Ferd/289 Posted January 3, 2004 Share Posted January 3, 2004 I have been reading about performance enhancements to mustangs and the book raves about the SVO 4 cylinder ( I think supercharged ) as an engine. The author claims over 400 HP. Has anyone made a hybrid out of one? I would think it would be a nice conversion. Ferd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guffinator Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Turbocharged....not supercharged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KSGerry Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 A better option is the new all-aluminum dohc Ford-Mazda Duratec engine now installed into the Ford Ranger and Mazda B-2300 trucks, the 2004 Ford Focus, the Mazda3 and Mazda6. This engine is based on a Cosworth design intended for Formula 1 competition in the early 1990s. The Duratec only weighs about 200 pounds complete due to it's all-aluminum components, a sleeved block, cylinder head, oil pan. Although rated at 160 h.p. in stock form, very little has to be done to the engine to reach over 200 h.p. Some of my naturally aspirated customers are making over 300 h.p. using forged rods and high compression pistons but with very little headwork. See: http://www.circleperformance.com or http://www.marcymotorsport.com The drag racers have latched onto the Duratec too with a turbo-boosted Mazda6 making upwards of 1000 h.p. See: http://www.nhrasportcompact.com/2002/news/110601.html Same for the road-racers as this is the engine for the new Formula SCCA open-wheel and sports-bodied cars. See: http://www.scca-enterprises.com/formula_sportsracer.html There are carbureted conversions and a stand-alone ignition that requires no computer plus several choices for drivelines including mating a Duratec to a VW trans-axle if someone wanted a mid engine Z car. Regards, Gerry Dedonis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nic-Rebel450CA Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 If you only want about 200HP, a 4 cylinder would work, but if you want more HP, there isnt really any benefit from having a smaller engine. You arent really going to get any better mileage because of all of the modifications you are going to have to do. The cost of the mods is going to far offset any efficiency benefits. And the cost to build another one because you blew up the first one is going to get even more expensive. And, as far as 1000 HP from a 4-cylinder? Let's see, do those pistons end up in orbit, or through the oil pan? Or heck, maybe they just disintegrate. Or maybe the nifty all aluminum block would melt and ooze out the bottom of the car. Aluminum is aluminum, it is a soft metal that melts at a low temperature. I am sure you could even determine a HP/melting point relationship. I really dont see the obsession with supercharging/turboing little engines to try to get them to make rediculous amount of HP. There is only so much room for combustion in those little cylinders, and there is only so much force that the components can withstand. The streetability is going to go way down if you have a 300-400 HP 4 cylinder. Just think of how streetable a Chevy 350 would be with about 200HP/L. That would only be about 1200HP That's about 300 more than a NASCAR engine! I wouldnt be surprised if the reason that you see this junk in racing is because the supercharger, turbo and NOS companies sponsor so much because they know that you are going to blow everything up and then have to buy more. I mean hey, the only thing better than someone who buys rediculous amounts of stuff once is someone who has to keep buying the stuff up because they blow it up, right? Oh, and hooking up any kind of power through a VW transaxle is going to be messy. I've even heard of Harley engines (about 100HP) destroying a VW transaxle on a trike! Just think of how much less the trike weighs compared to a Z, and how much less 100HP is than what you might intend to put through it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nic-Rebel450CA Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 Oh BTW, this topic belongs in the "Other Engines" forum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillZ260 Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 The Duratek is definatly a better engine, but have you priced a set of OHC's? 1800 Buck? WHAT? The SVO 4 cyl would be a cool implant, wanted to do one myself but got intimidated by all the WIRES in the engine bay of the Turbo Coupe I was going to buy. Never the less, someone do this swap and let me know it's not that bad. Can always make room for another car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KSGerry Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 The Duratec is definatly a better engine, but have you priced a set of OHC's? 1800 Buck? WHAT? The SVO 4 cyl would be a cool implant, wanted to do one myself but got intimidated by all the WIRES in the engine bay of the Turbo Coupe I was going to buy. Never the less, someone do this swap and let me know it's not that bad. Can always make room for another car Yeah, In my opinion the EM-40-B billet cams offered by Circle are a huge overkill for the Duratec. I prefer the ones being made by Kent with the adjustable timing pulleys or the ones available by Web. Actually, the stock cams work just fine for a street application. They reach their maximum lift at about 5800 rpm. The torque curve is flat and is reached almost immediately. By installing the 2.0 Duratec flat-top pistons the compression is raised to about 11-1. H.P would be around 225-250 at 190 ft lbs of torque. The weight factor is really the Duratec's strongest selling point. There are very few engines that weigh 200 pounds complete that need so few modifications to make power. The VW transaxle housing will accept the Mk8 Hewland-Webster internal components. The road racers have used and abused this gearbox for years in 400+ h.p. cars. See: http://www.taylor-race.com Regards, Gerry Dedonis Perhaps this topic should be moved to the other engines forum.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest brianglawson Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 if you go four cylinder i say go sr20det or ca18det both are VERY capable engines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kc280zx Posted January 18, 2004 Share Posted January 18, 2004 an SVO 2.3L motor will blow the damn doors off all the newer 4 cylinders. They are absolutely fantastic engines for the time, they make tons of torque and a great powerband, comperable to a V8 with enough boost. The stock SVO 2.3L made 200hp and 240ft lbs torque with stock boost levels, wow, thats alot of power for a 4 banger. With a decent bottom end and a big enough turbo these motors were snapping of 9 second quarter mile times in the mid 70's in pintos. (first 4 cylinder 9 second car, gg vtec.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillZ260 Posted January 19, 2004 Share Posted January 19, 2004 AND, it weighs LESS. Someone please do this swap, because I din't have the B@LLS TO. There is a Turbocoupe sitting right across the street, could have the whole car for 400 bucks. Alas I have already bought a GM T5 and I am not sure my fuel system would support it. Want to but all the wiring, vacume crap on that OEM motor scares me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaparral2f Posted January 19, 2004 Share Posted January 19, 2004 I'm glad that this subject has come up. I've been thinking of building a car for my daughter. She loves Metropolitans, and I've been wondering if an engine out of a turbo coupe would be a hard swap. I have no problem with building a frame, but body work isn't my strong suit. So whadda ya think? (First, of course, I gotta finish the z31) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KSGerry Posted January 19, 2004 Share Posted January 19, 2004 Keep in mind that a Ford 2300 cc engine is very heavy...around 340 pounds for being a four cylinder. There are ways to lighten it and increase performance with an aftermarket aluminum cylinder head. The cost complete with valves and cams is about $2000.dollars. The stock naturally aspirated 2300 can be built to produce good power if you are willing to do extensive cylinder head work and raise the compression. The other alternative is using the turbocharger and the related plumbing for it. Remember that the 2300 was discontinued from production in 1997 and replaced with a 2500 engine. That engine was discontinued in 2001. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillZ260 Posted January 19, 2004 Share Posted January 19, 2004 but still lighter than a SBC or Stock 6er right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randy 77zt Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 since i work as a ford dealer tech i know a little about ford.we have already changed 2 of those new 2.3 liter mazda/focus engines at work.had rod bearing problems.i dont see much strength in the parts-they are engineered just to get by and no extra.i would only swap a 4 cylinder into a pre 75 z-a light car .the old 2.3 turbo was a stout engine-i had a 88 turbo coupe.the turbo is on right side-no steering shaft problems.if you extract the 2.3 carefully you will find eec harness is separate from the car.best year for turbo 2.3 is 87 or 88 turbo coupe-these had a intercooler on top.also had 36lb injectors and a t5.the tbird was a heavy car -probably about 3400 lbs but i would go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KSGerry Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 since i work as a ford dealer tech i know a little about ford.we have already changed 2 of those new 2.3 liter mazda/focus engines at work.had rod bearing problems.i dont see much strength in the parts-they are engineered just to get by and no extra....<snip> I agree the stock powder sinter rods for the 2.3 liter Mazda Focus engine are only made to sustain limited HP. The pistons are a quality piece made by Karl Schmidt but won't hold up to boost. They are dished anyway and this engine needs compression to make over 225 hp. (naturally aspirated). The reason for rod bearing failures may be the engine block was not fully cleaned of machining chips. That is not a design flaw but a quality control problem. Ford had scrapped several hundred of the Ranger 2.3 Duratec blocks for the same reason. I'm curious. Did your dealer send the engine back to Ford or are they being scrapped at your location? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randy 77zt Posted January 25, 2004 Share Posted January 25, 2004 gerry-those mazda/focus motors got sent back.since bill ford(if my memory is correct) is running the company warrenty has got a little tighter and there are more controls in place.like calling ford for prior approval before an engine or trans is shipped.if they smell abuse (like racing or ecm mods)they cancel the warrenty.since we get time subtracted if a repair comes back the techs dont like to repair engines and trans anymore.just reload with another assembly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted March 9, 2004 Share Posted March 9, 2004 http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2465689333&category=6783 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWOT Posted March 10, 2004 Share Posted March 10, 2004 What you want is the engine from either a 84-86 mustang SVO, or a thunderbird turbocoupe. The engines are identical, the 88 TC has a larger stock intercooler, but it is mounted in a way that wont work with Z car hood, unless you made one. And I speak from experience (I have a 86 SVO ) they are one of the best 4 cyl stock engines there are......( I'm not saying it can't be improved upon, but I run 19psi on mine at around 312hp and 296ft/lbs on pump gas (91 octane). Only thing you have to watch for is to buy the right computer, the ones you want are PE series (any SVO) or the LA3 (a little cheaper and not as aggresive, from 88 TC). I know people who push near 400hp with the motor bone stock internally I wouldn't push mine past 360hp unless was a fresh build, mine has 119k on it If you can find a wrecked SVO go for it, especially if the trans is still in the car, world class t-5 Oh yeah, it you get one DON'T use the knock sensor, they are way too sensitive, pulls too much timing when no detonation happening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rum Runner Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 hey, if you're going to put a 4-banger into it, might as well go with a 91-93 toyota mr2 engine and mate it to the supra tranny. I've seen auto cross supra's with this setup, and the engine can be modified to make upwards of 600 HP reliably, and the engine is lighter than tha stock6 or a v8....just my $0.02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sven Posted April 9, 2004 Share Posted April 9, 2004 For those East Coast guys thinking about this... http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=477282&highlight=svo It's a great deal, and you should be able to get the harness and EEC. I already have to much money sunk into SBF stuff to buy this. Now somebody needs to do it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.