|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693
Hard-core CEG'er
|
OP
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693 |
I found this posted on the Escape-Central forums and thought it may be of interest. Some of the facts in the introduction seem to be a bit off, but the photos are great with a lot of detail. http://www.babcox.com/editorial/ar/eb90546.htm
Jim Johnson
98 SVT
03 Escape Limited
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037 |
"Think of it, if you like, as a librarian with a G-string under the tweed." Clarkson on the Mondeo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117 |
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Nice resource.
Agreed.
I read through it & get the impression that a 2000-2001 Lincoln LS non-VVT engine could be used in our cars. Can anybody verify that? Is there any extra HP to be had there with the direct acting tappets?
I suspect the water pump location may be an issue, but I don't know for sure as I've never seen the 3.0 engine in a Lincoln.
Must be that jumbly-wumbly thing happening again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,238
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,238 |
In the second paragraph dont they mean the 351 cid truck engine ? Nice article though.
-tropictour
2000 Contour SVT
Tropic Green
SHO Shop CAI
Bassani
1999 Contour SE
BAT Kit
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 375
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 375 |
Originally posted by TourDeForce:
...a 2000-2001 Lincoln LS non-VVT engine could be used in our cars. Can anybody verify that? Is there any extra HP to be had there with the direct acting tappets?
VERY good question indeed! Who can answer that?
96 LX 3.0L MTX - Black/Tan
K&N; 12lb F/W & uprated clutch
2.5" Pipe; SVT bits; Mystery Mod; Pull-tie Mod;
UN-tuned Mod; 3rd Gear Synro-Crunch Mod
280K on the Shell, and 40ish on the Motor... 1/4 mile??
Yeah, it's a fun daily driver...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 110
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 110 |
Originally posted by TourDeForce:
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Nice resource.
Agreed.
I read through it & get the impression that a 2000-2001 Lincoln LS non-VVT engine could be used in our cars. Can anybody verify that? Is there any extra HP to be had there with the direct acting tappets?
I suspect the water pump location may be an issue, but I don't know for sure as I've never seen the 3.0 engine in a Lincoln.
Someone put one in a miata. http://www.miata.net/news/v6.html
What do you mean by tappets?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by TourDeForce:
Is there any extra HP to be had there with the direct acting tappets?
No.
There only benefit is the ability to run higher rpm levels without the minimal collapsing of the lash adjustor. (more accurate lift) The rpm levels required to see that difference is well above the limits of the engine. (i.e. the stock valvetrain can surpass 8000rpm without any problems)
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760 |
Nope. They mean 361 truck engine. Old school Ford motor. I don't remember if that is a y-block motor or even a part of the 352 engine family. Originally posted by tropictour:
In the second paragraph dont they mean the 351 cid truck engine ? Nice article though.
-tropictour
Ryan
Trollin!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693 |
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Nope. They mean 361 truck engine. Old school Ford motor. I don't remember if that is a y-block motor or even a part of the 352 engine family.
Originally posted by tropictour:
In the second paragraph dont they mean the 351 cid truck engine ? Nice article though.
-tropictour
Yes, it is part of the 352, 360, 390, 410, 427, 428 family. It was unique to the trucks. I seem to remember that it was a 352 bore with a 390 crank. I do remember that the 410 (Mercury only) was a 390 bore with a 428 crank.
The 361 was only used in medium duty trucks (larger than F350). It was essentually a 360 with a cam ment for truck use (a lot of torque), very strong pistons, and so on to help it live up to harsh truck use.
Last edited by Big Jim; 10/05/05 09:30 PM.
Jim Johnson
98 SVT
03 Escape Limited
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by TourDeForce:
Is there any extra HP to be had there with the direct acting tappets?
No.
There only benefit is the ability to run higher rpm levels without the minimal collapsing of the lash adjustor. (more accurate lift) The rpm levels required to see that difference is well above the limits of the engine. (i.e. the stock valvetrain can surpass 8000rpm without any problems)
I remember a conversation with one of the Ford engineers about the valve train difference and he indicated that the main advantage of the mechanism used in the Contour (also Mark VIII and Cobra) was for much more agressive cam profiles. Something that Ford has never pursued. I really don't know just how accurate this is, it was just part of a converstion between two hot rodders.
Jim Johnson
98 SVT
03 Escape Limited
|
|
|
|
|
