Ben 4x4 Shepperd
|
 posted on 3/1/03 at 08:28 PM |
|
|
2.8 V6 tuning
I want to tune my v6 but with out changing it's official spec as insurance and parents are being hard enuff as it is with the 2.8. So far a quicker
flowing air filter and box as well as a less restrictive exaust are all I can think of ( and I will also already have) Any tips ?
Thanks Ben
|
|
|
|
|
Viper
|
| posted on 3/1/03 at 08:38 PM |
|
|
your biggest problem with the 2.8 is the heads, they have siamese exhaust ports, not very tuneable unless you want to spend loads a dosh...biggest
single (cheap) improvement is to find some heads off of a 2.8 v6 mustang its the same bottom end but have proper heads, grab the exhaust manifolds as
well, you might find you will need to use an after market manifold with something like a holley, search around on the net you can get stuf from the
states dead cheap, to give you an idea my race heads for my 2.8i capri were £1800.00 (siamese heads) it will all come down to how much power you want
or how deep your pockets are...
|
|
|
Ben 4x4 Shepperd
|
| posted on 3/1/03 at 08:45 PM |
|
|
My pockets are extremely shallow as I get about £100 a year but my parents will pay for things e.g chassis and coil overs (hopefully). (My
donor was my mum's old sierra estate that she left in our yard too long so I decided to recycle it in the best way possible)
|
|
|
Viper
|
| posted on 3/1/03 at 08:55 PM |
|
|
well not wishing to dampen your enthusiasm but your engine choice is probably not the wisest, i have had a bit of experiance with this engine and to
get it to go is expensive and its heavy, there are a lot of engines available that would be a lot more suitable, the main reason people use pintos and
crossflows is because they are dead cheap and there are loads of tuning bits around (used) at sensible money, if you know where to look, i understand
why you want to use the v6 , sounds good and you have one sat in your garage, but take a step back and think about it.
whatever you decide to do i wish you the best of luck with your project.
Tim.
|
|
|
jollygreengiant
|
| posted on 3/1/03 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
I think that the 2.9 heads fit, so you need heads,manifolds (inlet & exhaust), & injection system off 2.9 (Individual exhaust ports as opposed to
siamese)
Enjoy.
|
|
|
interestedparty
|
| posted on 3/1/03 at 09:12 PM |
|
|
Increasing the power of the engine, by whatever means, will need to be declared to the insurance company. Failing to declare any tuning improvements
will only be a problem if you get involved in an accident, but that's exactly when you want the insurance, isn't it?
The best insurance cost/power ratio will always be with the smaller more highly tuned engines, especially bike engines. My advice would be to swap the
V6 for a pinto, or better still a 1600 crossflow. Best of all would be a bike engine if you can afford it, might be worth getting a few quotes for
different sized engines.
John
As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list-- I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed-- who never would be missed!
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 4/1/03 at 03:32 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by interestedparty
Increasing the power of the engine, by whatever means, will need to be declared to the insurance company.
In my experience that only applies to standard policies with standard production cars. All the locost insurers I've spoken to only seem to ask the
age of the driver and the engine displacement. The make/type of engine doesn't matter, let alone it's state of tune. There's no such thing as a
standard Locost, so you can't really define a modified Locost either.
As for the 2.8, it seems you're on a tight budget, so I reckon that's easily your best option in terms of bang-for-buck. Sure you'd save money on
insurance if you swapped to a 1600 or a 2000, but that'd be roughly cancelled out by the cost of buying a pinto or cvh + carbs etc.
From your post it seems you're after some grunt too - another reason to keep the 2.8 IMO. Yeah it's a bag of sand heavier than a 2.0 pinto, but
then it has an extra 45bhp as standard and an even bigger increase in torque.
People often rubbish the idea of using a heavy engine in a Locost, and I often feel compelled to jump to the defence of such gravitationally
disadvantaged lumps (nothing to do with the fact I'm using one myself ). To (mis)quote my great hero Einstein "It's all relative, guys". Sure
the V6 is heavier than a bike engine, but put the 2.8 in a Locost and you still end up with a sports car lighter than an Elise. What's the
problem?
"Oh but it'll be a front-heavy understeering barge" some will say. But the little bit of extra weight is still comfortably between the two axles.
Sure you'll upset the handling balance as compared to an R500, or something, but nobody complains about the handling of MX5s, TVRs, or other such
front-heavy barges, do they?
OK, unprovoked rant over. If you haven't guessed, I say keep the 2.8. I also say keep it standard at first if you're on a tight budget - you will
most likely find the resultant Locost to be more than fast enough to begin with (have you actually driven the 2.8 sierra? - imagine it half the
weight). Then when you need more grunt, plenty of people have turbocharged the 2.8.
Liam
|
|
|
Ben 4x4 Shepperd
|
| posted on 5/1/03 at 11:44 AM |
|
|
Yeah I've driven a 2.9 XR4x4 of my dads that he left in the field too long (but not on the road I'm only 15) My brother and me Did some burn outs
and 720 donuts in the field and tried to handbrake turn park etc. and that was pretty cool as apart from that I've only driven stuff like Landrovers
and minis around our field!! But I think I will stick with the 2.8 as I can't really get anything else ! Eventually I think I will put the EFI and
carb on from a 2.9
Thanks Ben
|
|
|
jollygreengiant
|
| posted on 5/1/03 at 12:09 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ben 4x4 Shepperd
the EFI and carb on from a 2.9
Thanks Ben
Efi's Don't have carb's. oops
Know what ya meen tho M8.
Enjoy
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 5/1/03 at 10:32 PM |
|
|
quote:
From your post it seems you're after some grunt too - another reason to keep the 2.8 IMO. Yeah it's a bag of sand heavier than a 2.0 pinto, but
then it has an extra 45bhp as standard and an even bigger increase in torque.Liam
I agree with all of that. Im using the 2.4 L version of the Cologne - so why shouldnt I !
Just work through the bhp / tonne figures. If you factor in the increased weight of the V6 over a pinto, then look at the extra 45 bhp, you are well
in - you have around 40% more power than a std 2.0 pinto - and its NOT 40% more weight on the car......the V6 would need to be about 220kg heavier to
do that - and it seems to be about 60kg more if you look at a Haynes manual.
HOWEVER
dont overlook insurance. If you are young I have seen posts that show insurance on a kit car of 1300 cc is expensive and a lot more for a big engine.
Get some indicative quotes - using a big engine cos you have it may not save money in the long run.
atb
steve
|
|
|
Viper
|
| posted on 5/1/03 at 11:19 PM |
|
|
Just another point to think on
with the V6 you will need two lots of exhaust pipes& silencers, if you run the injetion you will need a high pressure pump & high presure filter and a
return fuel pipe, you will also have the problem wth the height of the plenum chamber although that is probably no higher than the rocker box on the
pinto, somewhere to put the air meter, i thought about the cologne but i know what it costs to get them to go well (admitidley i had restrictive rules
to follow) if i was Ben i would try and swap the engine he has for a pinto or crossflow, a bike engine would be cool but probably not the best option
in this case, by the way i am using a pinto only because i happen to have a 175bhp 2.0L sat doing nothing, i had the option of a 4.0L tvr griff lump
but that would have cost me money and it was getting a bit silly, if i didn't already have an engine i would go the bike route, but then i am i biker
at heart.
just my opinion of course......
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 6/1/03 at 10:10 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Viper
Just another point to think on
with the V6 you will need two lots of exhaust pipes& silencers, if you run the injetion you will need a high pressure pump & high presure filter and a
return fuel pipe, you will also have the problem wth the height of the plenum chamber although that is probably no higher than the rocker box on the
pinto, somewhere to put the air meter,
you can look at my pics to see how I placed my TWO (there are two on an injected cologne) air flow meters. They were the trickiest things to site.
If needed, I can give a height above chassis rails and above the rails for the cologne if needed. I think its a couple inches above std scuttle height
from memory.
the fuel pump is really easy to fit and comes with the car. The filter will be rusted and can be replaced sub a tenner at Halfords.
Its not that hard to fit a cologne.
The std car has a single exhaust. If you can loop one side to the other, you might be able to join em under the bonnet - although this may not be best
for bhp. Twin exhausts wouldnt be hard to do and might look cool unless you dont want summat hot on the drivers side.
atb
steve
my opinion too of course.
ps
have you done my second xray tank yet Viper
|
|
|
Viper
|
| posted on 6/1/03 at 11:09 PM |
|
|
(there are two on an injected cologne)
not all colognes, the capri has only one and that prodiced an extra 10 hp (claimed)
|
|
|
ewanspence
|
| posted on 7/1/03 at 10:29 AM |
|
|
keep the 2.8
I too support the 2.8. It cheap, the Capri had 160 bhp (due to it have 2 exhausts not just the one as in the Sierra). So for little money you can fit
2 exhausts and modify the air box (and reduce it size by 50%) similar to the way I did it after seeing how Glen (Wurly Valve) did it.
bhp with a pair of exhausts (I used 2 Lolocost silencers £55 each) is about 160 then add a better air filter may add another 10bhp. The car will weigh
700kg worst case which gives a figure of 240+ bhp/ton.
Not bad for no major cost. When you don't have the cash you need to make do.
But remember once its up and running and you have saved some cash you could always replace the 2.8 with the 24 valve 2.9 cosworth beast, same gear box
etc so just some rearranging in the engine bay. That engine can be obtained free with a Grananda for around £300. Just a thought. I think it has in
excess of 200 bhp (~225) but can't remember exactly. Sure someone on the list knows.
Ewan.
Visit the MegaGrip site :-
http://www.geocities.com/ewanspence/
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 7/1/03 at 07:08 PM |
|
|
[quoteThat engine can be obtained free with a Grananda for around £300. Just a thought. I think it has in excess of 200 bhp (~225) but can't remember
exactly. Sure someone on the list knows.
I am not an expert on the Granada, but I thought that the cosworth was only fitted to the very late cars which will cost rather more than 300 quid?
atb
Steve
|
|
|
ewanspence
|
| posted on 8/1/03 at 10:46 AM |
|
|
granny mk3
The H and J reg garnnys (91 92 were the first to get it) and I have seen a few for very low amounts of cash. Heres some info from PaRKERS WEBSITE
Valuation for: Ford Granada 2.9 V6 24V Scorpio 5d Hatchback Auto [LT]
Year / Reg Original Price A1 Good Fair Trade
1991/H £27382 £1510 £1240 £265 £445
INTRODUCED Apr 1991 Scorpio 2.9i 24v (195 bhp) launched with `cat', 4speed Auto, modified suspension, limited slip differential, cruise control,
air conditioning and full luxury specification
Ewan.
Visit the MegaGrip site :-
http://www.geocities.com/ewanspence/
|
|
|
