that weight distribution is just one factor playing a role in the handling. The other reason is that the engine in the commo is probably not in the same position relative to the front axle as a V6 would be in a Falcon. Quote: call it what ever you want. i just call it a waste of money.
no mater how you look at it. it's just a dumb idea. I might come to agree with you, but i think i still have a bit of interest in the idea left in me.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| Tommeh |
|
|||
|
If it was a worthwhile conversion, don't you think it would have been looked into already? Your knowledge is fairly limited, so listen to others!
There is more knowledge on this forum than i can dare to think, take there advice!
_________________ No means Yes, and Yes means anal!
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| relaxed_diplomacy |
|
||
|
Nigel wrote: 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  I just looked up the mazda CX7. The engine seems to be as follows: 2.3 litre Direct Injection Spark Ignition (DISI) turbocharged in-line 4 cylinder 16 valve DOHC Engine capacity 2,261 cc Bore and stroke 87.5 x 94.0 mm Compression ratio 9.5 : 1 Maximum power 175 kW @ 5,000 rpm Maximum torque 350 Nm @ 2,500 rpm Throttle control Electronic (drive-by-wire) Fuel system Electronic direct injection Fuel tank capacity 69 litres Recommended fuel Premium unleaded (min. 95RON) Fuel consumption combined1 11.5 litres per 100 km Kerb weight 1750kg Direct injection is changing everything.
_________________ wrecking 9/97 EL fairmont sedan burgundy 6cyl auto 270k modBAintake |
||
| Top | |
||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests |
