All Small Six To Build a 200 or 250?

[StarDiero75]

Howdy Guys,

Its been awhile due to house projects, work, etc since I've posted here. I finally got the Aussie 250 2V, looks great and can't wait to give it the works. I also finally fixed my lean issue with the 200 and all the vacuum leaks. I have yet to do the custom jetting my 2300 needs to fix the super rich conditions but I plan to go back to the sniper anyway. Anyhow, I am at a crossroads. I would prefer to have the motor built then swap into the Ranchero, rather pull the 200 from the Ranch and get it rebuilt to minimize downtime. I have an opportunity to go pickup a free 68 200 which would solve this problem, but it becomes another boat anchor in the garage to put next to the 390, 289, 170, 250 until I get to it. Then I had an idea..... what if I just build the 250..... More cubes, more torque, whats not to love? The only thing that really bothers me is having to get a new clutch assembly, flywheel, and bell housing (going to hydraulic clutch so not worried about that) but its not like I wont use the old stuff again elsewhere. I may want to get a new T5 b/c mine is an SVO model but we'll cross that bridge when it fails lol.

So what do I do? Should I do a 200 or a 250?

I planned on using aussie 250 hypereutectic pistons, a fairly mild street cam from schneider, 2300 sniper, with a 250 2V aussie head heavily ported and larger valves installed (1.75 and 144 intake as exhaust), Yella terra 1.65 roller rockers, and DSII ignition with MSD 6A box. I have dual VI headers from VI but they may not fit with the low mount starter, so I may have to use my spare janky long tubes, or just use my turbo manifold and slap a turbo on it. really unsure at this point what to do. I just got roasted by my buddy's Karmann ghia at the racetrack and I aint about to let that happen again. Currently the Ranchero is 11.05s@62.5mph in the 1/8" (estimated wheel horsepower is 104hp, flywheel 130hp). We need to bring that into the low 9s, high 8s at a minimum.

Give your opinions down below.

Thanks,
Ryan

 

[pmuller9]

The only way I can see to cut off 2 seconds is to use a turbocharger.
The Sniper 2300 has a 2 bar MAP sensor so up to 15 lbs of boost will work just fine.

The 250 will indeed have a broader power band than the 200 and will operate at a lower rpm making it easier on the valvetrain.
You will want to use Autotec forged pistons.

The compression ratio will need to be in the 8s depending on what cam you use.

Do you have a picture of your turbo manifold?

 

[bubba22349]

Hi Ryan, If it was me I would sure go to the 250 more Torque and with all the good parts you have more HP to, its only draw back is that its a little heavier engine. By the way the VI headers you have can also fit on the 250's you just need to make a simple Spacer plate out of Aluminum or Steel I think it needs to be about 3/4 or 1 inch to make it fit. See Lavron's "My Budget 250 Build" posts for how he did it, and he also has lots of other good tips that he used on his 250 build up. Yes if you really go want to go to a Turbo later than maybe now is the time and the engine needs a different build plan then. In that case the 200 will be just as good to use as a 250 and might be a little bit less money to build because of better parts available for a good price. Best of luck

 

[StarDiero75]

The only way I can see to cut off 2 seconds is to use a turbocharger.
The Sniper 2300 has a 2 bar MAP sensor so up to 15 lbs of boost will work just fine.

The 250 will indeed have a broader power band than the 200 and will operate at a lower rpm making it easier on the valvetrain.
You will want to use Autotec forged pistons.

The compression ratio will need to be in the 8s depending on what cam you use.

Do you have a picture of your turbo manifold?

This is the only picture I have of it at the moment. It was originally a set to do a draw through but this would be blow through. Or would draw through with a sniper be better?

Darn i was hoping to not need forged. How much does a set of those cost?

A 78 250 should have forged rods right? Or does it have cast?

 

[pmuller9]

This is the only picture I have of it at the moment. It was originally a set to do a draw through but this would be blow through. Or would draw through with a sniper be better?

Darn i was hoping to not need forged. How much does a set of those cost?

A 78 250 should have forged rods right? Or does it have cast?

A draw thru turbo system is limited by the restriction of the carb on the inlet of the turbo compressor.
Secondly a draw thru turbo has a special carbon seal to prevent oil from being sucked into the engine when the throttle is closed.
Draw Thru turbochargers are no longer available as a current turbocharger model.

The 1978 250 rods are cast but you can use the stock Ford 300 six forged steel rods if you are going with the Autotec pistons.

 

[xctasy]

The age old 200 vs 250 thing is just like a 302 headed 351 verses 302, an empty analysis. Normally, for straight line power, go cubic inches. Except in the 200, where really, only the head is the same.

The 250 is totally different under the head gasket. If you add the M code 250 2V head to the 200, you in potentially get 250 power, plus

1) the weight saving,
2) ease of gearbox fitment
3) freedom from steering ratio changes
4) freedom from Steering drag link mods
5) No engine mount changes
6) No axle capacity/strength changes.
7) No radiator changes
8 ) No water pump fouling issues
9) No cooling changes, and
10) No unforseen carb to hood clearance matters.

The 250 six is so much taller, and those weight, size, length and added torque racking loads add weight on weight to a Round Body.

25% More engine Doesn't make 25% more power on any Ford in line six when the block is so much taller and bigger like the 250 is.

 

[StarDiero75]

Hi Ryan, If it was me I would sure go to the 250 more Torque and with all the good parts you have more HP to, its only draw back is that its a little heavier engine. By the way the VI headers you have can also fit on the 250's you just need to make a simple Spacer plate out of Aluminum or Steel I think it needs to be about 3/4 or 1 inch to make it fit. See Lavron's "My Budget 250 Build" posts for how he did it, and he also has lots of other good tips that he used on his 250 build up. Yes if you really go want to go to a Turbo later than maybe now is the time and the engine needs a different build plan then. In that case the 200 will be just as good to use as a 250 and might be a little bit less money to build because of better parts available for a good price. Best of luck

A spacer between the headers and the head? Its already close to the shock tower, that might hit but I'll check out his post. If I go turbo though thats not a problem lol.
Yeah I was thinking the 200 might be slightly less to build. Especially now if I'm looking at getting new rods for it

 

[StarDiero75]

A draw thru turbo system is limited by the restriction of the carb on the inlet of the turbo compressor.
Secondly a draw thru turbo has a special carbon seal to prevent oil from being sucked into the engine when the throttle is closed.
Draw Thru turbochargers are no longer available as a current turbocharger model.

The 1978 250 rods are cast but you can use the stock Ford 300 six forged steel rods if you are going with the Autotec pistons.

Last time I called, the Autotec dished pistons were $550 for a set of six but that was a while ago.
It's possible they may be cheaper now especially if you order the rings to go with them.

Oh well that presents a problem. I figured it might be easier on the sniper since it just acts like a larger motor at that point. But blow through it is then!

I was hoping there'd be some crossover there. Thank god 300s are plentiful lol.

I'll call them and see whag they say. Are they factory spec but forged or are they a custom piston?

 

[jaan-e]

As xctasy say, for all the xtra fab work involved. I'd go for the 200 all day, come to think about it. I actualy did my self..
With triple Webers, you will have it screaming like an M3 down the track.
Good luck

 

[StarDiero75]

As xctasy say, for all the xtra fab work involved. I'd go for the 200 all day, come to think about it. I actualy did my self..
With triple Webers, you will have it screaming like an M3 down the track.
Good luck

You finally got yours all done? Hows it been?

 

[StarDiero75]

The more I think about it, if I go boost, maybe I should just do the holley hyperspark system so that I have complete timing control. The DSII system is fine, but requires a little bit of work to make it work. Being I'm using the sniper, it will unlock complete potential going with the hyperspark.

 

[pmuller9]

I'll call them and see what they say. Are they factory spec but forged or are they a custom piston?

The pistons will be custom.
Ford 1969 to 1996 connecting rods have a .975" piston pin.
Using the Ford 300 rod, the CH will be about 1.30" and the dish volume will be around 25cc for a low enough compression for turbocharging a 250 six.
Piston prices have gone up in the past few months. You will need to get a price for your piston order before making a discission.

 

[xctasy]

Grab an old Duraspark ignition module from a Turbo 2.3 carb Mustang, and it's T03b 0.60/0.48 AR turbo and run it blow through.

That puts the turbo on the US drivers side, and the DSII 2.3 Carb Blue Strain control unit has adjustment for 6 pounds of boost. It has a five Null Knob air fuel and ignition timing adjustment via the control system.

They made 35 thousand of those 2.3 Carb turbos and factory parts are around, plus another 30000 or so from Buick 231s and Pontiac 301s from 1978 to 1983 as over the counter parts.

With your Holley Sniper and 2V head on your 200 engine, it's an easy 195 HP and 240 lb-ft of torque.

Basically like putting in an HO 5.0 4bbl Mustang engine, without the required big engine parts changes.

Since you've decided to go Blow through, and Sniper, you can use an updated combination of the details I supplied in this post.

"https://fordsix.com/threads/draw-through-turbo-setup.81540/page-2"

 

[pmuller9]

The turbocharged 250 six will make serious power from 2500 to 5500 rpm.
The 200 six can make the same power but will need from 3500 to 6500 rpm to do so.
Of course, the 250 will have more torque throughout the lower rpm range and will feel less peaky than a 200 six.

The log turbo manifold you have is OK for low boost application but will seriously hinder any effort to make big power with higher boost.
There are six cylinders pressurizing the log with zero scavenging.
The back pressure each cylinder sees will be several times higher than the boost pressure in the intake manifold.
The cam profile would need a very wide LSA with an exhaust duration at least 10 degrees less than the intake lobe duration to minimize the valve overlap period.

You would be better using this style exhaust and routing the pipes to a turbocharger mounted elsewhere.

60-83 Ford/Mercury I6 6-2 Design Stainless Steel Exhaust Header Kit (Polished Chrome) 144/170/200/240/250 CID

www.protuninglab.com

 

[StarDiero75]

The pistons will be custom.
Ford 1969 to 1996 connecting rods have a .975" piston pin.
Using the Ford 300 rod, the CH will be about 1.30" and the dish volume will be around 25cc for a low enough compression for turbocharging a 250 six.
Piston prices have gone up in the past few months. You will need to get a price for your piston order before making a discission.

Thats what I figured. Now would that be press fit or floating? I looked up a set of H beam forged 300 rods for like $615 made for boost applications. They seem very nice.

I'm about 6 months out from starting to buy parts. I'm just starting the planning phase here.

100% cost is going to be a factor. for the 250 already for rods and pistons is at least $1100

 

[StarDiero75]

Grab an old Duraspark ignition module from a Turbo 2.3 carb Mustang, and it's T03b 0.60/0.48 AR turbo and run it blow through.

That puts the turbo on the US drivers side, and the DSII 2.3 Carb Blue Strain control unit has adjustment for 6 pounds of boost. It has a five Null Knob air fuel and ignition timing adjustment via the control system.

They made 35 thousand of those 2.3 Carb turbos and factory parts are around, plus another 30000 or so from Buick 231s and Pontiac 301s from 1978 to 1983 as over the counter parts.

With your Holley Sniper and 2V head on your 200 engine, it's an easy 195 HP and 240 lb-ft of torque.

Basically like putting in an HO 5.0 4bbl Mustang engine, without the required big engine parts changes.

Since you've decided to go Blow through, and Sniper, you can use an updated combination of the details I supplied in this post.

"https://fordsix.com/threads/draw-through-turbo-setup.81540/page-2"

I plan on running more than 6lbs here. I was planning on trying to push 14lbs. So i'll need to run an MSD unit or the hyperspark. Howerver the turbo from that motor is not a bad idea. Do you have a part number for that? I've tried searching it before and had a hard time trying to find it. If I go the 250 route though, that will require a different turbo b/c we'll want it to spool lower due to less RPM, ja?

is that 195 hp NA or 6lbs of boost?

I will check that thread out.

 

[xctasy]

Agreed about the remote mounting of a turbo, and using a non log manifold. On the Barra 4.0 Turbo, Ford Australia copied the 1980 250 Granada/ 200 Fox Body primary light off Catalyst style, a huge 4 inch single outer exhaust, which gave as another 9 lb-ft over the 1979 versions. The 4.0 turbo used a the front and back runners grouped, not a log exhaust.


The key thing to realise is that with the 2V head, you have potentially all the power of a 1971-1974 170 HP Gross 250 2V engine, with none of the increased torque and chassis issues.

IMHO In the tall deck 250, a 25% capacity increase requires a disproportionate amount of modifications.

The factory Australian 200 Falcon for 1972 was quoted as making 135 HP, and the 250, 155 HP, but both yielded the same quarter mile time of 18.3 seconds. The factory Net HP was just 9 HP different. On the US 3.3, 9 HP different, 91 HP net verses 99 HP.

US 200s are additionally, all told, 150 pounds lighter than the 250 because there is no power steering, no big bellhousing V8 SBF flange, nor any larger TopLoader gearbox, no heavier duty axle, no taller radiator to clear the 9.47 inch tall, 1.66 inch taller block. All of it adds up, even though the 200 engine is quoted as 365 to 385 pounds verses the quoted 407 pounds of the 250.

The actual Net gain in power is just 9% from a 25% capacity gain, and a net improvement of, well, nothing acceleration wise.... And no more miles per hour on the quarter mile when a 150 pound weight gain is factored in.

Under the Stan Wiess rules, peak power under Pipe Max increases from 3800 rpm with a 250 2V to 4400 rpm with a 200 2V with the same cylinder head.

Torque per cubic inch drops with the 250 engine verses the 200. Both US engines have the same Lambda rod ratio, so a 250 makes less lb-ft per cube than the 200 does.

These are things to consider verses the Bigger is Better gospel. In lines are not V8 engines. Normally a tall deck V8 will add copies quantities of torque to a turbo application, and with stock iron headers or a good set of tubing headers, a turbo application will make a 25 % bigger V8 a 25% more power full engine, because the intake improves with each inch or two of deck height. An LS V8 with a 9.22 inch deck is way better intake wise than a 8.2 inch deck SBF. On a short deck 200 in a unibody Ford, the whole deck height produces nasty other issues.

You've got great headers for Ford sixes, and I'd take a leaf out of Paul's advice.

I also love the 292 Chevy Turbo concept PowerNation did with the remote turbo in line Chev. That's why I suggest a driver's side mount junk yard 2.3 Mustang Carb turbo. They are easily reconditioned and Josh was practically given one when he picked up his 1973 Pinto Turbo.

If you don't discuss and ask questions, you don't get windfalls. And It's okay if you find yourself re-examining stuff you thought was worthless.

The blow through aspect of the Sniper will work great, but youbcan use very humble parts.

For example, the Ford 2.3 Carb turbo is traditionally a difficult item to clock, with poor geometrics and a bewilderingly complicated set of sensors. They key thing is, Holley's Sniper only needs a simple Prox Crank Sensor from a 351M 1983 F150 pickup to run, and everything Duraspark II can remain.

The five tee junction the 2.3 Turbo Carb engine ran has a Solpot idle adjuster, a peak boost controller and a spark retard under boost, so you can run the Holley controller as well as having some extra adjustability. The Turbo shaft and oiling was over designed for a 350 HP capacity, and it's similar to the T3 60 internally, and that turbo was used on Datsun 280ZX Turbos and Nissan's Holden RB30ET, and the racing 810 Turbo Bluebirds for 3 years of the Australia Touring car championship.

 

[StarDiero75]

The turbocharged 250 six will make serious power from 2500 to 5500 rpm.
The 200 six can make the same power but will need from 3500 to 6500 rpm to do so.
Of course, the 250 will have more torque throughout the lower rpm range and will feel less peaky than a 200 six.

The log turbo manifold you have is OK for low boost application but will seriously hinder any effort to make big power with higher boost.
There are six cylinders pressurizing the log with zero scavenging.
The back pressure each cylinder sees will be several times higher than the boost pressure in the intake manifold.
The cam profile would need a very wide LSA with an exhaust duration at least 10 degrees less than the intake lobe duration to minimize the valve overlap period.

You would be better using this style exhaust and routing the pipes to a turbocharger mounted elsewhere.

60-83 Ford/Mercury I6 6-2 Design Stainless Steel Exhaust Header Kit (Polished Chrome) 144/170/200/240/250 CID

www.protuninglab.com

I'm very divided on the choice of engine here. Torque is great especially throughout the whole range, but RPM sounds fricken great. I want this tame enough to be able to drive it casually too. Current rear gears are 3.25 posi as well if that matters. The 3.25 gears makes me think the 250 might be the better choice, right?

yeah thats what I kinda figured awith that manifold. I'll save it for a ghetto boost project later lol. Those headers are just like whats on the car now. I got the VI ones. So in that sense I'd just put the turbo right where the mechanical fuel pump would be, right? Then feed through the intercooler, under the battery tray, back up into the sniper? Having the cool intake pipe pass near the headers sounds self defeating, right? Or do an immediate U turn and place it under the headers?

 

[xctasy]

I plan on running more than 6lbs here. I was planning on trying to push 14lbs. So i'll need to run an MSD unit or the hyperspark. Howerver the turbo from that motor is not a bad idea. Do you have a part number for that? .......

is that 195 hp NA or 6lbs of boost?

I will check that thread out.

195 HP Net at 6 pounds of boost. Adding a 2V head to a 100 HP net 200 adds 40 HP. So that Richard Holdener Formula ( Hugh McInnes's stollen by Richard and Repurposed for information purposes) is (14.7 + 6)/14.7. That's a Boost Factor.

That gives you about, oh, about 195 HP...net. Gross HP would be well over 230. Like a J code 302 4V 4bbl.

 

[xctasy]

See page 1 of the post I linked

Draw Through Turbo Setup

Howdy guys, The other day I picked up a custom homebuilt draw through 200 turbo setup from a guy dirt cheap and all I need is to size a turbo. I'm not quite sure how to chose what kind to get. I have a Holley 350cfm I'd like to run or a 1.23 Autolite. I plan to run about 8psi max, maybe 10psi...

fordsix.com

The GPop Shop has the part numbers, and I've given you some Fake info to mess up the Counter Wallies who want a chassis number and VIN code and registration. Been down that road.

The turbo is basically this kind.

Garrett TAO3 TA31 TB41 Turbo Encapsulated Backplate Carbon Seal

You won't even need a seal, but a replacement is available to stop oil getting in if it's damaged. This is ancient tech, with great quality fixes. O rings, seals, and a long history of work, plus a five bolt mount which can be run off a steel rocker cover spacer.

I do have a design for it, incidentally...

The Duraspark II has a conventional Blue Strain Relief ICM module, and a three element Null Knob system which takes a combination Oil and Intake manifold and turbo boost pressure sensor, and then articulates ignition advance via that Ignition Timing Pressure Switch Assembly to the pressure sensor on the intake.

See post #303 on page 13 at the
Four Eyed Prides M81 Mustang Turbo tune documents.

"http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthr...Mclaren-ready-to-start-after-15-years!/page13"

I can't post pictures from there at the moment.