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

    You can register to join the community.

Bellhousing Adapter Coming Very Soon

striker2 said:
im not talking about modifying the firewall (although the firewall would have to be modified less with the shorter length of either the Zetec or Duratec), or mounting the engine at all. im talking about actually making the engine run, using the stock PCM and wiring. it will be far, far easier to use the stock PCM and wiring harness (only modified as needed) than it will be to set up a stand alone PCM and harness. there is no way to run 8 cylinders off the stock PCM, so you would have to either go with a stand alone setup, or use a stock PCM/harness for a V8 (and getting it to talk to the gauges and work with the rest of the car would be an absolute nightmare).
Click to expand...

well im glad you know that you cant run a v8 on the stock pcm lol. but i have done more 5.0 swaps into things people said i shouldnt, making the guages work isnt hard, its just a wiring thing, thats all. but im done argueing with you about this. (i've been trying to end argueing fo three posts now) lol good luck man
 
Im not saying that you cant use the V8, but why make the already complicated conversion even more complicated. it would be much easier (especially since he would be pioneering a RWD swap into the Contour) to stick with one of the engines that already came with the car. it also helps that the engine he is planning to use already makes over 300HP and is more than capable of 400HP.
 
wow dude...just wow... in a rwd vehicle you have much more parisitic loss than fwd. that is all. i think if you argue even more after i say im done argueing with you about opinions that you must be one of those people that has to be right or they'll drive themselves insane.
 
newb said:
wow dude...just wow... in a rwd vehicle you have much more parisitic loss than fwd. that is all.
Click to expand...

Any proof to back that statement up? And what does that have to do with you dreaming about putting a crappy 5.0 into a Contour?
 
its a known fact that in a rwd vehicle you will have more loss to the wheels. if you want i can do some searching and find scientific proof and other such things to prove my point.
how you figure a 5.0 is crappy?
 
newb said:
its a known fact that in a rwd vehicle you will have more loss to the wheels. if you want i can do some searching and find scientific proof and other such things to prove my point.
how you figure a 5.0 is crappy?
Click to expand...

please do.

FWIW, you can use stock dynos of SVTs to calculate the average MTX75 drivetrain loss. a stock SVT makes 200HP (195 in early years but close enough), they will dyno at about 165 -170WHP. thats about a 15-17% loss. your average RWD setup with a manual transmission also has a 15-20% loss.

here, read this link, specifically the 2nd paragraph. according to that site, RWD setups do have a slightly higher loss, but only marginally (and its still within the 15-20% that i stated)


PS. continuing to argue with me after you state you are done clearly shows that YOU are the one who has to be right. however, this is absolutely nothing to do with the argument, just thought i would point it out to you though. ;)


edit: after doing some quick searches lots of people on forums have had stock cars dynoed and all the manual trans ones (both FWD and RWD) seem to have about a 15-17% drivetrain loss. some are a little higher and some are a little lower but it depends on the dyno and the individual vehicle itself. FWIW, a stock 3000GT VR4 will put about 240-250 HP to the ground (depending on if its a 91-93 with 300HP or a 94-99 with 320HP). in either case, thats about a 20% loss, through an AWD manual transmission setup. you honestly believe that a RWD setup will loss the same or more than a car that has to transmit power to all 4 wheels?
 
ok, so you gotta look at all the work the engine has to do in a rwd car, turn the trans, turn the drive shaft, go through r/p and then to the wheels. fwd turn the trans, turn the spur gears turn the wheels.

but your link does proove my point, rwd has more parisitic loss than fwd. my point is prooven, thank you .
 
newb said:
ok, so you gotta look at all the work the engine has to do in a rwd car, turn the trans, turn the drive shaft, go through r/p and then to the wheels. fwd turn the trans, turn the spur gears turn the wheels.

but your link does proove my point, rwd has more parisitic loss than fwd. my point is prooven, thank you .
Click to expand...

except not really since i proved the MTX75 also has a loss of about 17%, which is exactly the same as what the link states is typical for a RWD trans. besides, 2% is only barely more and most modern ones arent even that. as an example i saw several posts about 05+ Mustangs which had only about a 10% loss. also, trans loss cant REALLY be put into a percentage anyways, but should rather be thought of as a HP loss, not to mention that the losses at 4000RPM of a given trans are about half of what they are at 8000RPM from the same trans. if it were a constant percentage, then the amount of loss a drivetrain would cause would be huge at say 1000HP (15% loss would be 150HP), obviously it doesnt take 150HP to turn the same trans that took only 30HP from a 200HP engine.

again, not that the total loss of a RWD trans vs a FWD trans really matters since the engine is more than capable of putting 300-400HP to the wheels.
 
swapping something into a car to be different is just plain stupid. if i wanted to be different id go by some obscure manufactures car and swap a W12 into it :crazy:

If i already have a capable engine ( Duratec) with a bunch of performance mods (think $$) why would i go through the hassle of tossing it for something else. i would want to do RWD so that i could possibly make more power out of a very light platform. (turbo 3L to a T5 and RWD :drool: ) and break less axles doing burn outs....

Still trying to comprehend the argument over parasitic loss. who cares. it makes no difference which engine is running what setup.

Personally i would rather see the ablility of swapping in an 2004-2007 STI trans for awd. but that is just a hope($$)
 
there are tons of guys that throw odd ball •••• in their car so they can get the wow factor. if i see a rwd contour at a car show and i see its a stock type engine my exact thoughts will be "hey sweet,thats alot of work and he made it easy on him self with the stock engine.sweet" or it could go "holy crap, he stuffed a 5.0 in that thing! cant wait to hear it run, i gotta talk to this guy" imo its about the wow factor.
 
what would get more attention a 5.0 rwd contour or a stock 2.5/3.0 rwd contour? just saying lol
 
newb said:
its a known fact that in a rwd vehicle you will have more loss to the wheels. if you want i can do some searching and find scientific proof and other such things to prove my point.
how you figure a 5.0 is crappy?
Click to expand...
The point where you should have just plain stopped trying was juuuuuuuust before you said this. Don't condescend to Striker2, he's one of the most knowledgeable people on this site. You clearly are not.

Oh, and f*** attention. Going fast is what counts. I'm a HUGE fan of the 302, (Dan knows that well), but if you knew anything about the Contique/ Cougar, or handling dynamics in general; you'd know the 302 would wind up being a three hundred and two cubic inch paperweight in the CDW27, ESPECIALLY in a RWD layout. You're living up to your screenname better than anyone I've ever seen.
 
for me its go fast with the least amount of work possible. Hp to $$ is a big deal to people who are strapped for cash and PERSONALLY i would like to keep it looking stock as possible.

people will look into the engine bay and go "wait, that engine isnt fitting the right way, oh wow look its also RWD" that makes me swell in the pants and look more achievable to me then going oh look a 5.0 in a Contour. Something ill never be able to afford to do.
 
newb said:
what would get more attention a 5.0 rwd contour or a stock 2.5/3.0 rwd contour? just saying lol
Click to expand...

except this car wont be a stock 2.5/3L. the car ALREADY has a turbo setup that makes over 300WHP. so it will be a RWD turbo 3L.
 
sure a 5.0 would be unique but then you would be just like all the other guys that did a V8 swap. You would also have just as many people saying they love it as you would those saying you should have used a GM V8 and blah blah blah. I like the 5.0 and love the way it sounds with an exhaust. However a 3L turbo is nearly the same engine as a Noble M12 from what i've read. That to me sounds much cooler than just another 5.0 swap. I would like to see a V8 rwd setup in this car but i would much prefer to own the duratec conversion myself. To each their own, I'm just not a fan of having the same engine as everyone else.
 
striker2 said:
and a properly built Duratec can make just as much power (even the 4cyl Zetec could make as much power) as a 5L. there are a couple Zetec Foci making over 500WHP, and lots of Nobles doing the same. why go through the hassle of making an engine with extra cylinders work when you can make the same power with engines that were already designed to be run in the chassis.
Click to expand...

You know how much I enjoy talking to you when I'm looking for wisdom on the Contour, but I gotta call you out on this one Daniel ;) True a properly built Duratec will make as much power as a well built 5.0L will on motor... I've seen dynos from a 5.0L "based" motor on muscle make almost 400 to the tires (it was a 347 if you were wondering). If you put a turbo on it as you've done to the Duratec then the power numbers get further distant between the two. One of my best friends had an 89 Mustang coupe with a built 331 and a single 70mm on it and it made over 700 to the tires. Boost is the replacement for displacement but when the bigger motor has a huffer too it makes it much harder for the smaller cube motor to keep up :laugh:

striker2 said:
im not talking about modifying the firewall (although the firewall would have to be modified less with the shorter length of either the Zetec or Duratec), or mounting the engine at all. im talking about actually making the engine run, using the stock PCM and wiring. it will be far, far easier to use the stock PCM and wiring harness (only modified as needed) than it will be to set up a stand alone PCM and harness. there is no way to run 8 cylinders off the stock PCM, so you would have to either go with a stand alone setup, or use a stock PCM/harness for a V8 (and getting it to talk to the gauges and work with the rest of the car would be an absolute nightmare).
Click to expand...

I do completely agree with you on this though ;) Doing a mod motor swap in an old fox body Mustang usually is easiest if the harnesses are swapped over with the motor to the new car... and I'm talking about ALL the harnesses :laugh: There are four main harnesses that need to be swapped over to make the job much easier.



Shannon
 
i can't wait to see these guys try to turn a transversely mounted engine sideways, LOL. your rod bearings will go buh-bye in a day.

the pickup is in the low part of the oil pan, down in the baffling. which is on the pulley side of the engine (left side as normally placed) which would be more toward the front of the engine when you try to turn it for a RWD configuration. you hit the gas, oil goes backward, sloshes around, air gets up in the mix near the pickup tube, cams and crank bearing journals are starved of oil. bearings get hot, bearings spin. it won't work. An accusump may remedy the problem, but it would be activating almost any time you got on the gas hard. good luck to whoever does a RWD setup...... hope it works out for you :/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top