john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Elite Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
He's Ok, he just doesn't "want to be a fabrictor, I wanne be a designer". We're all artists, aren't we? John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
|
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
The plot jsut got watered down. I realized just to get the 2.0 up to Ranger block spec you ahve to buy a balance shaft delete kit for $100. THen a Ranger water outlet($50?) Then you still ahve a HEAVY crank with the balance shaft gear on and less displacement. The savings evaporate quickly. |
darkknight9 Kirk Coughlin Junior Moderator Location: Saint Paul, MN Join Date: 01/08/2006 Age: Possibly Wise Posts: 493 Rally Car: Dreaming of escorts and xrats |
A balance shaft delete kit can be had for $29 from C-F-M The 2.3 Ranger crank is 5.1 lbs less than the 2.3 focus crank. Kirk Coughlin Woodbury, MN and River Falls, WI Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est. |
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
I understand the Ranger crank is still lighter than the 2.0 crank, as well. Thats a delete kit I didnt know about, but I would still be saddled with the heavy gear on the 2.0 crank. |
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Elite Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
it'll happen but maybe with Sean and I doing it since William is uninterested... Yeah kits too ---half the fixtures at at Williams and I am avoiding driving 35 miles there and seeing my 2 Duratecs what I imagine to be strewn all over missing all the fasteners and miscelaneous bits that all cost money... John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
Well sooner is better than later(sometime this year hopefully) Otherwise I may be forced to use sometihng other than the Supra setup just to have something that wont spin the inside tire midcorner.. with a stock engine, nevermind the Duratec I am obviously cooking up. |
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
Upon further review, the 2.0 DOESN'T HAVE balance shafts. The rod journals are closer to the crank center line, which should translate to a LIGHTER AND STRONGER crank. If its not enough a 10+ MX5 steel crank can add needed strength. The deck height is about 1/2" shorter which is just a little more hood clearance, and a little lighter of a block.
Things are suddenly far less clear. What to do? |
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Elite Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
first, don't worry about hood clearence, you wont have a tall valve cover and intake pipes going over the valve cover.. Second, you want to do something good? Use the tall block and a 2.0 crANK AND GO LONGER RODS... Both motors have rod/stroke ratios around 1.62---1.64... It'll be less side thrust with longer rods, more powerz, less wear.. In the YB it's also about 1.64 r/s... The day the rules allowed it--the onset of "World Rally Car" subset of Group A, Ford homologated rods about 10mm longer and got a much nicer 1.8 r/s... And a piston with comp hgt of around 30mm, so much lighter reciprocating weight, and reciprocating weight is really worthwhile to think of, screw the maybe 1/2700 increase in engine weight that the block would be as a percent of the whole car John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
|
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
Also, I disagree that hood clearance wont be an issue. Check out this swap thread:
Duratec Swap into XR- Merkurclub |
Andrew_Frick Andrew Frick Mod Moderator Location: Greenville, SC Join Date: 05/18/2007 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 684 Rally Car: Rally Spec Ford Focus |
Just buy a ranger 2.3L It is configured for RWD. Has a lighter crank and you don't have to mess with a balance shaft delete kit. Plus it is 15% more displacement. Some of the accessories bolt to the head like PS pump.
Also keep in mind that the accessory belt routing relies on some bosses on the front cover, at least depending on what you are running with. I am not sure if the front cover for the 2.0L motor has all of the right bosses to say run a water pump, PS pump and alternator with a Ford belt. Not saying this can't be overcome but its nice to be able to goto Autozone and get the right belt for the motor. Also, I have a 2.3L in my focus with the balance shaft. I have had no issues spinning up the motor. I actually doubt you would notice the difference other than maybe on a dyno and we don't race on dynos. |
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Elite Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
2.O fwd cover may have trouble sealing..decl height on 2.0 is 216.9mm, on the 2.3 its 231.. Maybe a fat toothpaste like string of silicone might seat it
Correction on r/s on the 2.0: 1.76<------pretty good, was for a long time "the" desirable r/s for compromise between revs and spread in the "old days' Basic figures 2.0.....deck 216.9....rod c-c 146.25....stroke 83.1 bore 87.5....47mm rod journal 2.3.....deck 321.0...rod c-c 154.78....stroke..94.....bore 87.5...50mm rod journal Both compression hgt....28.6 Hybrid 2.3 block w 2.0 crank w 28.6 comp hgt. rod must be: 160.85mm John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
espacef1fan Adam Escott Godlike Moderator Location: Fort Campbell,KY Join Date: 02/04/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 89 Rally Car: Don't have one. |
|
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Elite Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
ME, OF COURSE. John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Rally Anarchy © 2014 Corvus Digital –
Part of the AutoShrine Network –
Problems? Send an email to the Webmaster