200 or 250
- Thread starter 63comet
- Start date
A
Anonymous
Guest
I think the falcon 6 performance handbook has an entire chapter dedicated to this swap...my copy is out in my shop at this time so I cant check! 
Later,
Doug
Later,
Doug
thanks Doug, I just went through the entire article in Falcon 6 and I notice it doesn't mention anything about the oil pan sump being in the rear instead of in the front, causing problems with the steering link. I thought that I read somewhere where, someone said you had to fabricate a front sump oil pan for the 250, as well as an oil pickup, to fit it into the early falcon, comets. Just wondering if anyone has done such.
The front sump 250 is a common enough swap down here. The trans clearance is more of a concern as you'll have one of the earlier, smaller, tunnels in there.
I've seen the standard mounts packed up with 3/8" or so thick "washers" and modified block brackets (sectioned and rewelded), also some of us got lucky and found a rare local bracket set that has two sets of mount holes... They're the three options that spring to mind. In practice, I've noticed oil pans rubbing on the centre link at extremes of travel, too.
Most guys cut the setback out of the radiator support and run a larger radiator. You don't need to with an electric fan on the far side. It is also possible to open up the gravel pan for increased cooling - it blocks about 7½" of the lower radiator - and you may want to discreetly slot the front bumper in this pursuit.
It's just like the '65 Aussie one! That's how I can make the suggestion.
Your headers may be hard to install with the motor in and the head on. Extra height and width are the reasons. For that matter, they may need some "clearancing" or reworking if they are too close to the floor pan with the extra block height.
Regards, Adam.
I've seen the standard mounts packed up with 3/8" or so thick "washers" and modified block brackets (sectioned and rewelded), also some of us got lucky and found a rare local bracket set that has two sets of mount holes... They're the three options that spring to mind. In practice, I've noticed oil pans rubbing on the centre link at extremes of travel, too.
Most guys cut the setback out of the radiator support and run a larger radiator. You don't need to with an electric fan on the far side. It is also possible to open up the gravel pan for increased cooling - it blocks about 7½" of the lower radiator - and you may want to discreetly slot the front bumper in this pursuit.
It's just like the '65 Aussie one! That's how I can make the suggestion.
Your headers may be hard to install with the motor in and the head on. Extra height and width are the reasons. For that matter, they may need some "clearancing" or reworking if they are too close to the floor pan with the extra block height.
Regards, Adam.
AFIK, I think there was only one style of oil pan available on the 250, unlike the 200, that also had a rear sump configuration for the Fox chassis.
Adam, I already have an 83 200 block in place, which has the starter down low and a C4 tranny installed. No problems there at all, as I used the oil pan from the 170 that came with the car and installed it on the 200.I don't have any clearance issues at all with the tranny or starter. But, doesn't the 250 only have front sump oil pans, and it sits lower in the engine bay I believe. My only concern would be the front sump oil pan. Also, I will go with a pusher fan if needed for clearance up front. Probably, my best bet is to stay with the 200.
Should be no problem in a Comete
The 250 saw duty in many X-cars (that is, all cars which had coil over A-arm unibody chassis, based on the first XK 2000 Falcon, and last field in the US in the 1979 Granada). They were all front sump.
The last Torinos had a 250 base engine for a couple of years, a full chassis, and were not X-bodies. They should have rear sumps. Jack posted his 250 in Fox Mustang link last year with a 250 Triple Carb candy apple colored six. It had welded up dual out headers, and a cut and shut sump using two 250 sumps to clear the rack and pinion steering in the Fox, and the front cross-member.
The 250 was designed to fit in the same envelope a 302 fits into. Generally, where a 302 goes, a 250 will too, unless it has a restricted firewall like a Pinto, Mustang II, or British Cortina.
The 250 saw duty in many X-cars (that is, all cars which had coil over A-arm unibody chassis, based on the first XK 2000 Falcon, and last field in the US in the 1979 Granada). They were all front sump.
The last Torinos had a 250 base engine for a couple of years, a full chassis, and were not X-bodies. They should have rear sumps. Jack posted his 250 in Fox Mustang link last year with a 250 Triple Carb candy apple colored six. It had welded up dual out headers, and a cut and shut sump using two 250 sumps to clear the rack and pinion steering in the Fox, and the front cross-member.
The 250 was designed to fit in the same envelope a 302 fits into. Generally, where a 302 goes, a 250 will too, unless it has a restricted firewall like a Pinto, Mustang II, or British Cortina.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I think I remember seeing something about flipping the centerlink around for clearance with the oil pan in the 'Handbook, I think that was for the early 'round body' Falcon, right?
