|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119
Back In Black
|
OP
Back In Black
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119 |
Originally posted by mikey boy:
hey mark, get me one and i will see if it works on my escape engine in the svt. 
If i could manage to weasel one into my possession it would already be on the '06 3L AWD Escape. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119
Back In Black
|
|
OP
Back In Black
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119 |
Originally posted by LocoSCZ:
Quit talking about it.....and somebody do it! 
If I had another tour and some expendable income... but hey I think I'm speaking for a majority here!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119
Back In Black
|
|
OP
Back In Black
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
No. The bolt pattern is the same, just the diameters is different. It would be the bolt patter that was important, the rest would just be spacing.
The hood issues have to be measured.
The Valve cover is an easy fix.
The manifold is an easy fix.
Mounting the charger and intercooler are the only issues and it looks like this method is VERY viable if the hood is changed out.
I'm glad, not everyone thinks I'm nuts! haha
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 7,012
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 7,012 |
Originally posted by WorldTour:
If i could manage to weasel one into my possession it would already be on the '06 3L AWD Escape.
we arent talking escapes, just escape engines in contours. call kenne tell him svt needs one for testing. i will test it on my escape motor.
Oo (xxx)oO
o xxxxxxxx o
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119
Back In Black
|
|
OP
Back In Black
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119 |
unfortunately it isn't always that easy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by Swazo:
2. Our engines sit much higher than in Escapes,not only would the supercharger sit above the hood line, but it's outlet would be even higher. A HUGH cowl would be needed to enclose it with room to move.
Absolutely Perfect point that comes up every time this idea does. People keep using the Escape picture and don't connect the fact the engine sits 3-4" lower in the engine bay then it does in our car. You can't just factor that out or ignore that in the equation.
Either way that's one hell of a Fugly hood needed to cover that "power bulge"
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
No. The bolt pattern is the same, just the diameters is different. It would be the bolt patter that was important, the rest would just be spacing.
The hood issues have to be measured.
The Valve cover is an easy fix.
The manifold is an easy fix.
Mounting the charger and intercooler are the only issues and it looks like this method is VERY viable if the hood is changed out.
Odd, the mount they tried to sell me at the stealership was had 2 studs rather than 4, and it swung towards the firewall.... not inline like ours  I haven't seen an Escape's engine bay upclose, so I can't say for sure.
2005 Ford F150 SuperCab FX4
1964 Chevrolet Impala SS
1998 CSVT: 354HP/328TQ @ 10 psi, now gone 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 533
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 533 |
Originally posted by LocoSCZ:
Quit talking about it.....and somebody do it!
koni kit - hpp rstb
camber/plates - cf (yikes!)
polyroll resistors - TCA's
WR headers/ypipe -TB hiflow cat
SFC's - XCal2
-dreaming of 3L-
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119
Back In Black
|
|
OP
Back In Black
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,119 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Absolutely Perfect point that comes up every time this idea does. People keep using the Escape picture and don't connect the fact the engine sits 3-4" lower in the engine bay then it does in our car. You can't just factor that out or ignore that in the equation.
Either way that's one hell of a Fugly hood needed to cover that "power bulge"
The Escape engine bay has nothing to do with it. I know the engine sits lower, thats why I picked up the phone and made few calls to determin just how much higher the blower sits in relation to the UIM on the 3L. If you would have read some of my previous posts you would see that I've included some figures on how much higher it is over the 3L UIM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760 |
Originally posted by WorldTour:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Absolutely Perfect point that comes up every time this idea does. People keep using the Escape picture and don't connect the fact the engine sits 3-4" lower in the engine bay then it does in our car. You can't just factor that out or ignore that in the equation.
Either way that's one hell of a Fugly hood needed to cover that "power bulge"
The Escape engine bay has nothing to do with it. I know the engine sits lower, thats why I picked up the phone and made few calls to determin just how much higher the blower sits in relation to the UIM on the 3L. If you would have read some of my previous posts you would see that I've included some figures on how much higher it is over the 3L UIM.
But doesn't it have everything to do with it? It looks like via the picturs, the KB kit uses the Escape 'front' engine mount for support. So, if the engine is lower in the bay, the mount is going to be lower. Where as the CDW27 engine is higher, the mount is going to be higher and thus be in the way of the support and looks like tensoner for the snout of the blower...
Ryan
Trollin!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
