|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 743
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 743 |
Originally posted by Terry Haines: 2001 3.0 Taurus has the WAPU in same position as 2.5,driven off the cam! terry i might be able to help you with the website hosting...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050 |
Ok, I am very curious now. I have located a 99 taurus 3.0L which I was going to order next week! I gather there are problems with 2.5l heads going on the 3.0 block. Does the block overlap the 2.5 heads? By that I mean, when the heads set on the block, can you still see part of the block? If so, do the oil/water passages actually chance leaking outside the engine? How much bigger are 3.0L heads than the 2.5L heads? Would I be better off finding the 01 motor, or just keeping the 99 motor? If anyone took pictures of the 2.5l head before installation, and the 3.0l block this would be great. warmonger
You can call me anything you like as long as it's nice.(all lies accepted) 99 Silver Frost SVT. #226 of 2760 Engine: 3.0 power! Unique Stuff: Sunroof control module (#1 of 9) Car Audio: Loaded and loud! Check them out at http://home.earthlink.net/~twilson1726
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 82
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 82 |
I dunno guys... listen to Terry... if the '01 3.0L heads fit... well? Why would anyone not use them? This eliminates and "questions" about the plugs and welds. It also drops the compresion! Sounds like the best of both worlds!!!!! The ONLY way i could see useing svt heads on a 3.0L at this time is if you plan to build a N/A car and have a good welding contact... oh... and of course only if you happen to have a set laying around or on your present block.....
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 434
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 434 |
I am not questioning the use of the 2.5 heads on the 3.0 block, but rather, the materials used to "plug" some unneeded passages. I am well aware of the 2001's configuration, but considering that everyone already has the 2.5 heads or the SVT 2.5 heads, all you will need is a 3.0 shortblock and everything else but gaskets carries over. Cost wise, this would be at least half the cost of a 2001 longblock. If I had $2.5K - $3K to blow, I would probably go this route, but I don't ... hell, this isn't even for my car (sold it :().
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,562
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,562 |
Originally posted by exigent: I dunno guys... listen to Terry... if the '01 3.0L heads fit... well? Why would anyone not use them? This eliminates and "questions" about the plugs and welds. It also drops the compresion! Sounds like the best of both worlds!!!!! The ONLY way i could see useing svt heads on a 3.0L at this time is if you plan to build a N/A car and have a good welding contact... oh... and of course only if you happen to have a set laying around or on your present block..... Mostly because of cost, if you can even find one to buy. As long as the cold weld area is properly prepped and at an acceptable thickness, it will be fine. There is no pressure on the two oil returns and the passage tappers as it goes down the block leaving very little chance of separation. The one oil pressure feed that needs to be filled can be tapped and plugged with a factory style allen head plug, with a little cold weld on the threads to prevent it from backing out. If you want a mild boosted 3 liter, you can still do it by using the pre'01 heads by swapping an electric water pump. Buying an older block and the electric water pump will be cheaper in most instances than buying a '01 complete assembly. Not only will it be cheaper, but you'd get the added performance of removing the water pump AND the added reliability of such a unit over the factory troublesome piece.
Brad Noon '99 SE MTX 3 point oh my God H.O. 179HP/178TQ BNMotorsports Floormats, powder coating, TB optimizing, Gutted cats, etc BNMotorsports is now the preferred distributor of Contour/SVT/Mystique Indiglo style gauges!!!bnmotorsports@msn.com
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 82
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 82 |
hrm.. that sounds like a plan bnoon... I suppose i failed to consider that the parts are cost prohibitive at this time... so i suppose unless someone "fell" on a 01 longblock your method would be far more cost effective. Im also intrigued by the mention of the elec pump. I was under the impression that these units have such a short lifespan they are useless? I can see ill have to look into them a bit more.... that seems like the way to go for me now... 99-01 longblock with an elec pump... Thanks for clearing me up a bit.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 434
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 434 |
Do what you want to your own engine ... I will do mine to last the long haul. You may not have any problems to date at 2,500 miles and counting Brad, and good for you. I hope nothing happens to your engine for centuries to come, but I doubt that will be the case. My hat is off to you for doing the mods and offering to help others do the same, but I would never do this with JB Weld ... too many "what if's" for me.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050 |
Originally posted by bnoon:
If you want a mild boosted 3 liter, you can still do it by using the pre'01 heads by swapping an electric water pump. Buying an older block and the electric water pump will be cheaper in most instances than buying a '01 complete assembly. Not only will it be cheaper, but you'd get the added performance of removing the water pump AND the added reliability of such a unit over the factory troublesome piece. Although I think the electric waterpump idea is fine, I question the added performance value. I'm no 3L swap expert (not yet), but I know it still takes work to generate the power to run an electric water pump. Only difference is it loads the alternator more. I run my stereo at high volume, and when I'm decelerating I can feel the drag increase from the alternator load when the bass hits. I assume the work would just be "channeled" through the already overtaxed alternator. I'd prefer to use the waterpump's current configuration, but then I want to build a N/A vehicle anyway (with NOS) so the 2.5L heads are what I am looking at. I am just worried about those sealing issues. I will probably have it welded, or weld it myself and have it decked if needed. Any more good information on why it needs decked? Why not just weld some plugs into the block and not worry about it? Just make sure not to raise the temp of the block too much and keep the welds inside or down lower into the recessed passages. Then if you filled with jb weld it wouldn't matter at all. warmonger
You can call me anything you like as long as it's nice.(all lies accepted) 99 Silver Frost SVT. #226 of 2760 Engine: 3.0 power! Unique Stuff: Sunroof control module (#1 of 9) Car Audio: Loaded and loud! Check them out at http://home.earthlink.net/~twilson1726
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,329 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
I'm no 3L swap expert (not yet), but I know it still takes work to generate the power to run an electric water pump. Only difference is it loads the alternator more. The pump draw will not be as high as you are thinking. Also since the stock W/P runs off the intake cam it adds considerable parasitic drag to the valvetrain. Removing this drag far out weighs any minimal amperage increase the W/P creates. Plus gives the added effect of lightening the valve train (faster reving)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,050 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The pump draw will not be as high as you are thinking. Also since the stock W/P runs off the intake cam it adds considerable parasitic drag to the valvetrain. Removing this drag far out weighs any minimal amperage increase the W/P creates. Plus gives the added effect of lightening the valve train (faster reving) I can accept that answer assuming the amperage is low enough. What is it anyway? I'd like to think that low amperage would be around 10amps. At 13.6 volts... that's 136 watts of power plus extra losses wasted as heat due to resistance, etc. If its 20amps (more like a power window motor) then its doubled to 250watts. That would be noticeable. Overall, I think that I'll agree with your assesment but I still want to know.... :rolleyes: warmonger
You can call me anything you like as long as it's nice.(all lies accepted) 99 Silver Frost SVT. #226 of 2760 Engine: 3.0 power! Unique Stuff: Sunroof control module (#1 of 9) Car Audio: Loaded and loud! Check them out at http://home.earthlink.net/~twilson1726
|
|
|
|
|