Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives
Posted By: Auto-X Fil 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 05:37 PM
I know pricing has been brought up before, but I want to run some numbers specific to my idea. I'm considering snapping up a Contour if I find a clean rust-free V-6 with a blown engine. That cost is variable, of course, but how does this sound for a build:

$800 for solid engine with warranty from a local yard (that's correct for me here)
$200 for new gaskets and hardware
$600 for Torsen
$300 for chip/tuner
$300 for dyno-tune

That's $2200 without tranny work. How much is it (roughly) to get new shift forks and the like, and the LSD installed? How DIYable is that? Is Terry the better option? It's under $1000 for him to completely build a transaxle if I supply the LSD, right? That puts me at around $3k plus car and other mods. Sound feasible? If those numbers are close, I'll be hunting for the right chassis to make it happen.

Also, is there anything I should look for in a chassis to make the swap easier? I want a 4-bolt car with OBD-II, so that narrows it down.


EDIT: forgot fuel rail. Add $100 or so, right?
Posted By: Stazi Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 05:39 PM
I guess the sticky up top wasn't read, huh?!
Posted By: MapOfTaziFoSho Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 05:46 PM
Originally posted by Stazi:
I guess the sticky up top wasn't read, huh?!




Owned!


4 bolt LCA's plus obd 2....

96+ up to e0 SVTs.

You don't really need a dyno tune. If you call brenspeed he can hook you up.

Once I am totally done with a solid 3L NA tune. I may send it to brenspeed because his tune for a non-SVT duratec was a joke. There is so much more that needs to be changed to make it work.
Posted By: Auto-X Fil Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 08:35 PM
Originally posted by Stazi:
I guess the sticky up top wasn't read, huh?!




Yeah I read it, where do you think I got my info? I was wondering if there was anything else to consider if I'm going to do this from scratch. I'd like to make it easy on myself by getting the best car/engine/etc.
Posted By: todras_dup1 Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 08:36 PM
Consider a TH trans. Roughly $1400+ with LSD included. Prices may have changed since LSD prices went up I think. A warranty on an a 3L engine that's going into a Contour?
Posted By: Auto-X Fil Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 08:47 PM
They said they'd do it. 1 year, unlimited miles and as long as you don't mod it internally or boost it the warranty is good.
Posted By: MapOfTaziFoSho Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 10:28 PM
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
They said they'd do it. 1 year, unlimited miles and as long as you don't mod it internally or boost it the warranty is good.




Waste. I'd rather replace the bearings and have my own "warranty"
Posted By: posthuman63t Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 10:32 PM
Originally posted by MapOfTazi ohhh right:
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
They said they'd do it. 1 year, unlimited miles and as long as you don't mod it internally or boost it the warranty is good.




Waste. I'd rather replace the bearings and have my own "warranty"




Posted By: Auto-X Fil Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/05/06 10:58 PM
Well, I have considered building an engine for the experience. If I've never done it before, is this a good one to start with? I was thinking about a Miata instead, mostly because it's an easier in/out and it's easier to find a Miata with engine issues than a Contour.
Posted By: MapOfTaziFoSho Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/06/06 04:14 AM
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Well, I have considered building an engine for the experience. If I've never done it before, is this a good one to start with? I was thinking about a Miata instead, mostly because it's an easier in/out and it's easier to find a Miata with engine issues than a Contour.





REALLY!?

Around here they are a dime a dozen!
Posted By: warmonger_dup1 Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/06/06 03:02 PM
Then convert over the heads to fit the Lower Intake manifold. So much easier that Fkkn with all that other stuff, fuel rail included. Two hours of your time also saves a lot of money.

For a quality engine, $600-$1000 shipped. Gaskets $200, only if you replace every single thing. I've told people often enough that all you need is new head, pan and timing cover gaskets at a minimum. I say this because you don't want to pull something in that area apart later. Obviously you inspect the valve cover gaskets for pliability, and other o-rings/gaskets like on the intakes. If they are still pliable and in good shape, reuse them. If they eventually go bad, changing them on this engine is easy at that point.

You will want to replace the rod bearings with clevite77 and that means a set of rod bolts (about $100 total), but you won't need to do the mains (never been a main bearing issue). This gives you a chance to pull each piston assembly for inspection. You can carefully remove the rings, clean them and the grooves, clean the pistons up then lube everything and reassemble. This is the time you decide if you need new rings or not.

No need to worry about pulling the mains as I said, and then you can have confidence in your new engine.

As far as the heads, I posted how easy it is to convert to fit stock contour intakes and it makes it sooooo much easier for future work too.
You don't need to worry about non-standard parts everywhere else, and if you have SVT PCM it will even run a 3L just like stock only a lot better.
So you probably won't need a tune for a while. Then of course you can do some porting on the heads to improve flow if necessary.

And if I didn't mention it, all valve covers, timing covers, fuel rails, everything just bolts right back up at that point like stock. Unless you are a perfectionist with a 3L drop in, this will guarantee higher reliability in the long run.

Just FYI, $1700 with me doing the labor gave me a 3L with worked heads producing 217 wHP. After exhaust, headers and an emanage, $2500 later I had a great, tuneable car. Of course now the xcal2 is better and only a little more than an emanage.
Posted By: weargle Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/07/06 07:41 PM
You have found more blown up Miatae than Contours? I simply can't believe that.
Posted By: Auto-X Fil Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/07/06 09:02 PM
I have found more Miatas with short-nose crank or other issues than V-6, 5-speed, 4-bolt LCA Contours with blown engines. Contours in general are more common, but 5-speed V-6 cars are really hard to find.

Plus, there are Miatas on craigslist within a 4-5 hour radius of me every day that need engines. People throw away blown Contours, while Miatas hold enough value (and hold together well enough) to be worth selling.

Try looking for a car. I've found eight Miata project cars that tempted me in the last month. I've been looking for the right Contour for two years and never found one close to me. The ones I find are auto, 4-cyl, rusted out, or just disgusting.
Posted By: weargle Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/21/06 03:13 PM
So you mean only the early now 15+ year old 1.6s. Gotcha.

You should do a *real* 3L Locost. That would be sweet.
Posted By: todras_dup1 Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/21/06 03:45 PM
Thanks for the unnecessary post revival.
Posted By: weargle Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/22/06 02:40 PM
Originally posted by todras:
Thanks for the unnecessary post revival.




You're welcome. Next time, I'll start another one and make searches even more ridiculous.
Posted By: bnoon_dup1 Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/22/06 02:58 PM
Originally posted by warmonger:
, but you won't need to do the mains (never been a main bearing issue). <snip>

No need to worry about pulling the mains as I said, and then you can have confidence in your new engine.




I disagree with this part of the post. When my 2.5 spit it's rod bearing, I severely hurt two mains as well (though they didn't spin). Even in a budget build, I would pull the mains and inspect them at a minimum, even if I didn't want to replace the bearings. A few more bucks for the TTY main bolts is worth every penny.

$525 delivered for my 3L engine and a couple hun for the bolts/gaskets I needed, I had my 3L swapped in myself for under 800 bucks. How's that for "Locost"???

It put down 180/180 whp/wtq at SZ with a crappy stock SE UIM, a check engine light, a leaking exhaust manifold, running way rich on 24# FMS injectors, and no tune. When I swapped in the ported 3L aluminum UIM, I never got it dynoed again, but I KNOW it was a HUGE increase in performance over the stock SE UIM and didn't cost me a thing but time. I really wish I would have dynoed it though... It would have been above 200 WHP, I just know it!
Posted By: Auto-X Fil Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/22/06 05:53 PM
Originally posted by weargle:
So you mean only the early now 15+ year old 1.6s. Gotcha.

You should do a *real* 3L Locost. That would be sweet.




No, I mean all Miatas. It's not that Miatas fail more, it's that a huge majority of Miatas are good project cars while most Contours are not.

I've been thinking about that. Is there a longitudinal transaxle that will mate to the Duratecs? I was thinking about telling a friend to throw a turbo 3L in his RX-7. He's looking for an unusual swap. I'm afraid a blown 3800 might work better due to packaging and tranny choice, though.
Posted By: weargle Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/22/06 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Originally posted by weargle:
So you mean only the early now 15+ year old 1.6s. Gotcha.

You should do a *real* 3L Locost. That would be sweet.




No, I mean all Miatas. It's not that Miatas fail more, it's that a huge majority of Miatas are good project cars while most Contours are not.

I've been thinking about that. Is there a longitudinal transaxle that will mate to the Duratecs? I was thinking about telling a friend to throw a turbo 3L in his RX-7. He's looking for an unusual swap. I'm afraid a blown 3800 might work better due to packaging and tranny choice, though.




Lincoln LS Gecrap manual mates up. You'll need a custom driveshaft. There is a 3L Miata out there set up this way. Or, go with something beefier and adapt a T5. Googling can find the guy that made a custom plate.

The short nose crank issue was *only* on early 1.6Ls. Seeing as how the B6ZE engines were also used in the 323 GTX, I don't see why there was such a failure rate when there wasn't one in that turbocharged application. This is null on the 1.8L BP05.
Posted By: warmonger_dup1 Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/23/06 12:16 AM
Well, you are entitled to your opinion...this once.

Not bad advice by any means but I have to point out that if there was obvious damage to an engine as from bad rods then I'd check everything out. I only meant on a good low miles runner I'd leave the mains alone. Low miles being less than 25-30K...obviously less, not one of those that looks like it had 200K that the junkyard sells claiming it has 500 miles on it. lol
Posted By: Thinkmoto Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/23/06 09:46 PM
Originally posted by weargle:
The short nose crank issue was *only* on early 1.6Ls. Seeing as how the B6ZE engines were also used in the 323 GTX, I don't see why there was such a failure rate when there wasn't one in that turbocharged application.




Are you saying that the B6T motors didn't have short nose crank failures? I hope I read that correctly because I know for a fact that the turbo GTX and GT's sure did. Thats one of the stupid reasons I had for selling my 323GTX On top of the weak trannies and never ending rust
Posted By: "shotty driving"-ds Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/24/06 05:49 AM
Originally posted by weargle:
Lincoln LS Gecrap manual mates up. You'll need a custom driveshaft. There is a 3L Miata out there set up this way. Or, go with something beefier and adapt a T5. Googling can find the guy that made a custom plate.




http://www.miata.net/news/v6.html
Posted By: weargle Re: 3.0L "locost" build - 06/24/06 03:49 PM
Originally posted by Thinkmoto:
Originally posted by weargle:
The short nose crank issue was *only* on early 1.6Ls. Seeing as how the B6ZE engines were also used in the 323 GTX, I don't see why there was such a failure rate when there wasn't one in that turbocharged application.




Are you saying that the B6T motors didn't have short nose crank failures? I hope I read that correctly because I know for a fact that the turbo GTX and GT's sure did. Thats one of the stupid reasons I had for selling my 323GTX On top of the weak trannies and never ending rust




No, I misstyped what I meant to say. Mazda should have corrected the problem that would have been more pronounced in a boosted engine.
© CEG Archives