50/50 weight

[roworld]

I just read a article on the mustang svo. The article states that the reason the engineers desided to use a 4 banger in the svo mustang was to get close to a 50/50 weight distribution as posible. I know that with a k member swap and aluminum heads alot of weight can be removed from the front of a foxbody. My question is how close does that get you to evening the weight on the car. Has anyone swaped anything other than a v8 in there foxbodys. Would it be worth the effort to try. There are alot of strong engine out their other than v8's.

 

[CarMichael Angelo]

I just read a article on the mustang svo. The article states that the reason the engineers desided to use a 4 banger in the svo mustang was to get close to a 50/50 weight distribution as posible. I know that with a k member swap and aluminum heads alot of weight can be removed from the front of a foxbody. My question is how close does that get you to evening the weight on the car. Has anyone swaped anything other than a v8 in there foxbodys. Would it be worth the effort to try.

Well since you're on the topic of weight,.... asking about swapping ANY other engine than a V8 into a mustang here will mostly go over like a lead balloon.

There is no benefit to swapping in a smaller engine unless you're goal is to achieve 30+ MPGs. Installing a smaller engine, w/ the intent of coming up w/ a similar power to weight ratios to the V8 that was/could be in there is..........well kinda like.
The smaller cubic inch engine will have to be augmented w/ a turbo, intercooler and requisite piping to make enough HP/Torque to even justify it's existence, and all of that junk adds back weight.

You can do anything you want obviously, but if you have a 5.0 in there, you already know that you can get it much lighter by doing the heads, k member and tubular chrome moly front suspension swap. If you do that, then the front end will weigh less than any SVO ever did.

Oh yeah! AND........

There are alot of strong engine out their other than v8's.

Like what?

 

[Noobz347]

Like what?

I've wondered what souped up Eco-Boost motor would be like. I'd love to put one into an S197.

 

[CarMichael Angelo]

Why would you have to soup it up?

"In 2009 Ford modified a experimental 3.5 V6 EcoBoost engine with E85 direct injection andgasoline port fuel injection, which achieved a BMEP score of 305 psi (27 bar), which translates to approximately 553 pound-feet (750 N·m) of torque and 316 horsepower (236 kW)@3000 rpm (flat torque curve from 1500-3000 rpm)"



However as a swap engine, I understand that the fuel pressure required for the direct injection is something like 2000+ P.S.I. Might be a little challenging for a first time ECO Boost swapper like yourself Noobz

 

[Noobz347]

Gotta hit that 400 RWHP mark.

I'm talking, a larger turbo or crank up the BOV or whatever it takes to get there. Probably a moster intercooler too.

 

[CarMichael Angelo]

Gotta hit that 400 RWHP mark.

I'm talking, a larger turbo or crank up the BOV or whatever it takes to get there. Probably a moster intercooler too.

You're talking TWO larger turbos then, (they're already tt'd).

 

[Noobz347]

You're talking TWO larger turbos then, (they're already tt'd).

I love twins.


but yeah... that.

What does the Eco-Bo0ost combo even weigh? I don't actually know if there's an advantage there or not.

 

[CarMichael Angelo]

I love twins.


but yeah... that.

What does the Eco-Bo0ost combo even weigh? I don't actually know if there's an advantage there or not.

449 lbs. ( dont know if that is w/ the turdbos or not though)

 

[Noobz347]

... and an aluminum headed 5oh? That's in the 700lb range?

 

[91TwighlightGT]

Aluminum headed 5.0 isn't 700 lbs. I'll see if I can dig up the weight.

Also, it should be noted that a 2.3L turbo was only about 100-150 lbs. lighter than the iron headed 5.0.

http://forum.turboford.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=055113#000014

I think to get that kind of weight distribution in a Fox, you are talking about more than just engine weight. If it is a street car, I don't see it happening at all, but a race car might be able to get there.

The way I would do it would be with an aluminum headed 5.0 (aluminum block if you got 10K stashed away not being used) with a K-member to set the engine back. Remove A/C, smog, etc. A coilover and tubular A-arm setup would further help. If it is a GT, the fog light bracket and fogs should be removed. Use some aluminum to support the front cover.

On the rear, an IRS is heavier than the solid axle, so I would swap that in so that you get the advantage of lower unsprung weight, and the extra rear weight helps to balance out the overall weight distribution. Then move the battery into the trunk.

A Fiberglass hood up front,or Carbon Fiber if you have the cash, carbon fiber fenders, remove cruise control if it is there.

After that, I would start working on the small stuff. Extra sound deadener up front, extra wiring. For a road race car, you could do a dry sump oil system and mount the oil tank in the rear.

Drag racers may have more options.
A manual steering rack (could be done on a RR car, but most seem to like to keep PS)

Remove front sway bar.

Light weight brakes.

Parachute in the back.

Even lighter K-member.


That's all I can think of. Think we made it?

 

[NIKwoaC]

Yea, I was going to say, i thought a iron-headed 5.0 was in the 450-500 range, dressed.

 

[MikeH686]

Well I know that an aluminum headed five o weighs less then 500you because I got ot on a motor stand rated for 500 lbs ...

 

[CarMichael Angelo]

Well I know that an aluminum headed five o weighs less then 500you because I got ot on a motor stand rated for 500 lbs ...

And you think that means your engine weighs less?

 

[bentley429isBAC]

My car has full tubular front end, coil overs, no ps or ac, no front bumper, alum radiator, iron v8 block, alum heads, blower and a front mount which is roughly 16-18 lbs and was 56/44 last time on the scales. All steel. Should be a little better now.

There is a lot you can do, plus adding weight in the trunk area is also a plus.

 

[Bullitt347]

Moving the battery to the trunk has more of an effect on weight distribution than moving the engine back 1 foot in the chassis. It comes down to leverage. Manual steering is not that bad, and manual brakes are every bit as good as power brakes if you get the pedal pivot right. Loss of A/C is an easy 70 lb deduction provided you take the heater box out and remove the evaporator. Being smart in wheel and tire choice can save an easy 10 to 30 plus lbs off of the front. The list goes on. My Saleen has about a 47/53 split right now. But I have taken into consideration almost everything that can have an effect. The car is still very streetable, to me at least. And that is the big gorilla in the closet, what can you personally live with? It may be totally unreasonable to someone else, but perfectly acceptable to you. I still have power windows, power door locks and a stereo as well. Full carpet and the stock seats, so it is not like my car is a gutted out race car..................yet.

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

Well, some guys on the Merkur forum decided to put this debate to rest so they weighed an EFI 302 oil pan to intake with all the accessories against a complete turbo 2.3 with the turbo and accessories on it and the difference was only about 75lbs. Now, on the nose of a car 75lbs is a big deal. The reason Ford did it this way was because aluminum heads and tubular K members aren't very factory cost effective. If you were to do heads and a K member and trunk mount the battery you'll drop at least 75lbs or more off the nose of the car and end up with more power and torque at the same time.

 

[roworld]

I just read a article on the mustang svo. The article states that the reason the engineers desided to use a 4 banger in the svo mustang was to get close to a 50/50 weight distribution as posible. I know that with a k member swap and aluminum heads alot of weight can be removed from the front of a foxbody. My question is how close does that get you to evening the weight on the car. Has anyone swaped anything other than a v8 in there foxbodys. Would it be worth the effort to try. There are alot of strong engine out their other than v8's.

So from what Im reading its a lost cause trying to get even weight on a street driven foxbody. Im car is a 88 t top gt. Its lowered and Ive added upper and lowed control arms and 228/40/17 in front and 275/45/17 in rear and the handling still sucks.

 

[Bullitt347]

So from what Im reading its a lost cause trying to get even weight on a street driven foxbody. Im car is a 88 t top gt. Its lowered and Ive added upper and lowed control arms and 228/40/17 in front and 275/45/17 in rear and the handling still sucks.

Not a lost cause at all! And your handling still sucks because it takes more than just wheels and tires and a set of control arms to make one of these cars handle "correctly".

 

[jrichker]

GEt out

So from what Im reading its a lost cause trying to get even weight on a street driven foxbody. Im car is a 88 t top gt. Its lowered and Ive added upper and lowed control arms and 228/40/17 in front and 275/45/17 in rear and the handling still sucks.

Get out your wallet and visit Maximum Motorsports, Steeda or Griggs and buy a complete handing package from one of them. Your wallet will shrink to the size of a postage stamp, but your Stang will handle like a champ!

 

[MikeH686]

Yeah I will go with that it probably weighs around five close to five and a quarter