length of 200 rods
- Thread starter MRJLB84D
- Start date
80Stang
Well-known member
4.7150 and yes, you can use them in a 200 block which is more of a rev-engine than 250
Btw, there is a great chart here: http://www.fordracingparts.com/download/charts/217.pdf
Btw, there is a great chart here: http://www.fordracingparts.com/download/charts/217.pdf
Aussie 200 rods are nominally 6.27 inches or 159.25mm, they are reasonabaly easy to find, but the short 200 rods as mentioned wont be these days in Australia.
A7m
A7m
rickwrench
Famous Member
That Ford Racing chart has a number of errors in it. The one concerning folks on this site is in the deck height column.
Rick(wrench)
Rick(wrench)
rickwrench":19jvcmdz said:
Hang on. Wasn't the Aussie 200 the same block as a 250 but with shorter stroke?
At least that was my understanding for the later 7 bearing log-head engines. Certainly the Xflow has the same block.
With due respect and no offense intended, I'm not sure how applicable those comments from the overseas guys are for the Aussie engines, which is, I assume, what we are talking about.
Learn me!
Vaughano.
All US 200's (3.3's) have a block 1.666" shallower at 7.803". US 250's (4.1s)are 9.469" with 5.81 to 5.88" rods
Consequently, a US 200 runs a real short 4.7105" rod.
Early Aussie 200's from 1964 until 1967 had the same shallow block and rods as US 200's.
There were no 200's made for 3 or 4 years as the medium 8.425" deck 188 and 221 were made from 1968 to 1970.These had 5.37 and 5.14" rods, and were made in Argentina as well as Australia.
Then in 1971, Ford Oz standardized the 200 and 250 blocks to be 9.38" tall. So ever since, the 3.3 has had real long 6.27" rods.
Ford has a habbit of using this technique of getting the smallest capacity from the largest block in an engine family. Like the truck I6 240 and 300, the 302C and the 351C, the 390 and the 428FE, one standard block with a crank and rod change. In the US, each engine is optimised to minimise the use of grey iron castings. Hence the US 200 is 90 pounds lighter than a US 250, and a 302W is about 117 pounds lighter than an Aussie 302C.
Like the old Aussie cast NASCAR spec 351C blocks, all Aussie block castings are made on slower production lines, with less of a focus on reducing the amount of iron consummed durring the casting process.
The seven bearing US 200 runs in at 385 pounds, while the Aussie X-flow 200 made after 1976 weighes a massive 531 pounds, 146 pounds more.
Generally, engine weight is proportational to engine height. A 351 W with a 9.469" deck verses a 302W with a 8.206" deck is 9.469/8.206 ths heavier, or 540 pounds verses 470 ponds.
Even with an iron head, the US 200 is about 385 punds, or 38 pounds lighter than the 8.645" tall 202 Holden L6.
I think Ford Oz made a mistake with the later tall deck 200's.Biggest shame is that the US 200 didn't see service in the Cortina Six with a 2V head. Wouldn't have handled like a dog if there was 385 pounds of engine rather than 531 of X-flow six.
Consequently, a US 200 runs a real short 4.7105" rod.
Early Aussie 200's from 1964 until 1967 had the same shallow block and rods as US 200's.
There were no 200's made for 3 or 4 years as the medium 8.425" deck 188 and 221 were made from 1968 to 1970.These had 5.37 and 5.14" rods, and were made in Argentina as well as Australia.
Then in 1971, Ford Oz standardized the 200 and 250 blocks to be 9.38" tall. So ever since, the 3.3 has had real long 6.27" rods.
Ford has a habbit of using this technique of getting the smallest capacity from the largest block in an engine family. Like the truck I6 240 and 300, the 302C and the 351C, the 390 and the 428FE, one standard block with a crank and rod change. In the US, each engine is optimised to minimise the use of grey iron castings. Hence the US 200 is 90 pounds lighter than a US 250, and a 302W is about 117 pounds lighter than an Aussie 302C.
Like the old Aussie cast NASCAR spec 351C blocks, all Aussie block castings are made on slower production lines, with less of a focus on reducing the amount of iron consummed durring the casting process.
The seven bearing US 200 runs in at 385 pounds, while the Aussie X-flow 200 made after 1976 weighes a massive 531 pounds, 146 pounds more.
Generally, engine weight is proportational to engine height. A 351 W with a 9.469" deck verses a 302W with a 8.206" deck is 9.469/8.206 ths heavier, or 540 pounds verses 470 ponds.
Even with an iron head, the US 200 is about 385 punds, or 38 pounds lighter than the 8.645" tall 202 Holden L6.
I think Ford Oz made a mistake with the later tall deck 200's.Biggest shame is that the US 200 didn't see service in the Cortina Six with a 2V head. Wouldn't have handled like a dog if there was 385 pounds of engine rather than 531 of X-flow six.
