Rough idle + pinging

[thesameguy]

Youe experiences written B 4 this section show readness...
my 250 is $759 prts, $759 machinest rebuild costs

I appreciate the support. $1500 to rebuild the six really puts me on edge. I think that's a completely reasonable number, but $1500 also buys a crate Duratec 2.3 and a Quads4Rods bell housing adapter to put a C4 or T5 behind it. That's *really* tempting to me. That's the source of my agony.

I had 2 of those Wolwo motors (like U mention - I think they were 2.3s? from the early and mid 90s) and was not impressed. Not real durable (sure seemed quick tho). Now the earlier 4s were ("B" something model) impressive )4 me).

Yeah, they came in 2.3l and 2.4l. They are not as stout as the earlier 2.x inline fours, but they do put down some really good power. Which isn't to say they are a bad motor - they will go a long time with reasonable care, but the B230FT, for example, could really take abuse. '80s turbo motors were all pretty overbuilt because nobody knew what to expect from them. By the '90s, they were getting really good at cheapening the build sheet. Still, a bone-stock I5 should make 200hp and 250lb ft without smog gear, and you can buy them for $200 anywhere. That's tempting. Plus, inline fives sound awesome with a big exhaust.

The reason I bring the Volvo motor up is because I have a '98 V70 torn apart in the garage getting a new transmission... I have to wrap that up before doing any real surgery on the Falcon. I'm going to order in a leak down tester and see what it reveals. The results may steer this ship a little. In any case, while the Falcon waits for its turn with the tools, I'm going to keep my eyes open for someone offloading a I6 (maybe from a V8 conversion). Or a wrecked late model Ranger to harvest a Duratec from.

 

[170-3tree]

I wouldn't be very concerned with the cost of just the engine or trans adaptor, but computerized? Or the cost of moving to a carb?

If you want to test the waters post on cl about wanting a 200. Many people with space and money have one sitting around in their garage, and just never thought it was worth the trouble to post it out on craigslist. I met several people who had that same story in my quest for one, and of them, at least one keeps contact with me after I showed him classic inlines, pretty sure he wants to keep it now. Never hurts to inquire, not like you are promising a purchase.

Gerald.

 

[chad]

about wanting a 200
OR got the 170 & 250 available (here) for those looking

 

[thesameguy]

I wouldn't be very concerned with the cost of just the engine or trans adaptor, but computerized? Or the cost of moving to a carb?

I would go with fuel injection. I have put several FI systems in places where they don't belong, and I am pretty comfortable with it. My only hesitation is that on a newer motor - like that 2.3l Duratec - working around the smog components the computer would expect to have around could be a problem. I'm sure it would get pretty upset when it tried to open the EGR valve and found there wasn't one. If that's the case, Megasquirt is certainly an option, or possibly running the motor other, older system. Dodge SMEC might work, for example, or the Bosch Jetronic from a late '80s Volvo or Saab. Or, maybe even Ford EEC IV... with an EEC Tuner it might work out just fine.

On the other hand I would be sorely tempted to actually try and build all those smog controls into the Duratec Falcon build. I know it sounds like madness, but there is something to be said for doing one's part for the environment, and if it was feasible I'd be totally happy to have a clean-running Falcon that - given the light weight - could get 30+ mpg. That would probably necessitate either using a the 5-speed auto from the Ranger, or a 5-speed manual like a T-5. To that end, maybe the next step is trying to find a wrecked '01+ Ranger I can pull everything from, including a significant part of the wiring harness.

 

[170-3tree]

I believe in the environment part too. That's what my next build will be going for, but in an entirely different manner than most.
I wasn't sure what intent you had for it, use the factory computer or try to do something yourself. Using all that smog and factory stuff from the ranger could be a lot more wiring than I would be willing to deal with, but someone with confidence could do it well.

After doin this head and destroying my budget I have learned to factor in too much rather than the basics alone.
If you didn't want to roll the smog into the mix, there are tons of computer experts out there that could help get the computer set up to not see those things. I'm wondering if holleys New avenger efi computer that is self learning could be adapted to another throttle body.

Gerald.

 

[Invectivus]

I know it sounds like madness, but there is something to be said for doing one's part for the environment, and if it was feasible I'd be totally happy to have a clean-running Falcon that - given the light weight - could get 30+ mpg.

2X

That's the primary reason I bought an aussie 250EFI, figured the least I could do was work better fuel metering. I don't mind a little smog equipment either, though i think a little water injection might lower the nitrogen pollutants enough i don't need it. i mean, i'm making improvements as it is.

 

[thesameguy]

I just have to see what smog equipment the Duratec came with over the years. There are so many variables I need to be sure I can account for them... I recently did a head job on a 2001 PT Cruiser that was a model citizen in terms of engine bay complexity - that is, it was clean & simple! OTOH, I am currently replacing a transmission on a Volvo V70 which is a disaster area under the hood. Good news about the Duratec is that it's been in production for a while and comes on a variety of cars. I should be able to run a RWD-configured Duratec with my choice of early Focus, late Focus, Fusion, Escape, or Ranger smog gear and electronics - whatever is most advantageous to me. If I was feeling really saucy I could even use an MZR from a Mazda, with it's nifty cam tricks.

 

[170-3tree]

I'm pretty sure that the Ranger, if any of them are, would be the most relieved of equipment over the years. They seem to have a lot less crowding under the hood. Iwould assume, at least. MZR was which engine? apologies, i never followed the codes of foreign engines, b20 sr25 its just hebrew to me..

 

[thesameguy]

The MZR is the Mazda version of the Ford Duratec, but they have variable cams and some have direct injection that the Fords do not. Otherwise, they're the same motor.

 

[170-3tree]

Ahhh Thank you. I thought as much, since you would consider it too. That would add some fun to the project.

 

[Invectivus]

are the heads/blocks cross compatible?

 

[thesameguy]

Simple answer is yes - they are all identical. But the slightly more complex answer is that when features change (variable cam timing, direct injection, displacement. etc.) they may not be exactly. But bolt patterns etc. are all the same.

Here is a useful thread on the topic:

http://www.turborangerforums.com/showthread.php?t=1788

 

[thesameguy]

This looks like it might fit nicely in the Falcon, assuming the engine isn't too tall.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll25 ... 05_249.jpg

 

[bubba22349]

I swapped a 71 pinto engine, trans, rear axle into a 62 Falcon once was lots of room left over .

Edit: This swap was back in 1971 and was the tiny Kent engine.

 

[thesameguy]

I didn't even think about that - I am sure if a Lima will fit vertically a Duratec will fit. That's super... I guess I'm going to spend a little while hunting for a wrecked '01+ Ranger or '05+ Miata.

The Ranger yields a 2.3l Duratec that makes 143 hp and 154 lb ft, with a simple head and no balance shafts.
The Miata yields a 2.0 MZR that makes 170 hp and 140 lb ft.

I think either would be fine a Falcon... I read a 1962 Falcon Futura 2-door weighs 2343lbs. That's not much metal to move around!

I figure I can also be looking for a good used I6 in that time, and just go with whatever comes up first.

 

[chad]

:nono:
jack-a-thread

"...'01+ Ranger or '05+ Miata..."
both 4 cyl, no?

"...C4..."
& a 4 banger that fits a C4, (backward compatible?) do tell?
When the focus wagon blows it's motor may B it'll take my bronk C4 and dis motor yer talkin bout!

 

[thesameguy]

Same Ford-Mazda co-developed engine, just different displacement and the Miata has variable cam timing. Both bolt to the same transmissions, and both would be compatible with the Quads4Rods Duratec->C4 or Duratec->T5 adapter, in case running the newer stuff won't fit or won't work properly.

I'm not sold on the idea, but it's proven hard to find good I6s in California, as everybody was obsessed with V8 swaps and tossed the sixes. I don't want a V8, and I don't want to put a grand or two into rebuilding the six.

 

[thesameguy]

I received an OTC leak down tester in the mail today, so hopefully I will have a better idea of where my issue lies this weekend. Kind of excited!

 

[chad]

Both bolt to the same transmissions, and both would be compatible with the Quads4Rods Duratec->C4 or Duratec->T5 adapter, in case running the newer stuff won't fit or won't work properly.

Sorry, still not clear to this mudle head: the C 4 will fit my 'sideways' 4 cyl Ztec (a 2001 Focus)?
Thanks...

 

[bmbm40]

A good running used 200 would be quick and easy and they are still usually available if you look around. Occasionally you can get a real good deal on one. You would notice the extra 30 cubes, a mild bolt in performance upgrade. Not exotic but less fabbing and more driving. I wouldn't rebuild the 170 either.