3.5L Duratec? - CEG Archives

i know this won't help any of you guys but ford has produced a 2.0L duratec going in the focus rally series car over 200 hp all wheel drive

The 2L duratec in the focus RS (street car) has 215hp,,, if they put it in a rally car, it'll have over 300hp.

Originally posted by afboy:
i know this won't help any of you guys but ford has produced a 2.0L duratec going in the focus rally series car over 200 hp all wheel drive

n/a??

Turbo of course

Whatever.

Originally posted by warmonger:
Whatever.

whatever

As we never get the cool turbo cars from Ford??

Originally posted by Thinkmoto:

Originally posted by warmonger:
Whatever.

whatever As we never get the cool turbo cars from Ford??

No.

[censored] whatever because this is 3L forum first of all, not 2.0L. Second we have a forum for forced induction too....so two strikes there.

But this is the 3L duratec forums, not the 3.5L,, so this whole thread is "whatever".

Originally posted by warmonger:

Originally posted by Thinkmoto:

Originally posted by warmonger:
Whatever.

whatever As we never get the cool turbo cars from Ford??

No.

[censored] whatever because this is 3L forum first of all, not 2.0L. Second we have a forum for forced induction too....so two strikes there.

Like any of the threads really stay on topic around here

kremits posting so you know the topic will go to hell eventually

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
But this is the 3L duratec forums, not the 3.5L,, so this whole thread is "whatever".

At least it has a '3' in the title......

FYI- The little Zetec is called a Duratec in Europe. Same engine.

Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
FYI- The little Zetec is called a Duratec in Europe. Same engine.

Nope, zetec is zetec, the 2L duratec in the focus RS in england is a duratec designed off a zetec, it has an aluminum block, timing chain, and other changes.

Originally posted by Thinkmoto:

kremits posting so you know the topic will go to hell eventually

Sorry kid, you handle that all on your own.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
FYI- The little Zetec is called a Duratec in Europe. Same engine.

Nope, zetec is zetec, the 2L duratec in the focus RS in england is a duratec designed off a zetec, it has an aluminum block, timing chain, and other changes.

Kermit, you really can't say that Ford's new global four cylinder is based off the Zetec. In fact, it shares few parts and looks completely different. There are about 4 different plants around the world which are supposed to be able to build any of the different versions according to demand.

Speaking of versions, available displacements are 1.8L, 2.0L, and 2.3L. Some have balance shafts. Some are transversly installed, some inline. There are also engines with no VCT, VCT on one cam, and VCT on both cams. Finally, there will be versions with direct injection into the combustion chamber.

Originally posted by procyon:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
FYI- The little Zetec is called a Duratec in Europe. Same engine.

Nope, zetec is zetec, the 2L duratec in the focus RS in england is a duratec designed off a zetec, it has an aluminum block, timing chain, and other changes.

Kermit, you really can't say that Ford's new global four cylinder is based off the Zetec. In fact, it shares few parts and looks completely different. There are about 4 different plants around the world which are supposed to be able to build any of the different versions according to demand.

Speaking of versions, available displacements are 1.8L, 2.0L, and 2.3L. Some have balance shafts. Some are transversly installed, some inline. There are also engines with no VCT, VCT on one cam, and VCT on both cams. Finally, there will be versions with direct injection into the combustion chamber.

You may wanna do some research. I haven't looked into the 1.8L duratec so I won't include that in my discusstion,,,,
The 2.3L duratec (coming in new foci and mazdas) is a completly new engine,,,,
The 2L duratec used in the Focus RS in Europe is a big redesign of the zetec
It actually looks very similar and I'm not sure how many exact parts interchange, maybe not many as it is a BIG redesign. The 2L duratec has an aluminum block and a timing chaing but is still very similar to the 2L zetec..... RESEARCH IT if you don't believe me.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by procyon:
..... RESEARCH IT if you don't believe me.

Does knowing the parts and watching them being built on the production line at the Ford engine plant count as research?

Originally posted by procyon:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by procyon:
..... RESEARCH IT if you don't believe me.

Does knowing the parts and watching them being built on the production line at the Ford engine plant count as research?

Lol...

Originally posted by path914:

Originally posted by procyon:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by procyon:
..... RESEARCH IT if you don't believe me.

Does knowing the parts and watching them being built on the production line at the Ford engine plant count as research?

Lol...

OWNED !!!!

Originally posted by procyon:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by procyon:
..... RESEARCH IT if you don't believe me.

Does knowing the parts and watching them being built on the production line at the Ford engine plant count as research?

Obviously you don't know them well enough.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
FYI- The little Zetec is called a Duratec in Europe. Same engine.

Nope, zetec is zetec, the 2L duratec in the focus RS in england is a duratec designed off a zetec, it has an aluminum block, timing chain, and other changes.

Correction, some parts of Europe call zetecs zetecs others call them duratecs, though most call it a zetec a zetec (got burton power catalog right here with zetecs in it)..
And another correction the 2L duratec does not have an aluminum block, not sure how the timing setup is,,, original info I had was wrong.

Originally posted by procyon:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

Originally posted by procyon:
..... RESEARCH IT if you don't believe me.

Does knowing the parts and watching them being built on the production line at the Ford engine plant count as research?

I don't know what plant you supposedly were at and what parts you know,, but here are some sites showing the 2L duratec RS that is based on the regular 2L zetec,, but I guess they're all wrong and you are right.
http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/focus_rs.asp
http://www.tyresmoke.net/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=1,20,22,25,27,5&Board=reviews&Number=125316&Main=125316
http://www.rsownersclub.co.uk/car_info/focus.htm
http://www.hegartys.com/new-cars/focus-rs.html
http://autozine.kyul.net/html/Ford_Europe2.htm

Sometime in 1996 Ford did some racing development with McLaren Engines IIRC for the Contour being used in a racing series that had a 2.0L cap on displacement. What came of this was a destroked 2.5L V6 that met the displacement requirements. I have read an article on this, but I am too lazy to search it up and link it.

Edit: Dug up the file: http://www.bath.ac.uk/mech-eng/auto/txnet/983038.pdf. So, a 2.0L Duratec V6 did exist at one time! This is a far cry from the I4 Duratec line ... let's not forget, before displacement considerations, this is a V6 forum!

So there!

Umm ok?

Heck, those marketing guys in Europe are calling everything a Duratec. Look here, there is a 1.3L 8V engine for the Ka being called a duratec.

Despite what they call it, the 2.0L engine in the Focus RS is a really a Zetec. The cast iron block is a dead giveaway.

As I stated before, Fords new global I4 engine is not based on the Zetec. It is an entirely new, from the ground up, design.

In the U.S., they are calling the new global I4 a Duratec in the current Ranger and 2005 Focus & Escape.

fastcougar,
Very interesting SAE article. They were using a destroked version of the regular 2.5L roller finger follower engine.

You might not know it, but they are currently making 2.0L 24V V6 Duratec engines at Cleveland Engine Plant. These are for the Jaguar X-Type. The Jaguar and Lincoln Duratec V6 engines all have bucket tappet style heads instead of roller finger followers.
3.0L for the Lincoln LS
3.0L for the Jag XJ
2.5L & 3.0L for the Jag S-Type
2.0L, 2.5L, and 3.0L for the Jag X-Type
The 2.0L is a destroked 2.5L.

Originally posted by procyon:
fastcougar,
Very interesting SAE article. They were using a destroked version of the regular 2.5L roller finger follower engine.

You might not know it, but they are currently making 2.0L 24V V6 Duratec engines at Cleveland Engine Plant. These are for the Jaguar X-Type. The Jaguar and Lincoln Duratec V6 engines all have bucket tappet style heads instead of roller finger followers.
3.0L for the Lincoln LS
3.0L for the Jag XJ
2.5L & 3.0L for the Jag S-Type
2.0L, 2.5L, and 3.0L for the Jag X-Type
The 2.0L is a destroked 2.5L.

Yes, I remember reading that somewhere as well, but I thought that it was for the European market only. I could be mistken ...

Originally posted by procyon:
fastcougar,
Very interesting SAE article. They were using a destroked version of the regular 2.5L roller finger follower engine.

You might not know it, but they are currently making 2.0L 24V V6 Duratec engines at Cleveland Engine Plant. These are for the Jaguar X-Type. The Jaguar and Lincoln Duratec V6 engines all have bucket tappet style heads instead of roller finger followers.
3.0L for the Lincoln LS
3.0L for the Jag XJ
2.5L & 3.0L for the Jag S-Type
2.0L, 2.5L, and 3.0L for the Jag X-Type
The 2.0L is a destroked 2.5L.

I found it very interesting too.
Do you have any more where that came from? I would be very curious to know what cams they used as well as how to get those adjustible cam gears.

Someone should email this to Travis by the way. There are several references to the engines sensitivity to intake manifold tuning with regards to diameter and length.
**There is even a reference to the mean piston speed being different between the 2.5L and the 3.0L engines**

Procyon, how is it possible to have a different mean piston speed with the same stroke though a different bore?
I confess I don't understand it either but this is what Terry Haines referred to also.

War, it's the other way around. They were experimenting with different strokes and using the stock bore size.

With 3.0L Bore size (89.0mm), the necessary stroke reduction to create a 2.0L displacent engine resulted in mean piston speeds of only 15 m/s. They would have needed a stroke of about 53.5mm to get down to 2.0L. As you know stock stroke is 79.5mm.

Using the 2.5L bore of 82.4mm, the stroke was closer to stock and piston speed was 17.7 m/s. According to the article, they used a 62.4mm stroke.

Thanks, I did understand that they had changed the stroke. However, I guess I interpreted the writing as if "they" were referring to the two engines having a different mean piston speed before the stroke was changed and that this was the driving force for their choice of bore. Thanks for pointing out that they were calculating what the effects of a change in stroke would have with the two piston choices.

It didn't make sense that the pistons could have a different speed when the stroke was the same.

I, as I said before, acknowledge the 2.3L MAZDA designed 4cyl is a new design. Can you show me these all new 2L duratec I4s??? All I see is the "zetec/duratec" 2Ls......

I just checked this out. I think he wasnt quite reading it right about the gas velocity thing. They are saying that reducing the stroke on the 3.0L (larger bore) to a 2.0 L made the mean piston speed slower (which makes alot of since) then how much they had to reduce the 2.5L to get the same displacement. The 2.5L`s piston speed would be higher. Because the stroke would be longer. The way he said it in the FCO forum it didnt come out like that.

Im really disappointed in the power the engine made... Im convinced better and wider LSA`s would help with the over scavaging and make more power... we need some adj cam gears on these engines. Its going to make a huge diffrence when the aftermarket cams come out. Im also convinced the 3.0L (larger bore and larger distance between the intake/exhaust valves) will make the overscavaging problem alot less of an issue. Give more increases at the top of the tach.

Arhh so much work...

Kermit, here's 2 good articles on the media.ford.com web page:
Article 1
Article 2

There's one picture in there. Maybe I can find some other pictures later.

Originally posted by gasmaster:
I've heard mention of Ford manufacturing a 3.5L Duratech engine sometime in the near future. I haven't been able to find any spec's on this engine yet

According to Car and Driver, March 2004 issue, page 52,
The next-generation Aviator�??due to hit showrooms in late 2005�??will have a lot of Mazda 6 in its structural makeup, as well as a V-6 engine�??a 240-hp, 3.5-liter version of Ford�??s Duratec.

Linky Caranddriver.com

Travis,

The valve centers on the 3L are exactly the same as the 2.5L and with the larger 3L valves then the edges of the valves are actually closer together. This would make the problem worse instead of better. Not sure how that helps or doesn't help the cam choices, but better to know that up front.

So these new 2Ls you speak off aren't out yet, and really they're just a changed 2.3L,,, no wonder I haven't heard of them.

Yea they are the 2.0L duratec HE`s They are currently out in Europe. They have a shorter stroke then the 2.3`s which makes them VERY rev happy little engines. In essence a 2.0 is a stroke change away from a 2.3 from what iv been told. With the flow capabilities of the 2.3L head it could make an increadible combination. Cosworth is already releasing a head/cam/intake/header package for the 2.3L duratec I4 that puts it into the 200 whp range on pump gas. Not entirely torqueless either. Lots of spine from 3000 up. Should be interesting to see how the I4`s develope.

Thanks for the info btw warmonger The problem should be better regaurdless because the combustion chamber + cylinder volumn will make the air going around the back side of the intake valve (side farthest from the exhaust valve) have more space to fill into before overscavaging happens. This doesnt do anything for the closest sides but you could go as far as to say the cylinder will be nataurally more restricted so this will cause more downward vacuum as opposed to cross vacuum from the negative wave in the exhaust port causing less overscavaging as well. Higher compression pistons should also help to keep the over scavaging down.

Shorter rods also to keep tdc dwell down and draw more into the chamber instead of having all that dwell time where there is no downward piston movement.

Lots of good info in the sae article.

Hmmm, maybe the 3.5 Duratec will have a 4.0 Mod

Originally posted by procyon:
Heck, those marketing guys in Europe are calling everything a Duratec. Look here, there is a 1.3L 8V engine for the Ka being called a duratec.

IIRC, all future DOHC engines will carry the Duratec name along with them - that's how they will be distinguished. The architecture of the engines may be entirely different, just the same name...essentially the Duratec family will be growing immensely, but don't think that just because it has the name, it will work as an upgrade to a Contour, Taurus, Jag, etc, etc...

oh man...think about it..3.5 in a csvt, look out maxima's 350z's (ehh thats too much I guess nvm) omg that'll be awesome

but it ain't happening so there's nothing wrong with dreaming

Originally posted by Goonz12 (SVT):
oh man...think about it..3.5 in a csvt, look out maxima's 350z's (ehh thats too much I guess nvm)

Who needs a 3.5L to do that???

did anybody else see this???

Quote:

With a class-leading interior room, hopefully Focus will not repeat the failure of Contour.

Went with my friend to get his oil changed in his taurus. the guy asked if he had the 3.0L or the 3.5L. wtf?

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
The 2L duratec in the focus RS (street car) has 215hp,,, if they put it in a rally car, it'll have over 300hp.

And It'll Have The Name COSWORTH Attached To It!!!!!!!!!!