Click Here -> Please Consider Making a PayPal Contribution to the FordSix Forum!
2018 Contributors:
StarDiero75, curts56, DannyG, B RON CO, wsa111, Captainslow42, falconcritter
Econoline, THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER, 95FordFleetside, turbo6, Max_Effort, WorldChampGramp
cr_bobcat, C.S.Designs, pmuller9, gus91326, rwbrooks50, rocklord, drag-200stang, Big64my79Effie, CNC-Dude, gb500

2019 Contributors:
NJwpod, 1strodeo, mightynorseman, maxtrux, 6d7coupe, broncr, Phase3, 68Flareside240, bmbm40,
mustang6, WorldChampGramp, justintendo, BigBlue94, ags290, motorsickle1130, Rooster, ousooner919, ethanperry

Unknown->> M.Ketterer, T.Smith, J.Myers, P.McIntire - Please PM me (1966Mustang) and lemme know who you are!

Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Moderator: Mod Squad

MarylandMustang
Registered User
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 am

Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #1 by MarylandMustang » Mon Feb 06, 2012 12:40 pm

I was just curious whether someone could increase the stroke on a 200 ci...and what potential problems this would cause?

Do they have stroker kits for the sixes like they do for the V8s?


Miles

User avatar
rocklord
Registered User
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:25 pm
Location: Hurricane, WV

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #2 by rocklord » Mon Feb 06, 2012 1:21 pm

Look here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=67266

Check towards the end of the post, discussion of a 220 Stroker.

xctasy talks about offset grinding the 200 crank rod journals to 1.9" and increasing the stroke to 3.35", using the rods from the Ford Kent 1.6L inline 4, rod bearings from the Australian Holden 202 or VW, and 95mm pistons from the early BMW M5 inline six.

Care has to be taken on clearance between the connecting rods and cam; pretty tight on a 200 let alone trying to increase its stroke. The cam clearance issue is one reason why the 250, and 221, block was redesigned; to move the cam further away from the crank.

One downside of the 220Stroker is the cost of the BMW pistons, very $$$$$. Another is you're pushing the limit of overboring the 200 block (3.74") with the 95mm pistons. But is everything works out, you increase the displacement and torque by 10%.

Won't know if it's possible unless someone tries.

You game?
Dan

Currently Own
1965 Mustang, 200CID, 3Spd
1964 Corvair Coupe, 164CID, 140HP, 4Spd
1961 Corvair Lakewood wagon, 145CID, 80HP, 2Spd Powerglide Auto.
2017 BMW X3, 3.0L Dual Turbo, 300HP, 8-Spd Auto

User avatar
powerband
FSP Moderator
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: Mid Hudson Valley - \H/

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #3 by powerband » Mon Feb 06, 2012 1:33 pm

MarylandMustang wrote:I was just curious whether someone could increase the stroke on a 200 ci...and what potential problems this would cause?
Miles


Someone did- Ford. Here's an excerpt from the FSP/CI "tech" page:

The 250ci was developed from the earlier 144/170/200ci family of engines. In order to accommodate the large increase in stroke from 3.126" to 3.91", the block deck height was increased and the cam location raised. Outwardly the engines appear very similar, but measuring the deck height (crank centerline to top of deck) shows that the 200ci has a 7.808" deck height and the 250ci has a 9.469" deck height. The cam is repositioned higher in the block to provide for crank clearance. At the rear of the block, the 250ci was redesigned to accommodate the same bell housing pattern as a small block Ford V8.

All the basic components from pistons to cams are same as 200. As with typical "strokers", the increased available displacement is countered somewhat by RPM constraints with longer piston travel/speed.

Have Fun
"Take time to stop and smell... The roadkill..."

MarylandMustang
Registered User
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #4 by MarylandMustang » Mon Feb 06, 2012 4:34 pm

I'm considering it!

I've been looking for a weekend project once it warms up...still deciding what to work on (exhaust, intake, carb, etc) and whether it would be a good investment for a daily driver.

It seems like for the money though a stroked 200ci wouldn't add as much of a performance improvement as other modifications

MPGmustang
FSP Moderator
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:23 pm
Location: Chandler AZ

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #5 by MPGmustang » Mon Feb 06, 2012 4:47 pm

typical i6'ers will note the 250ci is a stroked 200ci

the more questions you ask the more we can answer and you'll find something that you'll really enjoy. Don't throw parts at it, engines are a work of art in a way and the more time taken the better the result and bigger grin down the road.

the bottom can handle quite alot of abuse, it's the top that is the weak point, low flow and stupid intake.

the 200ci is not a performance machine, you can throw alot at for N/A and you still won't make 300hp where as the same price a bent8 will be over 400hp...

what are you looking for in your engine? street, sleeper, track, daily driver?
65mustang-SOLD-200ci-t5-scarebird disks-vintage air ac-264/274 110 cam-mav 8inch 3.8 open-350cfm-CI headers
66 Bronco-SOLD-i6 170 - rust bucket never ran...
75 bronco-SOLD-v8 c4 dana 20 33's and disk brakes, locker front/rear.

Soldmy66
Registered User
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:09 pm

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 250 ci?

Post #6 by Soldmy66 » Mon Feb 06, 2012 5:02 pm

Has anyone stroked a 250?

User avatar
rocklord
Registered User
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:25 pm
Location: Hurricane, WV

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 250 ci?

Post #7 by rocklord » Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:30 pm

Soldmy66 wrote:Has anyone stroked a 250?


Yes. It can be stroked to 269cid without to much problems, just money.

Just offset grind the rod journals, find rods with smaller crank journals (big end), use different pistons with a compression height equal to the amount of throw added to the crank.
Should go with longer rods to keep the rod/stroke ratio near the stock 1.5-1, if not better.

AZCoupe has done it.

Several are talking about it. They may chime in.
Dan

Currently Own
1965 Mustang, 200CID, 3Spd
1964 Corvair Coupe, 164CID, 140HP, 4Spd
1961 Corvair Lakewood wagon, 145CID, 80HP, 2Spd Powerglide Auto.
2017 BMW X3, 3.0L Dual Turbo, 300HP, 8-Spd Auto

MarylandMustang
Registered User
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #8 by MarylandMustang » Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:31 pm

I'm planning on having it as a daily driver and originally wasn't going to change anything but lately I've been interested in ways I can improve low end/mid range torque (mostly for having fun at stop lights!). My goal is to try to maximize the torque I can get out of the six without losing any economy? Open to any suggestions. I've got about $1500 in my car budget for improvements.

User avatar
powerband
FSP Moderator
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: Mid Hudson Valley - \H/

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #9 by powerband » Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:07 pm

Open to any suggestions. I've got about $1500 in my car budget for improvements

'struck up a conversation in a parts store after hearing a guy asking about parts for his '69 Mustang and he offered V8 swapped 250 for free . .. added @ $ 1000 for fully tricked HP head (kudos to the Schehldahl's! [sp :? ]). You might not find a free 250, but they do show up on forums and CL often. For low end grunt/fun , even stock - it's awesome. 250's are all SBF from starter to FW ,clutches and most trannys' fit the SBF bellhouse they use.

... heard too often but with good reason: there's no replacement for displacement ... , my friendly machinist adds: ... just horsepower per cubic dollar 8) ...

Have Fun
"Take time to stop and smell... The roadkill..."

MPGmustang
FSP Moderator
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:23 pm
Location: Chandler AZ

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #10 by MPGmustang » Tue Feb 07, 2012 12:32 am

http://i897.photobucket.com/albums/ac17 ... torque.jpg

only difference is a 1bbl vs 2bbl, the 2bbl really opens the ENTIRE range of the engine. for more torque stay away from the dual grind cams. for 1500, build it your self, you'll do it right and learn properly on what to care for. always ask questions before you do something you don't understand.
65mustang-SOLD-200ci-t5-scarebird disks-vintage air ac-264/274 110 cam-mav 8inch 3.8 open-350cfm-CI headers
66 Bronco-SOLD-i6 170 - rust bucket never ran...
75 bronco-SOLD-v8 c4 dana 20 33's and disk brakes, locker front/rear.

User avatar
rbohm
Assistant Admin
Posts: 5690
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 4:00 am
Location: Tucson, AZ
Contact:

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #11 by rbohm » Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:47 pm

8) just remember when building your engine, that you need to consider the entire combination, not just a few parts of it, for best results. changing the stroke without considering the cam, cylinder head, exhaust, etc. means that you wont get the most out of the combination.
64 falcon
66 mustang
05 grand marquis

my mind is aglow with whiriling
transient nodes of thought
careening through a cosmic vapor
of invention

MarylandMustang
Registered User
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #12 by MarylandMustang » Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:25 pm

Here is what I am considering doing...I would be interested to hear thoughts/suggestions for the project.

Have:
Bone Stock 200 ci
Autolite 1100
Pertronix Ignition
Straight exhaust


Planning to Add (in order)

1. 6-2 performance header from CI and 2in dual "Impostor" exhaust with x-pipe from CI
2. Direct Mount Autolite 2100
3. 264/274-110 Clay Smith Hydraulic Cam..or similar range

I'm trying to improve low-mid torque and keep my fuel economy high (daily driver)...not sure what else I can do

User avatar
powerband
FSP Moderator
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: Mid Hudson Valley - \H/

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #13 by powerband » Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:39 pm

The 200 with the mods you describe should be fun ride - what's transmission and rear gearing in RPM /cam / MPG equation?.

Had Fun
"Take time to stop and smell... The roadkill..."

MarylandMustang
Registered User
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #14 by MarylandMustang » Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:53 pm

7.25" stock rear and C4 3 spd transmission...not sure I'd upgrade the tranny (even though everyone gives the C4 a hard time) but I've never thought about a gear swap. maybe if it were a good investment.

User avatar
powerband
FSP Moderator
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: Mid Hudson Valley - \H/

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #15 by powerband » Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:04 pm

MarylandMustang wrote:7.25" stock rear and C4 3 spd transmission...not sure I'd upgrade the tranny (even though everyone gives the C4 a hard time) but I've never thought about a gear swap. maybe if it were a good investment.

C4 is strong availble 3spd Auto, with stock rear usually @ 3.00, it's your choice of cam for torque and MPG powerband 8)

HAve Fun
"Take time to stop and smell... The roadkill..."

User avatar
rbohm
Assistant Admin
Posts: 5690
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 4:00 am
Location: Tucson, AZ
Contact:

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #16 by rbohm » Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:10 pm

[quote="MarylandMustang"

Planning to Add (in order)

1. 6-2 performance header from CI and 2in dual "Impostor" exhaust with x-pipe from CI
2. Direct Mount Autolite 2100
3. 264/274-110 Clay Smith Hydraulic Cam..or similar range

I'm trying to improve low-mid torque and keep my fuel economy high (daily driver)...not sure what else I can do[/quote]

make the cam a 112 lobe separation angle instead of 110. that will trick the engine into thinking it has more compression than it really does, and will help the low end torque.
64 falcon
66 mustang
05 grand marquis

my mind is aglow with whiriling
transient nodes of thought
careening through a cosmic vapor
of invention

MPGmustang
FSP Moderator
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:23 pm
Location: Chandler AZ

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #17 by MPGmustang » Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:07 pm

IMO, I want the C4 back... then go 2.79 rear gears...

the engine, I like the cam, cause I have it now. the 110 is good enough for the C4, tq comes on little late instead of what your used to moves it up to 1800rpm but gosh does the engine sing. the headers yeah I got them no X pipe and it tricks people into thinking it's a v8 most the time, but I just went to the muffler shop and paid 160 per side (320 for entire exhaust)

either stick with that cam or or 274/274-112 (HP with torque) route. I'm doing something most big end racers do, run higher ratio rockers on the intake and stock rockers on the exhaust, this will help the intake gulp more air per stroke and increase torque/power. I think the stock torque converter can handle either cam.

with the 2bbl direct mounted, you'll make the same power I do, at the tires I make 135hp and 166tq the link I posted above gives the same engine with 1bbl vs 2bbl which is a big improvement from what you can see. (35hp increase just from the 2bbl, and I still get 20 mpg in city, if I'm light footed)
65mustang-SOLD-200ci-t5-scarebird disks-vintage air ac-264/274 110 cam-mav 8inch 3.8 open-350cfm-CI headers
66 Bronco-SOLD-i6 170 - rust bucket never ran...
75 bronco-SOLD-v8 c4 dana 20 33's and disk brakes, locker front/rear.

MarylandMustang
Registered User
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #18 by MarylandMustang » Sat Feb 11, 2012 12:31 am

I would love to make 135 hp with 166 tq and still get 20 mpg city! Do you think it is doable with the modifications I described or will I have to add anything extra?

Thanks for your help,



Miles

bmbm40
Registered User
Posts: 1190
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:25 pm
Location: Carson City, NV

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #19 by bmbm40 » Sat Feb 11, 2012 12:45 pm

The 200 is a great engine and the mods you described would be very enjoyable from what i have read on this site.
But I always like to mention the 250 as an option based on the high level of satisfaction mine provides. Consider a good running used 250 and a T5. With some looking around in yards and CL could probably piece together for a reasonable sum. You can still drive what you have till you get it all together.
I give the same advice to everyone, probably getting a bit tedious but the 250 is the best small six in my opinion.
66 Bronco-1970 250, NV3550, DSII, 4 turn ps, uncut, 1" bl, 2.5" sl, front disc, twin stick D 20, 30 x 9.50
NEXT- direct mount 1.08 on D8 head, power brakes, rear limited slip, 3G, electric fan, electric upgrades, custom curved DSII, header, 31" tires

New guy? Get the Falcon Performance Handbook and Ford six high performance parts from https://vintageinlines.com

MarylandMustang
Registered User
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #20 by MarylandMustang » Sat Feb 11, 2012 2:54 pm

I'll keep that in mind...I've had my eye on a 65 falcon futura in my neighbor's backyard that needs a restoration. I have been thinking about making him an offer for a while but the car is going to take a lot of work as it has no engine right now. The 250 or even 300 might be a good candidate if I can't find a reasonable 289.

mugsy
Registered User
Posts: 691
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:48 pm
Location: Dearborn, Mich

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #21 by mugsy » Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:03 pm

[quote="MPGmustang"]http://i897.photobucket.com/albums/ac174/mpgmustang/1bblvs2bbltorque.jpg

only difference is a 1bbl vs 2bbl, the 2bbl really opens the ENTIRE range of the engine. for more torque stay away from the dual grind cams. for 1500, build it your self, you'll do it right and learn properly on what to care for. always ask questions before you do something you don't understand.[/quote]

Is the 2-bbl from the dyno graph a direct mount or on a 2-to1 adapter? And that's a nice increase for just a carb change!
line 'em up, baby

Found over on Neons.org:
"whats a tranny tunnel?"
"total area is 142 cubic inches"

thatblue_67stang
Registered User
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 8:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #22 by thatblue_67stang » Mon Jan 07, 2019 9:53 am

If you want more grunt I would consider forced induction. I have turboed my 200 and it is a blast. Granted I milled off the intske and made my own but that's not to hard.
Brayton
1967 Ford Mustang Coupe
200 Inline 6 Turbo Charged

Image Image

fast64ranchero
Registered User
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 2:58 am
Location: Boise ID

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #23 by fast64ranchero » Wed Jan 09, 2019 3:31 pm

with a C-4 and stock converter I would not use the anything more than the 264/274, it'll be a hog from a stop. I was the guy that stroked the 250 to 269 Cu inches, I would never do it again, the 1.43 rod ratio proved to be to short and the engine wore out the pistons and cylinder walls.
I looked at stroking my latest turbo project 200 I'm building. offset grinding the crank would have been the exact same price as a stoke stroke grind (I'm using 1JZ rods that are wider and have a smaller big end) I am sticking to stock stroke. I don't think the extra 10 or 11 Cubes are worth the extra wear caused by the shorter rod ratio.
Walt
63 Ranchero,1965 Mercury Comet Convert V-8, 1978 Fairmont small six, mill'd off intake, 62-1 ET 12.332 @ 123.49 mph (gone)

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 6742
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Has anyone ever stroked a 200 ci?

Post #24 by xctasy » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:26 pm

MarylandMustang wrote:I was just curious whether someone could increase the stroke on a 200 ci...and what potential problems this would cause?

Do they have stroker kits for the sixes like they do for the V8s?




Miles



Kind of, Miles.

See a 221 with a 250 Ford crank.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=78906&p=609115#p609115

Back to the 200 stroker.

The Ford small six 144/170/187/188/200/221/250 all share exactly the same the Philippines export 130/ Torana 138 and Domestic
Red Australian GM sixes 161/173/179/186/202/2250/2650/2850/3300 4.08" bore spacing. (and 1980-1984 Blue 2850/3300 and 1985- 1986 Black 3300/3300 Electronic Injection later engines)

Specifically, the Holden 186 in Australia has often had either a 221 or the 188 Ford Six crank placed in it; about 130 kits were made by Bob Mann in Australia from 1968-1988. For the 221 crank, the Rod ratio (L-R) was down to 1.425:1. 3.46" stroke crank offset ground to an about 3.685" max stroke with 1.899" Holden crank pins instead of 2.124".

5.25" Starfire Four or XT5/XT6 rods were used instead of the 5.155" XT/XW 1968-1970 conrods the Aussie domestic 221 in line small six had. Other versions were made with the 188 Ford in line six crank, stock 5.37" 188 Ford in line six rods, and other 200/221/250 pistons. The success of the conversion was actually based on piston ring clearance and cylinder wall/ bore finish and texture.

Two problems are that when stroking,

your piston support is lost, and rocking occurs before or after a 500 to 10000 mile run-in.

Its caused by:-

1. the stroke to rod lamda value (L-R, Length : Rod ratio), which has to be no worse than (lower than) 1.484. That is historically where a normal US iron block engine becomes unable to support more than 4500 rpm with stock Ford/Chev style pistons in the 3.625- 4.125" bore diameter zone

2. the piston wall supported length is already marginal, and the new length of rod: stroke and piston combination will need to be plateau honed for the correct cross hatch and peak to valley roughness, or it'll suffer blow-by due to piston rocking and ring flutter.
If you have a nice piston material, good ring pack, nice gapping, and the right texture variance between the valleys, peaks and core roughness, as long as the L-R ratio is not less than 1.484, it will do the job.

Like the old Total Seal diagram below.


The deep scores are the valley cross hatching, the rest is in the plateau hone to smoothen 45 degree included angle cross hatch so you get the right relief map for the rings to flow against the moderate boundary layer of oil.

Image
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests