philgregson
|
| posted on 5/8/02 at 08:57 PM |
|
|
Which engine?
Having still failed to locate a mk 1 or 2 escort for sensible money (nearly free!) I am starting to reconsider my engine options as I will no-longer
be resticted to the donor car.
My feelings are that I wish to go down the type 9 gearbox route as I am lead to belive that these are narrow and obviously the back
axle/propshaft/gearbox equation is easier.
X-flow is one option still obviously.
Pintos are nearly free but the height puts me off.
There seem to be a reasonable number of sierra donors with 2l twin cams - how well do these fit?
Ditto ford V6's.
I have a 1.6 CVH from an XR3i but everyone tells me that fitting them was a nightmare!
I've heard that the vauxall twin cams can be made to fit a type 9 box and these are nice (but not as cheap as ford).
I'd love a Hyabusa but too much for my present financial circumstances - still in mind for a future build though.
One final thought - Rover V8 is light and tourquey can this be made to fit in any way. Plenty available and sounds gorgeous.
Any thoughts at all would be welcome (well almost any).
|
|
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 5/8/02 at 10:43 PM |
|
|
seirra t/c engines are rubbish,i tried a cvh but gave up with the alternator mount ,look at some other cars with cvh,they are better than x flow,it
can be done! 
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 5/8/02 at 10:56 PM |
|
|
Why are the sierra tc engines rubbish? I had a sierra Ghia many years ago (when that sort of thing was more acceptable) and thought it was a great
engine - hardly a light weight sporty aplication though.
Is the CVH easy to fit to a type 9.
There are two distinct schools of thought on the CVH, regardless of fitment to a locost. Half the world thinks they are crap and the other half
thinks they are great - Who is telling the truth?
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 04:22 PM |
|
|
half of em.......just don't know which half.......
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 04:56 PM |
|
|
I rate the cvh,simple,robust and powerfull, hate the t/c,un reliable,slow and overly complicated,thats my veiw of the world for what its worth!
|
|
|
johnston
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 05:35 PM |
|
|
why not build a cvh zetec bottom end plenty in scrappys but with the cvh head was lookin into it and it doesnt look as hard as it sounds
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 07:06 PM |
|
|
Although I want to play engines in the future I really just want a reasonable powerful lump I can just drop in to get the thing on the road.
I've got enough on my plate with the rest of the car without spending as much time and money again on the engine.
I need to get the car going and through SVA and then I can start tuning and improving.
WOuld be helpful if my engine choice was a good one for continuing improvement though to avoid rejigging engine bay.
What about a zetec?
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 08:21 PM |
|
|
one option i considerd was cvh, RS turbo style.......worth a sniff....
my understanding is cvh btm ends are pretty tuff little sods.... 
|
|
|
escary
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 08:35 PM |
|
|
if you want build with xf have a look at Practical Classics magazine, they have had about ten mk2's for sale in the last three months all at the &100
pounds mark as well as v6 grannies at about £100 just do'nt tell the old set in thier way owners what your intentions are or may not sell, they also
run a free car's section (which is why i buy it) but as for cvh v's twin cam go cvh, Fiesta rs turbo's are cheaper than escorts as they rust worse
than escorts.
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 09:50 PM |
|
|
Well I'll try the practical classics route - a donor escort is still favorite for starters to avoid the dreaded Q plate.
If not I'll have a bash at cracking the old CVH thing.
The CVH I've got is from an XR3i and I have all the loom (I think) but I would think that carbs are still a better option - comments please?
If anyone else can give me a hint as to the other fitting problems. What I have gathered so far is:
It will fit a type 9 box (although I don't know how easily).
It will require some height reduction - the sylva site describes chopping the bottom off the sump and fitting wings.
I gather that, originally being a transverse unit, the engine mountings will not be suited to this application but have heard that the route here is
to use the alternator mount as one - is this ok? or will it stress the block in a way it shouldn't be?
The alternator needs to be put on the other side - possibly a small japanese unit?
Someone has told me that (And I must be honest The engine is buried in the workshop and I have not looked for a while) the dizzy is on the back and
will impinge on the space frame.
I have no experience at all in the vast world of ford engines etc so would appreciate some advice from those who have looked into the CVH option
before.
|
|
|
paulf
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 10:02 PM |
|
|
I managed to fit a 1300 cvh into my chassis and still retained the alternator on the original side. After spending a couple of weeks messing with
engine mounts etc. I used the alternator mounting and the original front mounting at the top of the block. I still needed to solve the height problem
but a rebuilt 1600 crossflow came my way complete with donor vin so i fitted that.I could post some pics of the engine mounts if required and may even
be persuaded to sell them .The gearbox fits no problems at all and the dizzycap clears the chassis by at least an inch.
Paul.
quote:
It will fit a type 9 box (although I don't know how easily).
It will require some height reduction - the sylva site describes chopping the bottom off the sump and fitting wings.
I gather that, originally being a transverse unit, the engine mountings will not be suited to this application but have heard that the route here is
to use the alternator mount as one - is this ok? or will it stress the block in a way it shouldn't be?
The alternator needs to be put on the other side - possibly a small japanese unit?
Someone has told me that (And I must be honest The engine is buried in the workshop and I have not looked for a while) the dizzy is on the back and
will impinge on the space frame.
I have no experience at all in the vast world of ford engines etc so would appreciate some advice from those who have looked into the CVH option
before.
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 6/8/02 at 10:22 PM |
|
|
I'm getting more encouraged by the minute!
If you can post your mount piccies that would be good.
More questions though:
If you hadn't solved the height problem but had already built the mounts was:
a) the engine sticking up too high? or
b) the sump sticking out of the bottom?
How much too tall is the engine?
Is the 1300 block the same size as the 1600? I ask beacuse everybody else tells me that the alternator will not fit in the standard engine bay.
When you say the type nine box fits no problem at all - does this mean just bolt it straight on, same clutch, same everything?
|
|
|
paulf
|
| posted on 7/8/02 at 07:56 PM |
|
|
I will try and find the engine mount pics or take some fresh ones and work out how to post them to the group.
To get the height correct i needed to chop the sump by about an inch to be level with the bellhousing bottom, the cam cover was just a bit to high and
would have needed the breather area modifying, it is a lump that sticks above the general height of the cover.
My nose cone is a caterham clone and i believe slightly lower than some of the others available and was very close to the cambelt cover which i was
going to run without.i dont know about the height of the 1600 block it may be the same as a crossflow and about 1 inch higher , maybe someone else can
confirm this.
The alternator easily fitted in my car as i retained it in its original CVH position and used a braced box section bolted underneath the cast mounting
and at 90 degrees to the block, this i set onto a square ford gearbox type mounting against the chassis.
The original clutch cover fits if used with a cortina 1300 or 1600 clutch plate with the 1 inch 23 spline centre to suit the gearbox,you would need to
fit a spigot bearing to suit also, i think the bore is 16mm.
Paul.
quote:
I'm getting more encouraged by the minute!
If you can post your mount piccies that would be good.
More questions though:
If you hadn't solved the height problem but had already built the mounts was:
a) the engine sticking up too high? or
b) the sump sticking out of the bottom?
How much too tall is the engine?
Is the 1300 block the same size as the 1600? I ask beacuse everybody else tells me that the alternator will not fit in the standard engine bay.
When you say the type nine box fits no problem at all - does this mean just bolt it straight on, same clutch, same everything?
|
|
|
johnston
|
| posted on 7/8/02 at 08:42 PM |
|
|
try this site i found some good stuff on it before for the cvh http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/
|
|
|
philgregson
|
| posted on 7/8/02 at 09:14 PM |
|
|
Thanks for all that folks.
I've found the puma site today and he sounds convincing about the potential of the CVH.
Also looked again on the sylva site - they recomend it as an ideal engine for their strika. They take about an inch off the sump and put wings on the
side to retain the oil volume. They suggest replacing the flywheel and clutch with the item from the sierra 1.6 CVH. The shaft of the 1.6 is already
drilled for the spogot bearing which just knocks in. The post '86 CVH can have it's flywheel re-drilled to take the 1.8 clutch but I have the
earlier one that needs the flywheel replacing.
- doesn't look like such a crap idea after all. And it seems like planty of potential for tuning - 140 BHP looks comfortably possible without loosing
tractability and apparently the Turbo version will do a comfortable 170 BHP (and it weighs bugger all compared with some of the other ford lumps). Ok
so it's not a bike engine but it doesn't seem half bad.
Photos of mountings would still be good though.
|
|
|
paulf
|
| posted on 8/8/02 at 07:54 PM |
|
|
I cant find any clear ones at the moment but will take some on saturday when off work and post them.
Paul
quote:
Photos of mountings would still be good though.
|
|
|
.jpg)
