200/3.3L crankshaft questions

fast64ranchero

Well-known member
Did Ford change the design, manufacturing or material used at any point during the run cycle of the 200/3.3L engine? will an early crank drop in a late block? did Ford change material used to build the cranks at any point?
Asking this to have the info before I build my engine, this engine could (should) end up with more WHP than my stroked and turbo'd 250 and I would like to have the best parts I can afford in it, I know any should hold the power but why not look for the best if there is a "best".
I plan on using a late (1982) low mount starter block for tranny reasons unless they have problems I don't know about.
Thanks
Walt
 
I wondered the same thing , Maybe FTF has some in site to this ?...There seams to be more than one crank design or number...They all seam to interchange [US 7 main of course]...I have not been able to figure out the difference if any.
 
wuz it X or some1 who put up a treatise on nodular v forged and other quality changes to material citing yrs of manufacture?

I seem to recall an early yr difference, goin 1 step better, then a return to original (or lesser grade) B4 'the end'. The better in the early or mid 60s? Only w/1 or some of the Falcon motors, not all (170?)?

Sorry...
:oops:
 
If you want parts that will handle more HP look at aftermarket rods for either the Pinto 1.6L or 2.0L engine.
They are slightly longer than the 200 rod, 4.9"-5.0", for better rod/stroke ratio, are forged, and can handle more HP than the 200 rod.

Hope this helps.
 
No major changes, although Ford did recode the casting number.Appart from the first four bearing 200 in Fairlanes and Cometes, the 3.3 USA market engine in seven bearing form never really changed asside from the casting number puched or cast into the crank. Your all good. All were cast iron, eight counterweight in line 3.3 cranks the same from 1965 to 1983. Interchangable. No counterweights on cylinders 2 and 5.

IIRC, The Crank code stamped on the post 1980 - 1993 B and X code engines is different to the earlier ones. 2M or 3M or some such.NHRA has crank casting codes somwhere. But the crank has the same thrust bearing and crank and flange dimensions as it did in the four bearing 200 's in the 1963 Fairlane and Cometes. The last X code 1983 crank is still designed for a rope seal. And to the last day, the engine had two versions....high mount starter with C3, or low mount starter with C5 lock-up clutch. The only difference was the block casting code, and the kind of auto gearbox it came with.


The little Ford in lines six cylinder cranks were lowest tier in line six technology, always cast nodular iron, and It still missing even the 12 counterweights you'd find on a 1955 Nash in line six, and any 3.8 0r 4.2 AMC, or or 4.2 or 4.0Jeep crank...or the Aussie 1980-1986 3.3 liter OHV Blue and Black XT5 or XT6 engines. The Ford 3.3 seven bearing crank only has eight counterweights.

The decendants of the 3.3 were the eight counterweight 3.2, 3.9 and 12 or 8 counterweight 4.0 Overhead cam Aussie in line sixes, and they only got a fully counterweighed 12 counterweight crank in one version, the 4.0 liter EF Falcon from 1994 to about 1996.




See viewtopic.php?f=5&t=74799


Then Ford went back to a lighter, IIRC, 8 counterweight version in the EL Series 2 late i 1997, and kept it for all the versions untill the engine died in 2017. You can make 1650 horspower without a fully counterweighed crank.

10EFcounterwightvs6XPtoEDcounterwei.jpg

In 1994, the EL crank got reworked to 12 counterweights (Holden XT5/XT6's had 12 counterweights in 1980, so not cutting edge). Before that, all seven bearing Ford small I6's have had 8 counterweights since 1960 to 1993. The harmonic balancer was changed to a two element item.
 
on material alone we now have more:
"... in lines six cylinder cranks were lowest tier in line six technology, always cast nodular iron..."
on design, also see above
 
Yes you could use the 1jz rods with a 200 crank if you machine the cranks rod throws. The 200 Crank could also be offset ground during that process to gain a small amount of a stroke increase. The US 250 cranks can’t fit in a 200 block, there is not enough clearance/ or room between the cam and crank for the rod clearance, thats one reason why the 250 block is taller and wider than a 200 block. The largest stroke crank that could be made to fit in a 200 is one of the 221 cranks, you would have to source one of those from Australia, Boenos Aires, Argentina. Best of luck
 
We have a new member from Buenos Aires. He might have access to or a source for a 221 crank.
 
Yes you could use the 1jz rods with a 200 crank if you machine the cranks rod throws. The 200 Crank could also be offset ground during that process to gain a small amount of a stroke increase. The US 250 cranks can’t fit in a 200 block, there is not enough clearance/ or room between the cam and crank for the rod clearance, thats one reason why the 250 block is taller and wider than a 200 block. The largest stroke crank that could be made to fit in a 200 is one of the 221 cranks, you would have to source one of those from Australia, Boenos Aires, Argentina. Best of luck
with the 200/221 which one has a better stroke/quench? If that's the correct wording.
 
Nice. I"ve seen them the issue is shipping.
I don’t think so, you can use DHL or FedEx for shipping. For example i buy in Amazon/ Ebay, send them to a mailbox in Miami and then a Courrier to Argentina. The weight makes it expensive. There is also a factory in Argentina (Kotwika) that makes crankshafts for Porsche and Still manufacture 3.0lts Cranckshafts for Falcon competition.
 
I don’t think so, you can use DHL or FedEx for shipping. For example i buy in Amazon/ Ebay, send them to a mailbox in Miami and then a Courrier to Argentina. The weight makes it expensive. There is also a factory in Argentina (Kotwika) that makes crankshafts for Porsche and Still manufacture 3.0lts Cranckshafts for Falcon competition.
Yeah I meant weight wise. I know Ercoli makes them too.
 
So a 221 crank in a 200 block creates what displacement? The 200/221 pistons are not same bore size right?
 
Back
Top