Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications Forced Induction S/C PLUS 3.0L

Ya, what he said... Whatcha think Mark? I can't remember without looking to see if it's even possible...

It's possible, but the added vibration is going to cause other problems, namely the bearings and gear drive on the SC. Your best bet is to get the prop shaft hardened and then use a synthetic impact grease on the splines instead of the suggested anti-sieze.

-Mark

I think I mentioned before that you could have those pieces heat treated to improve the surface hardness. I don't know where you live, but there is bound to be a facility that works with heat treatment of metals. I live in Tucson AZ and there is a facility in phoenix that you can describe your problem and they will tell you the best way to treat the material. If all else fails check with the local university at their metallurgy department or materials engineering department.

I feel confident that your problem can be handled.

BTW for FastCougar. You say that boosting a car is a lot of work to go through for only 6psi of boost. I would agree if you boosted a 9:1 engine with 6psi. However, you with the S/C your are boosting 6psi and compressing 10:1. Something must be said for the performance increase of compressing even more air and fuel than norma down to 1/10 its original volume. So I don't agree. I agree that knocking would be my primary concern, but you have the same issue on a lower CR engine that you boost higher than the 6-10psi range anyway. If knock is under control then who cares how the power is made.
As far as the 3.0 heads again. I see no advantage to their use other than no machine shop work required, but then you need the $300+ water pump. So its 6 in one hand and a half dozen in the other.
*************************************************
All people thinking of cutting SVT cams to fit 3.0 heads take note:
*************************************************
I am also not fond of the idea of chopping a tubular camshaft. Those cams are not forged or cast as one piece. They are assembled on a hollow tube and then a ball bearing is pressed down the center to expand the tube against the cam lobes and bearing surfaces. It makes the cams lighter, stronger, and easier to harden the lobes to resist wear. What happens when you chop off the end of the cam? I think that would basically ruin the cam unless you could insert an end plug properly into the end of the cam.
Those of you who have done it or know for sure could you enlighten us?

warmonger

Wrong.
The only difference in the combustion chamber aside from valve size is the extra metal shrouding the valves, including that flat wall that is next to the intakes.
I have done this and when I develop the film you can all see for yourself. Removing ALL the shrouding around the valves in the 2.5L heads basically removes the same amount of metal that is removed when the 3.0L heads are first milled at the factory. This shrouding IS the difference in combustion chamber volume. I measured the volume after I removed the shrouding around the valves and removed almost all of the flat wall next to the intake valves. There is plenty of metal to remove. The valve sizes are different, but the spacing between the valves is exactly (I have a picture with a micrometer in place!) the same on both heads. The valve seats on the intake are the same for both the 3.0 and the 2.5L except they are cut different. The outside diameter of the seat is EXACTLY the same. Easy to recut them to the same dimensions. (I've done that already)
The exhaust valves are a LOT smaller, and so are the seats. When the new seats are installed into the heads, they have the same amount of metal between the outside edge of the new exhaust valve seats and the intake valve seats. This means that they are positioned identically in the head. Again, I have measured this before and after so I know I am right. I have documented every step on this engine building/modifying process JUST for this type of occasion when I make a statement and have to prove it. You can take my word for it now, or wait until I get all the pictures posted.

Sorry to be a little emphatic here, but I have spent 30 days of my offtime maniacally measuring veryifying and photographic all this work. I have completed the head modifications and I am very confident as to the information I am passing out here;
WITH REGARD to the 1999 SVT heads and 1999 Taurus 3.0L heads.

warmonger

For every full point of compression, you are talking about 10hp increase ... with boost, maybe 20hp. I am not against boosting high compression engines, I am against using inferior stock components. At 6+psi, the stock rods are at their limits. As long as I am replacing the rods and pistons to take a beating, I may as well lower compression and increase boost ... much better than the other way around. I would like to get Terry's thoughts on this matter. 99% sure he will agree ... 9:1 or lower + more boost is the way to go. When you bend a rod or walk the crank, I think that you will start to agree.

You'd probably be right on that.
I just meant that you would still get plenty of power, and I took the hypothetical approach of no knocking.

warmonger

I don't know what happened to the message, its not showing up.

Basically you'd be right if I started hurting engine internals, no doubt of it. I was discussing the hypothetical "no-knockin" case, then you would still get good power.
Nothing more than that.

warmonger

I have completed matching the 01' 3L heads to the 2.5 LIM. If anyone is interested in doing this PM me and we will talk. It is almost neccessay to do this with a return fuel system and using the 01' engine.