Strong 200 rods

[Anonymous]

Interesting stuff..........Thanks for that!

OK,
so I need to find some pre-'74 200 rods...
- - - - How far back can I go?
To '68? '66?


I am curious to what HP level the 1982 rods I have in my turbo engine will last to.


I am going to visit the folks in North Dakota in a few weeks but I'll unlikely find an Industrial 200 in the time I am there unless I do some fast detective work, or am willing to pay a LOT from a farm salvage yard. Maybe I can get the word out to some friends, (and get an unusal Christmas present!)

I'll pick up the 1970 year Mav 170 while I am there, and part it out.

 

[MustangSix]

On the engines I've taken apart, it looks like the cutoff date is about 1974. The early forged 200 rods will have a C3 cating number. The later ones have a D4 number. There may be others, but these are the only ones I've run across so far.

On the 250, I've found D4 and D8 cast rods and C9 forged rods.

 

[Anonymous]

The early forged 200 rods will have a C3 casting number.

So I'll need to find some C3 rods (in 200 length)

I find it curious the C3 denotes an engineering spec of 1963, and the 200 didn't come out until later
...........and that Ford didn't create a new spec for a the "new" shorter rod needed in the 200!

 

[xctasy]

The Fairlane got the 200 in October 1963, so it was a 1963 C3 for sure.

Lots of features are pre-planned in the developement phase. Ford would have done a 200 variant in a test engine well before then. Remember, the XK200 Falcon project was cobled up in about 18 months, surely a record for a 24 year long engine run.

(*The 40 years of Small block Chevies. These were cobled up in a few months, and was tooled off a wooden buck. It was designed as a thin wall 4" bore engine, but never got four inch bores till the 1963 327).


Ford designed the EFI package for Falcon sixes in 1981 with Robert Bosch Germany. The diagnostic manual came out with a pulse timing light in 1981, and the dealers wondered why. In December 1982, out came the EFI, and dealers understood.

 

[6bangerwanab]

Ipels, forged, 1.04" compression height. Nice!


In a heavy pro-steeter Mustang, with low mount 1981 engine, only drag-200-stang had proplems, and that was at 450 hp, turbo charged. He changed to easily replaceable alloy Carillos or somesuch with spiro- locks, but this won't work on the street. They'll last about 6 months of hard use, and then fatigue.

Best source is the 70-73 Pinto 2.0 rods, which are 5.00" but can be adjusted to 4.96".This is about 250 to 290 thou taller than the stock 200 rods. They are very strong.There are stock ones with 0.945" gudgeons, and aftermarket with the good old standard Small Six, Small Block 0.912" rods.

In order to stop the stock ring land galling on the top of the block, you need to add two head gaskets and one 250 thou plate to the block. Then you can use the stock Ford Six or 2.3HSC overhead valve pistons.

The stock 2.3 hsc and aftermarket 3.3 pistons have 275 thou before the ring land goes over the block. Normally, the rods streatch 25 to 30 thou at rpms above 5500, so as long as the ring land is at least 40 thou away from the top of the block, then you can use the Pinto rods.

The crank need to be reground to suit the stock 2.0 rod bearings.


The Pinto rods can cope for 30 minutes of wide open throttle 400 hp turebo racing at 8500 rpm. At 100 hp per piston. Unless you expect to get more than 300 hp from your 200 Ford, then stick with the stock rods.

I've checked my information, and my stock 1966 200 rods are forged, and have an oil hole to splash lube the piston and cylinder wall. They look good enough in the beam to cope with extreme loads. The worst ones seam tobe the later rods. In aussie crossflows, about 400hp is all they can take in a turbo'd race car with good detoation control. These engines are 250 cubes, the stroke and rod are all about an inch longer, and subject to more stress.

i think that i saw a while back that amc 304 pistons are of a 3.75 bore and have a 1" compression height.

what about stronger rods for 250's?

 

[drag-200stang]

I think there may be some differences between the U.S. and Aussie 170 engines. I came across a forged 170 rod that came out of a C8 block casting that I believe was a 1970 engine that measured identical to a 200 rod. The rod casting letters/numbers are the same as a 200 forged rod. This may be a source of less stressed forged rods. Forged rods are about 60 grams lighter than the late model cast rods that are much beefier. The cast rods have a thinner wrist pin apparently to offset the heavier rod weight. The cast rods appears to be a stronger rod but probably more prone to break due to the casting nature. Can someone verify these findings?

 

[Anonymous]

Dang.....and I had my hands on my old 1970 model 170 just a few weeks ago (NOW ya tell me...!)

 

[kirkallen143]

Howdy,

All this rod talk has me feeling better, I am currently replacing crank seals (a pain in the a$$ on the top seal) and pan gaskets. Come to look upon the bottom half of the engine and find...C9 block, C1 main caps, C3 rods, and etc...Ford was pulling what they had left in the parts bend again. Good thing they had those extra C3 rods and put them in there, the turbo is feeling better.

Kirk ' 73 bronco
ps. still waiting on the heads to come back and I have two of them at the machinist, boy they really know when you are in need and still lead you on.

 

[MustangSix]

...Ford was pulling what they had left in the parts bend again.

Maybe not. Keep in mind that those are "engineering" numbers, not production dates. The designe was approved for production in that year, but may have been cast many years later. You'll find a lot of older engineering numbers in newer cars.

On larger parts like heads and blocks, you can find a casting code that tells you the month, day, and shift that cast the part, but on small stuff, there's often not enought room so those details were omitted from the pattern.

 

[I66coupe]

Ok, so what I get from all this is that TRW has the forged pistons, pre-74 blocks have the forged rods which should be good for 350HP and nobody has a forged crank. For over 350HP, things become more troublesome to build due to no stock length rod of sufficient strength. To use available rods that are close to proper length (but actually are a bit long) special pistons are needed. These are the Iapels?

So the longer 2.3 OHC rods are good for high HP but require the Iapel pistons?

Which combo was it that needed the rods machined to a shorter length and two gaskets and a .025 plate between the head and block?

Or, was it TRW pistons, 2 gaskets, block plate, stock rods, 3 freeze plugs and turn your head and cough?

 

[LEROY POLL]

HEY EXCUTE

.....I HAVE NEVER SEEN A 170 IN THE US WITH SEVEN BEARINGS. THEY ALL HAVE THE THREE FREEZE PLUGS AND ONLY FOUR BEARINGS. THAT IS UP TO 1972.... WHEN IT WAS HARD TO FIND A 170.

.....THE 221 SIZE BLOCK ALSO CAME WITH A 200 AND A 6.0 IN ROD...RIGHT. COULD I TAKE ONE OF MY 221 BLOCK AND PUT IN THE 170 CRANK FROM AUSSIELAND ? WOULD IT WORK?

THANKS

LIVE IN GRACE

LEROY POLL

 

[addo]

Leroy, the 188 motor had the same block as the 221, but with a 170 seven main crank. We also had seven main 170s in 1966-67, from what I've seen. Are you going to start that motor up soon?

 

[Anonymous]

OK, I bought these:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayI ... 8003430825

I figured I would have a hard time getting all that done locally for the same price.

Look for a forged rod / forged piston version of "Linc's crappy turbo 200 powered '84 Mustang" coming to you soon (not in theaters near you)

 

[xctasy]

The 144 was 4.854", with 1.7" tall pistons.

See http://www.geocities.com/hotrod_inline6/6article.jpg

Decks on those early 144 and 170 Fords were about 7.803, no difference in height, same as the later 200 engines. The 170 rods was most likely either 4.715". One article puts the 170 rod as being 1/16" shorter, or 4.792". Stroke is 440 thou greater.

The 170 I6 Fords ran 221 V8 pistons. Both cars and engines came out at the same time, and both had 3.5" bores, and 1.62" tall pistons.

The later 1969 to 1973 170 rods were the same weight as the 200 items. The taller 221 V8 piston must have compensated for the shorter 2.94" stroke.


The HSC 2.5 I4 can run with 255 V8 pistons. Same or similar 1.585" pin to deck register. The 200 I6, and 250 I6 can take those pistons with the right modifications.

I'd say 170 rods are rare, but a set of 4.854" 144 rods would be the ones to have.

Thanks to addo and Mustang Geezer for there information

http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ht=#135540

 

[Anonymous]

They arrived, and are just as nice as the picture

Now I have to get everything together and get hooked up with Ted Eaton (machinist/balancer) so I can get a shortblock prepped.

 

[turbocharged66stang]

this is wat my Ford I-6 performance handbook reads on page 32 ("All 144/170/200 connecting rod, until 1973 model were forged...... and back to forged steel in 1982. 170 & 200 rods measure 4.715" and appear to be inerchangeable. The '82 and later forged steel rods would be the performance choice.")
TURBOCHARGED66STANG

 

[Anonymous]

this is what my Ford I-6 performance handbook reads on page 32..........and back to forged steel in 1982.

Gotta be wrong.
The 1982 engines use D8AE rods, which are definitely cast.

I would like to see some '82 (E2xx) rods!!!

 

[Anonymous]

Just curious, but why not 302 rods? Aftermarket or stock rods are plentiful... I know thatthe big end is a little narrow but wouldn't a little bit of work on the crank take care of that?

 

[XFlow_Fairlane]

I would think a 302 rod would be WAY long for a 200. heck even a short 5.2" rod form a 2.3ohc is a good stuff into a 200.

 

[Anonymous]

302 rod is only 5.09" long....