Any 3.8L V6's into a 60s era I6 Ford (Yes, Blasphemy)

[65DropTop]

Getting into trouble is what I am good at, so has anybody put a late 80s to mid 90's 3.8 L (V6) Ford engine into a classic Mustang that had a 200 cu i6 engine? (Mine is a 65 I-6). Thanks.

 

[Anlushac11]

8)

I have never seen or heard of one.

I have heard and seen a few turbo 2.3L's in classics and there was a Hot Rod magazine feature on a older Falcon with a 2.3L turbo that was pretty darn quick.

I have heard of a 3.8L GN V6 being dropped into a 65 Fastback but I dont wish to discuss such sacreligious transgressions.

Doing a search just now I find references to a guy putting a 90 Supercoupe supercharged 3.8L into a 65 Mustang but no pics or website mentioned.

 

[65DropTop]

Thanks Anslu for your answer. I will not ask you to commit further blasphemy.

 

[MustangSix]

A couple of years ago one of our members mocked up a 3.8 Ford into a Falcon. The clearance issues, oil pan configuration, exhaust, cooling, and other issues made it a tough swap. The engine is NOT a cut off small block as some people think, so everything has to be fabricated.

In the end, you would be spending a lot of time and effort to install an engine that is only marginally more powerful than the one you took out, and unless you retained the EFI, probably no more economical.

 

[CobraSix]

Yeah, like Jack said.

It's to the point that unless you really want the originality, you might as well but a 302 in and be done with it.

Slade

 

[Guest]

Not to bash the 3.8 but...

The 3.8, since having aluminum heads and a cast block, are extremely synonymous in blowing head gaskets and cracked head(s). My uncle worked at a local Ford dealership, and they would come in in droves with that problem in the 90's, when he worked there. I also have an 89 cougar LS that has sat in the garage for a year...with that same problem.

Id rather stick with the 200 inline, cast on cast, the same "melting points", the same expansion/contraction ratios. The expansion/contraction ratio of aluminum is WAY different than cast iron. If theyre on top of each other, different things happen to each when they get hot, as well as aluminum having a way lower melting point than cast iron.

Again, not bashing, just basic physics talk on one of the biggest mistakes that Ford made, and without a recall too..

 

[Anonymous]

The 3.8, since having aluminum heads and a cast block, are extremely synonymous in blowing head gaskets and cracked head(s)..... one of the biggest mistakes that Ford made, and without a recall too..

Bash the 3.8 all you want, it just is not a "great" engine design at all.

There is MUCH more to it than an aluminum head on a cast iron block.........it is more like a very POORLY designed aluminum head on a POORLY designed cast iron block.

If you had to go with a 3.8, get one from a late 90's - early 2000's mustang, they had their act together by then.

AVOID the 80's and early 90's models like the plague.

 

[66Monterey]

There's a '57 T-bird in the area with a supercharged 3.8 out of an '89-'96 T-bird SC!

I don't really care for the combination, but I'd imagine it would run rings around all but the supercharged 312 with better driveability and fuel economy...

 

[Anonymous]

The supercharged 3.8 T-bird is an excellent package added to a trouble prone engine. There are fixes....but.....