I've just sussed that another reason why its sat a bit higher is of the COP's its resting on them. A 25mm spacer will do I think. Think
I'm going to have to go the same road as kev and machine an st220 manifold to suit as I dont fancy drilling out a 25mm block of ally
quote:Originally posted by sdh2903
I've just sussed that another reason why its sat a bit higher is of the COP's its resting on them. A 25mm spacer will do I think. Think
I'm going to have to go the same road as kev and machine an st220 manifold to suit as I dont fancy drilling out a 25mm block of ally
I went for a coil pack instead of COP.
The upper/lower ST200 seal is a plastic/rubber gasket about 4/5mm thick. I don't see why a couple can't be stacked eBay Item
If anyone interested here is the difference between the 2 lower inlets. The all plastic fuel rail version is 99-01 and the steel rail is 01 onwards.
There is a 10mm difference in height with the steel rail version being taller aswell as the much taller fuel rail with the plastic rail.
I finally got around to slapping the plenum on the Duratec 30. The ports are huge and look much bigger than the St200.
Question, how high does the st200 manifold sit above the rocker cover please ?
I will try and get some better photos if it compares well.
I also commented that the Aj30 plate didn’t bolt direct to the Duratec 30 as there was a dowl in a differant location. I got the dowl out but the
plate doesn’t seem a great fit. Even with just one dowl in the block I can’t get all the bolts to go in. And I can tell from the starter flywheel it’s
not 100% centred.
On the Jaguar version there are two senders close to each other on the near side of the engine tapped into an oil gallery. One has one wire one has
two wires. Am I right in thinking the one with one wire is oil light and the other one is oil temperature? Or is it an oil pressure sender ? Thanks
I thought 1 wire would be for oil pressure light. Maybe the car had an oil pressure gauge, i can't remember, that may be the 2 wire sender. Your
right about oil temp probably needing to be in the sump.
I will get a couple of pics tomorrow.
quote:Originally posted by RWD Focus
I thought 1 wire would be for oil pressure light. Maybe the car had an oil pressure gauge, i can't remember, that may be the 2 wire sender. Your
right about oil temp probably needing to be in the sump.
I will get a couple of pics tomorrow.
If you unscrew the sender it will be clear to see if its temp or pressure.
Temp will be solid,pressure will have a hole in the end!
Strange isn't it. I would say FWD. Mine is mounted very differently. Ive fabricated mounts to pick up on the bolt holes around the oil switches,
and same area on the other side
Looks like a Ford FWD, possibly a X-type. That photo is the front view.
When they converted it to RWD they used the oil filter/cooler as the engine mount you find on the S-Type. Description Description
Yeh that looks like an x type lump. There is a huge lump of cast iron in the V to hang it of the inner wing. It’s so big you have to take a head of to
get it out.
The block for the 3.0L S type / X type and ST220 are the same so all the boxes bolt up if you move the dowels.
Crank is also the the same as is oil pump etc.
Ive swopped between blocks from each in my car when Ive done rebuilds.
Incidentally has anyone considered the plastic plenum from the Maverick... as used on nobles to over 700bhp (mine being one of them).
Looking at the Rocketeer carbon manifold, it looks loverly, but for a single throttle NA engine the chambers look too large to me... given the results
being poorer than the ST200 manifold I wonder if they got it wrong.
Ive developed ITB's for mine... it outperforms the ST220 manifold above 6500rpm considerably.
Ive been looking at plenum options. Including the 3.7L Cobra.
Trouble with itb's for a 7 style car is going to be height. The fwd manifold actually sits nicely in a 7 due to the step in the bulkhead.
Ive got a lovely set of Nasp exhaust manifolds designed for 3.5/3.7. Not that they would be any good in a 7.
I would love to find a set of -1mm rods like the Nobel. Yours is definitely something to aspire to.
I actually have 5 spare... as I seem to have lost the 6th one lol
you can get forged pistons that suit the stock length rod (which I run) and you can get KI stock length rods for $600.... but it starts to add up when
you find you need oil squirters machined into the stock block and the gaskets and stretch bolts are not cheap...
Not cheap... but then what engine is when your tuning it 3-4 times its stock power?
quote:Originally posted by andygtt
The block for the 3.0L S type / X type and ST220 are the same so all the boxes bolt up if you move the dowels.
Crank is also the the same as is oil pump etc.
Ive swopped between blocks from each in my car when Ive done rebuilds.
Incidentally has anyone considered the plastic plenum from the Maverick... as used on nobles to over 700bhp (mine being one of them).
Looking at the Rocketeer carbon manifold, it looks loverly, but for a single throttle NA engine the chambers look too large to me... given the results
being poorer than the ST200 manifold I wonder if they got it wrong.
Ive developed ITB's for mine... it outperforms the ST220 manifold above 6500rpm considerably.
Interesting single twin scroll turbo by the looks of it, which one if you don't mind me asking??, and what sort of power band/bhp are you
looking at? (i'll be building a new turbo engine for my Metro over the next few months and i'm just gathering info/options...and parts
lol).
I used to run a BW S300SX, made over 700bhp easy and my intake was the limitation... it WAS NOT laggy before anyone asks, it way outperformed any
previous twin turbo setup I previously ran.
This engine made power from 4000-8000rpm... it made 700bhp for 1500rpm so wasn't peaky.
It was making 500ftlb from 4000rpm! peak torque was 630ftlb wish from memory.
For the Jag heads and the new engine package Im targeting 8500rpm and much more power than before.
For the new spec engine I have moved to a BW EFR9174 which I have seen make 1000bhp... but you really need to match the compressor map to your
engine.
Yes thats one of my old dyno charts, I moved it on 50bhp from that a few years later
had the same throttle response to my V10 M5's so it was very controllable on the throttle.... This V6 is a truly awesome bit of kit and very
underrated and underused.
Worth mentioning the ford version of the sump has the bowl and pickup at the rear so might well miss a 7 type crossmember!
quote:Originally posted by andygtt
The block for the 3.0L S type / X type and ST220 are the same so all the boxes bolt up if you move the dowels.
Crank is also the the same as is oil pump etc.
Ive swopped between blocks from each in my car when Ive done rebuilds.
Incidentally has anyone considered the plastic plenum from the Maverick... as used on nobles to over 700bhp (mine being one of them).
Looking at the Rocketeer carbon manifold, it looks loverly, but for a single throttle NA engine the chambers look too large to me... given the results
being poorer than the ST200 manifold I wonder if they got it wrong.
Ive developed ITB's for mine... it outperforms the ST220 manifold above 6500rpm considerably.
