Build Thread 1978 Mercury Cyclone. The pig is in the pen.

Status
Not open for further replies.
#10,141
Destroke it, add boost, and carbon fibre pushrods, and a carbon fibre cover over the side plate, or at least, aramid coating to quiet the riot.

Just like Ford did on alumnum drive shafts.

My old tall deck 200 from the 1972 XA Falcon 500 I wrecked has US 250 mains, factor 6.28" rods, and the conrods are forged. All you gotta do is weld the front snout up to 1.375 inches...rear flage is US 250.

In think the trust bearing differences aren't different on the crank. Its a good cast nodular iron item.

Smoothness of a long rod, 2:1 rod ro stroke ratio engine is massively better, those who have driven a destroked 302 Chev 351m or 240 that is no longer a 327/ 350 or 400 Ford or 300/4.9 will vouch for this. I have.

In our 18 minute phone chat, I noted that the TRW pistons in the 302 Chev made the car a cold warm up um, "slapper". An early z28 302 is still a very sweet engine.

The long rod engines are very kind to the cylinder bore, and no piston rock. Time to destroke, and nail it CMA.

IMHO....
 

  • Sponsors (?)


#10,142
I know you said mod motor-but this looks pretty sweet-add some CMA/MadMike flare and it could be Amazing
(if a motor change is still in the works,still have my fingers crossed for the Aussie headed Sixxer.)
08440A59-9DA1-4E80-87D7-E3781B7F7501.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
#10,143
RaggedGT said:
I know you said mod motor-but this looks pretty sweet-add some CMA/MadMike flare and it could be Amazing
(if a motor change is still in the works,still have my fingers crossed for the Aussie headed Sixxer.)
08440A59-9DA1-4E80-87D7-E3781B7F7501.jpeg
Click to expand...
That makes me want to buy a camaro and put a ford modular engine in it. :mad:
But not Fix my oil leak or drive my Cobra :cautious:
 
#10,145
xecute said:
Destroke it, add boost, and carbon fibre pushrods, and a carbon fibre cover over the side plate, or at least, aramid coating to quiet the riot.

Just like Ford did on alumnum drive shafts.

My old tall deck 200 from the 1972 XA Falcon 500 I wrecked has US 250 mains, factor 6.28" rods, and the conrods are forged. All you gotta do is weld the front snout up to 1.375 inches...rear flage is US 250.

In think the trust bearing differences aren't different on the crank. Its a good cast nodular iron item.

Smoothness of a long rod, 2:1 rod ro stroke ratio engine is massively better, those who have driven a destroked 302 Chev 351m or 240 that is no longer a 327/ 350 or 400 Ford or 300/4.9 will vouch for this. I have.

In our 18 minute phone chat, I noted that the TRW pistons in the 302 Chev made the car a cold warm up um, "slapper". An early z28 302 is still a very sweet engine.

The long rod engines are very kind to the cylinder bore, and no piston rock. Time to destroke, and nail it CMA.

IMHO....
Click to expand...
What does the finger say?
 
#10,150
a91what said:
My engine will look very similar when I'm done.
Click to expand...
One day I will get around to a crank trigger and cam sync and go coils . I want them out of site honestly. We used the maven brackets on the race car i did . They make them for like tube mount too where you could prob mount them to an aftermarket k member down low .

E6F4BB2D-73EA-4A89-8FAC-BDDF20E783DA.jpeg
F8A0F21A-1F67-404F-BEE1-C6DB616352C5.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
#10,153
Ya know Mike....we've all been thinking big. The answer may be in the little ecoboost 2.3L. 310hp and 350ftlbs. They are cheap and MAP performance has loads of parts. It's small enough to accommodate all the tubes and turbo you'd ever need. It's way cheaper to build a 4 cylinder versus a v8...or custom straight 6. The platform is new enough...and and odd enough to get all the car show looks and questions.

Screenshot_20190123-211308_Chrome.jpg


Complete brand new ford warranted engine

Screenshot_20190808-101525_Chrome.jpg


I'm sure ms3 can run it....maybe....

( edit ) I've found the crate engine cheaper through Ford....I think it was around 4k
 
#10,154
Can't get much more reliable than an almost brand new factory engine.... The rods, block studs, ported heads, billet intake, secondary fuel system, and mo boost can net up to 700hp.

Screenshot_20190808-102334_Chrome.jpg


Just sitting at work bored...and decided to clutter your thread with 4 cylinder stuff.
 
Last edited:
  • Hell Yeah!
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
#10,155
And the finger is fine. One stroke of it proves You really deserve a V8 then.

See Mrs "Peelout". Powerglide 2 stage, 3.7. High sevens. Stock drive train and suspension and weight.


View: https://youtu.be/jiwKMFVDc-k


mpSS_004.jpg


Now, one suplementry question Mr Speaker.

Q. Why did the 3.8 Jag, the 302 Zee 28, 289 GT350, the Torana 202 XU1 GTR, the 2.6 liter GTR Skyline and indeed, all the smaller versions of the bigger stroked engines do better in a competition environment?

Because of optimum power and smoothness for the block. When you turbo, your cam LSA has to suit the effective capaity of the engine with the boost ratio added. So 250 with 14.7 pounds boost is a 500 cubic inch tractor puller with its boost ratio capacity. With added boost, comes added effective capacity. Your engine is a big lunged 4.65 bore, 4.91 stroke, 11.37 inch tall triffid with 5 inch bore spacings when you give it boost. It behaves like an engine 6 inches longer, 2" taller, and 250 cubes bigger. The torsinal vibration does as well.


One guy with a turbo 3.3 with insane boost and a bigger than CMA duration cam is chasing the same crank seal leak. As everyone does with a smaller 3.625" crank flange verses your V8 sized flange. It is a lot worse with the US style 200 than with your 250. The engine, even with its crapt 1.5:1 rod ratio, is just a pure dynomo of grunt.

67SS_001.jpg


67SS_002.jpg


67SS_003.jpg


67SS_004_1.jpg


IMHO, you should just fix the problems.

Your problems are smoothness related,

Big sixes are like 2 liter engines over 2 liters.

In those cases, secondary vibration goes haywire. They suddenly get rough, noisy, and people who stroke them, find they peter out past 2.3 liters. Same with a sixes past 3.3 liters. Torsional vibration in the crank goes haywire at about 1.75 hp per cube, or 437.5 hp. Drop the crank overlap, and you get another bite of the fruit.

I don't hate on the 250 or 4.0 DOHC, but its sooooo much rougher than a 200 or 3.2.Or 3.7.

Ford Australias destroked the tall 250 to make it a 3.3 200 and the little 3.2 OHC. They never got a proper Porsche 911 Turbo style boost, and the ding bats spent, wasted, all the development budget on adding another 21 or 50 cubes to make 221 and 250 engines that were basically door stops to 302 and 351 Cleveland and Mod 5 and 5.4 V8's.

The 9 second DOHC car I like of note are 10000 rpm destroked 179 cubic inch DOHC turbo's, and if you liked the 66 Intech Turbo Stang, then you'll grab a destroked 250 crank and save on your investment and take my advice.


Or go off on a wild goose chase. Your finger will decide....
 
Last edited:
#10,160
I guess time will tell Dean. I’m at the crux...the engine runs again. My mind will stop wandering down the “what if “ boulevard, and I’ll be focused on the here and now again. I actually had a dream a couple of nights ago that I put the thing on the Dyno...
I had to be smiling because, I remember saying to myself “ there it is” when the dyno dude lifted off of the throttle as he was warming the car up and the BOV made the PSSSSHHHHOTTT noise that it used to make that it stopped making when the ITB’s were installed. I never actually got to see the power number though...but that has never been a concern when the thing is making 7+ psi.

And although I’ve said that 10-12 psi is the target all along,.....the itch that needs scratching will probably take one bar to satisfy.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back
New
Hot
Menu