• Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.

    You can register to join the community.

Simple clarification of ideal 3.0L build.

My initial argument was that if he was going to do a swap and run it untuned and get the car back on the road with minimal issues than his best option was a port-matched 3.0L.

I was also pointing out how you stated earlier that if you were going to run untuned with a 3.0L that the best option was a port-matched 3.0L, when you actually did the opposite by doing a full 3.0L and running it untuned for 3 months.

Please stop calling people's efforts half-assed. Honestly since you haven't made the numbers manimillion and other full 3.0L swaps have made I could call your swap half-assed. But that's insulting, I'm sure you've done what you can for now and probably have other plans for your car to make more power so it wouldn't be right for me to call your car half-assed. Just be respectful of the way others do things.
 
i had mine untunes for a reason...waiting for a tune. and i needed a car. not to mentoin little issues make sure everythign is correct. and yes. my tune is halfassed. but my car runs flawless with my crappy 199hp. or if i go back in and get 230hp. either way
 
What does MPG have to do with anything? Now your just throwing in random stuff to prove your point that... well isnt very clear anyways.

I would say there are very few people that pull out a good running engine in these cars to put in a 3L for more power. Most people doing 3L swaps are doing them because the 2.5 blew up and for a lil extra work you can have a portmatched 3L in there. I would never even consider putting a portmatched 3L in my car, but thats because my car is a garage queen with a trailer that I am willing to spend money on to make power. The other two 3L swaps I did were for people that blew the 2.5 and needed the car back on the road, therefore I told them all I was willing to do was the portmatched setup, because it is easier cheaper and doesnt need to be tuned
 
Really? Bc I'm pulling a very healthy 110k mile 2.5 to put in a full 3l. And yes I'm doing it for the slight power gains, and well, bc I can and want to. I'm not saying people efforts are half assed. I'm saying it's half assed to do all that work (and let's be honest neither setup is Super easy or quick to do, ESP for your first time) and not bother with the easiest part, letting someone else tune it.
 
Wow, I posted a single message about the 3.0L swap (That I hope to do this summer), and got seven full pages of replies! Wow! :)

I've been doing some more research and have come closer to my conclusion for what I'll most-likely be doing. Please feel free to provide any insight, experience or other technical data that I'm missing. :)

It appears that the 3.0L Duratec is from the MPV Van, Mazda 6 or Lincoln LS (DAMB) is the best [as far as power goes] base to work from. If indeed my research is correct, this motor produces ~24HP/TQ more (232bhp vs 208bhp) due to a revision in the camshaft's valve train arrangement. Does this seem universally accepted, or is this also up to dispute? I wonder though, if indeed the profile of the cams were changed as well. Do the SVT cams (mechanically) fit/drop into the DAMB head's valve train?

In regards to the camshafts, I am not certain what the lift/duration of the SVT cams are, nor that of the RFF and DAMB cams. I'll need to further investigate that to make certain of what's what.

The SVT Intake manifold seems to have the most ideal flow characteristics for a performance build – I realize that the Taurus IM does flow more, but absolute air flow is only one of many critical measures of performance. Runner length, volume, plenum volume, velocity, casting imperfections.. etc are also very important. The extrude honing, which Cosworth provided for the SVT intake manifold, does allow for this IM to hands-down have the least amount of resistance to disrupt the velocity of the air charge. So, obviously I am most partial to the SVT intake manifold until I can be more well presented with other data in regards to other IM options.

So this far, it * feels * like I might use the DAMB motor, port out the intake side of the heads, drop in the SVT Cams and timing assembly as well as the SVT fuel system and intake manifold.

As far as porting, I've ported a few heads and understand fluid dynamics well enough to know where and how to cut, not to mention that I already have a bin full of proper porting bits – so for me, porting the heads is of no concern.

In regards to the tune, I'll most likely go with a complete stand alone. I have a wide-band setup and am quite well versed in using Mega Squirt, so that [like porting the heads] is a lesser concern for me in this build. I have done the whole MS&S build, install and tune on my supercharged Probe GT – so I'm not blindly / wishfully walking into this. :)

Other than brackets and the sort, what else might I be blindly / ignorantly running my self into? :)
 
The only engines you are going to want to look at are the MPV 3L, Escape 3L, and the Taurus/Sable 3L. Typically the Taurus/Sable 3L is cheaper. Unless you are a wiring guru your not going to want to consider the Mazda 6 or Lincoln engine. Although if your going to run a stand alone that could all be different.

I know CSVT#49 tested the volume of the ST220 intake vs the Escape intake, I would have to find the thread but from what I remember the volume of the ST220 is about double the SVT intake manifold.
 
FastFord said:
The only engines you are going to want to look at are the MPV 3L, Escape 3L, and the Taurus/Sable 3L. Typically the Taurus/Sable 3L is cheaper. Unless you are a wiring guru your not going to want to consider the Mazda 6 or Lincoln engine. Although if your going to run a stand alone that could all be different.

I know CSVT#49 tested the volume of the ST220 intake vs the Escape intake, I would have to find the thread but from what I remember the volume of the ST220 is about double the SVT intake manifold.
Click to expand...

Link to my thread : 05 ST220 vs 05 Escape

2005 Ford ST220 Mondeo intake: 7.5L +/- 150mL

2005 Ford Escape intake: 5.75L +/- 150mL
 
FastFord said:
The only engines you are going to want to look at are the MPV 3L, Escape 3L, and the Taurus/Sable 3L. Typically the Taurus/Sable 3L is cheaper. Unless you are a wiring guru your not going to want to consider the Mazda 6 or Lincoln engine. Although if your going to run a stand alone that could all be different.

I know CSVT#49 tested the volume of the ST220 intake vs the Escape intake, I would have to find the thread but from what I remember the volume of the ST220 is about double the SVT intake manifold.
Click to expand...

Rewiring, looping, splicing, new pigtails.. piece of cake. It's good to know that ahead of time though, this way I could request the wiring harness with the motor so that I have the pigtails to work with - that is, if that's indeed needed. Are the sensors simply in other locations, do they have different ends or are they entirely different in that they return different impedances, resistances, reference, voltage.. etc?
 
CSVT#49 said:
Link to my thread : 05 ST220 vs 05 Escape

2005 Ford ST220 Mondeo intake: 7.5L +/- 150mL

2005 Ford Escape intake: 5.75L +/- 150mL
Click to expand...

Ah yes, I did see that thread before -- good info your gathered there. :) Internally speaking, are there chambers, baffles and/or passages apart from the typical plenum-to-runner design?

I ask because the KL (2.5L V6, Mazda) use an intake manifold which routes the pitch of the air-flow between two different plenums via actuated butterfly plates [VRIS, Variable Resonance Induction system]. The difference between a manifold which has this system functioning properly or not can be as-much-as 30ftlbs of torque difference though-out the entire powerband; It's VERY easy to tell via-butt-dyno when this system has failed. So again, sheer volume - although important - doesn't dictate how well this IM can function, but rather, the velocity/buffering [staging] of the plenums does.

As far as I know, the only 'odd' thing about duratec intake maifolds are the butterflies close to the heads, which in part create a similar effect of VRIS by changing the flow characteristics of the runners themselves. Is that all, or is there something else that I'm not aware of in the design of any Duratech IM?

Thanks for the feedback and thoughts, I really do like the volume test that you provided us with. :)

Come to think of it :: a valve-train with less resistance can indeed free up some HP, though freeing up 25 HP does seem quite.. substantial. If indeed the IM from this engine does have more volume, then it's quite probable that this is a significant chunk of that realized hp/torque difference.
 
Are you on Probetalk? i've been a member there for 6 years now. i've run megasquirt on my turbo'd 95pgt, what a pain to get tuned for all the seasons, in hindsight i wish i would've just piggybacked it to the stock ecu.
good luck with your csvt build, and no, the svtc manifold is not the most ideal manifold for a performance 3L MAYBE a max extrude honed manifold is a bettter bet, but if your going full 3l you might want the st220 or escape if you can overcome the hood issue.
 
Yea, the MS&S is nice if you use a 98+ 626 36-1 trigger wheel and go EDIS. The Mitsubushi electronics, all of 'em, the bane of all Probe reliability-related issues and need to be dealt with by axe. Piggy-backing fuel-only is pretty easy, though you really need wide-band feedback to get a proper tune -- especially if you are using autotune. Narrow band tuning really isn't even worth the headache of attempting to generate half-ass maps for. Though I must say, it's good to maintain 31mpg on the highway while boosted. :) I really wish my SVT Contour got that kind of mileage. Though when considering MS&S, the AEM wideband / A/F kit is worth its weight in gold, and is worth every penny it costs in preventative frustration. :)

Do both the manifolds from the escape and/or st220 cause hood clearance issues, or just the escape? I really don't want to invest into a scooped CF hood.. nor do I think that I could even if I did want to. heh. :)
 
troll96se said:
st220 or escape if you can overcome the hood issue.
Click to expand...

The ST220 and Escape manifolds fit under the hood just fine. I think the only problem was when people run a spacer to use the 04+ valve covers is when the hood clearance becomes a tight fit but it still fits just fine.
 
Kresnik said:
Do both the manifolds from the escape and/or st220 cause hood clearance issues, or just the escape? I really don't want to invest into a scooped CF hood.. nor do I think that I could even if I did want to. heh. :)
Click to expand...

I can only speak from experience on the fitment of a full 05+ Escape 3L. The mainifold will clear but the IAC and oil cap will contact the hood unless they are modified. I haven't done anything on mine yet but I do believe a little grinding on the IAC would give it enough clearance and you could shave the oil cap to get it to fit. My hood is a little raised up in the back, maybe 1/4 inch and it closes, but it does hit the IAC and oil cap, I guess I half-assed that :).

This is only my opinion based on my build, but with an 05 + Escape engine you get:
-The best UIM based on availability. ST220 is better but not as easy to get.
-The oil pan fits and will line up with the trans no problem.
-The cams in the 05+ engines are not too far off from the SVT cams, plus better low end torque.
-24# injectors, the fuel rail needs to be shortened though.

There are some things that you need to work out like the TB and bracket, the fuel rail and injector plugs and some sensors. If you don't want to port go full, if you want to port and skip the bracket fabbing the go ported. Personally I wasn't comfortable porting and swapping cams so I thought it would be best to leave the engine as a whole the way it came from Ford.

Mine is dyno tuned and made 195 whp which is not anything to brag about, but it runs really smoothly and is a blast to drive. The full 3L drives great on the street, at 3K rpms it has great torque compared to the SVT 2.5. You're not waiting for the IMRC to open to get power, it's nice when you need to pass you don't need to wind it up.

I think any way you decide to go if it's done right your aren't going to be disappointed.
 
Kresnik said:
Rewiring, looping, splicing, new pigtails.. piece of cake. It's good to know that ahead of time though, this way I could request the wiring harness with the motor so that I have the pigtails to work with - that is, if that's indeed needed. Are the sensors simply in other locations, do they have different ends or are they entirely different in that they return different impedances, resistances, reference, voltage.. etc?
Click to expand...

Those engines have VVT which isn't compatible. You can't use them without a standalone ECU setup. For the 20 more hp it isn't worth all the trouble. Turbo the motor if you want more power. Not to mention the timing covers are different so your power steering pump, alternator and main engine mount won't bolt up. The valve covers on the VVT motors sit too high for a 2.5L intake so you'd have to do a full 3L or cut the covers down.
 
Blackcoog said:
Those engines have VVT which isn't compatible. You can't use them without a standalone ECU setup. For the 20 more hp it isn't worth all the trouble. Turbo the motor if you want more power. Not to mention the timing covers are different so your power steering pump, alternator and main engine mount won't bolt up. The valve covers on the VVT motors sit too high for a 2.5L intake so you'd have to do a full 3L or cut the covers down.
Click to expand...

So, all of the DAMB Durtec 30s are VVT? If that is indeed the case, then that is a buzz kill. That would force me into using Megasquirt; which is an open option at this point, not an absolute must.

I've read that the Duratec 35 and duratec 30 are both used in the Mondeo, and if both fit in there well - while we know that the duratec 30 fits in our bays properly - then why/where is the duratec 35 too-large for us to use/consider? It seems that mounting brackets could be worked around either way, though I wonder if it's something to do with hood clearance and/or confinements of our engine bay. mmm.

I'm not going to consider a turbo for a few reasons. This is my daily driver, and it needs to be reliable more-so than balls-to-the-wall fun. I understand a lot more about forced induction than most people do, and because of that, I well realize the cost associated with making it reliable. A simple motor upgrade and tune will keep it running reliably and be more fun without needing to spend an excess of money. I'm considering performance upgrades only to replace their worn, broken and/or failing OEM equivalents. And if, by some chance I had the excess of money to build things balls-to-the-walls, I have far too many debts to settle before I could even consider that. :/

My Probe (Supercharged) runs a 12 second quarter mile and can get to 140mph with the quickness and hold that speed with good control, which is more than good-enough for me when I want to drive that speed. It has undergone a lot of work and cost to properly upgrade the suspension, mounts and frame to have a reasonably-good launch and to be able to handle both the speed and torque. But with the torque of that car, I'm apt to break the transaxle case, differential and half-shafts if I keep on it too-hard for too-long. Because of the finicky drive-train components, this cannot be considered as a reliable daily driver. I don't want to hazard that in my Contour, just in case I get excited and want to drive it harder than I should. :)
 
i can say without a doubt(experience) that you will shatter the contour tranny long before you will the pgt's tranny. the diff used in the mtx75 is the same used in the focus has been known to shatter in a stock svtc...so no matter what motor you do you need to be mindful of that.

as far as the "duratec" 35....its not a duratec in the same sense as the duratec 25 or 30. duratec is now just a name given to ford motors, like the 2l and 2.3l are now called duratecs. its a totally different motor.
 
troll96se said:
i can say without a doubt(experience) that you will shatter the contour tranny long before you will the pgt's tranny. the diff used in the mtx75 is the same used in the focus has been known to shatter in a stock svtc...so no matter what motor you do you need to be mindful of that.
Click to expand...

The stock differential is very weak and I've seen first hand several that have blown up. One of my buddies who used to be on here quite a bit bought his SVT with a blown differential years ago. The white Cougar I swapped the motor and rebuilt the trans in had a differential that was damn near about to blow as well and that was a completely stock 2.5L with only 80k. But, when I installed my torsen in my SVT the differential looked like new. It's all in how you drive the car, if you're going to hammer on it or drive it hard, expect the differential to blow if you don't upgrade it. You've gotta pay to play!

On a side note, holy crap did this thread turn into a big pissing contest! Everyone does their builds or swaps for different reasons and each person needs to do the research about the types of swaps and determine how they want to do their build. I have my opinion on which swap is better and someone else has different goals for their swap or build and therefore has a different idea of what they want to do. There's nothing wrong with that.
 
The 3.5L is also VVT. It just isn't worth all the work to try and get a VVT motor to function. Run a normal 3L, do some head work, gasket matching, etc. and get the most out of it. You could potentially create a piggy back system to control VVT. Pull in the signals needed to control it and output what is needed to the actuators. I thought about building something to sell to the NECO/CEG crowd but there wouldn't be enough demand.
 
Blackcoog said:
The 3.5L is also VVT. It just isn't worth all the work to try and get a VVT motor to function. Run a normal 3L, do some head work, gasket matching, etc. and get the most out of it. You could potentially create a piggy back system to control VVT. Pull in the signals needed to control it and output what is needed to the actuators. I thought about building something to sell to the NECO/CEG crowd but there wouldn't be enough demand.
Click to expand...

well id be in for the test pair:laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top