Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 18:57:21 GMT
as mentioned earlier, I am on the look which engine and gearbox i will use for the Ford based Eagle. After days of reading and searching I think a Tuned Ford 2 liter pinto is going to be used. Either build it myself or have it built by Burt Motorsport, or a combination of the two. But I'm really curious what you guy's have stabbing in your Eagle, so here is the question, which engine you have built in, and what gearbox.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 5:55:42 GMT
Mines came with the 2 litre Pinto ( although it says a 1.6 on the registration documents ) originally it had the 4 speed Cortina gearbox but I have changed this to the 5 speed type 9 ....
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Aug 1, 2014 12:02:11 GMT
Note to LUC; As far as the engine and gearbox / chassis goes the RV and the SS are the same, just different bodies. so any suggestions are the same for both.
|
|
|
Post by dickdastardly on Aug 1, 2014 20:49:32 GMT
The 2 ltr is a doddle to work on but as I have come from a 928 it is not to quick. I think you just have to accept its faults as all cars have and enjoy it, sometimes having to much power is no fun this car puts a smile on your face every time you take it out, each time I take it out it seems to drive better . I will put a quieter exhaust on it though as its way to loud I will make it myself it will be a rear central exhaust
|
|
Graham Wood
E.O.C. Chairman
Webmaster
User name = RAM
Posts: 516
Location, Town please: Southport, U.K.
|
Post by Graham Wood on Aug 1, 2014 21:21:06 GMT
Again, mine is a 2000 cc Pinto, fully restored / reconditioned including main and big end shells. Standard 4 speed gearbox.
I used to have 4 x 40DCOEs webber carbs, but were jetted for an RS 2000, so drank too much fuel. Only changed to standard single original carb 2 months ago. Power from a good Ford 2000 pinto is all you need.
As Mentioned by Peter, the SS is not designed for agility. Next to no weight on the rear, and tyres larger than on a heavier cortina, so too much power can be dangerous. Build a standard pinto engine, have the crankshaft, rods and pistons and flywheel balanced, which DOES help produce a bit more power.
Then put "Nitro" on it ( straight line 5 second bursts only ) for THAT thrill.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2014 19:14:33 GMT
ok that make it already a bit more clear, now deside what tuning i gone do on the Pinto engine, thx for the answers
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2014 13:31:33 GMT
I used to have 4 x 40DCOEs webber carbs, but were jetted for an RS 2000, so drank too much fuel. Only changed to standard single original carb 2 months ago. Then put "Nitro" on it ( straight line 5 second bursts only ) for THAT thrill. I'm curious, do you feel the difference between 40 DCOE and standard carb clear, or is it negligible, what difference does it make in consuming? Nitro brrrrrrr I've only been in a car once where the driver used it, so I was co-driver, it gives a kick for sure, but if your engine will endure it long?
|
|
Graham Wood
E.O.C. Chairman
Webmaster
User name = RAM
Posts: 516
Location, Town please: Southport, U.K.
|
Post by Graham Wood on Aug 7, 2014 10:16:34 GMT
[quote-DIY]I'm curious, do you feel the difference between 40 DCOE and standard carb clear, or is it negligible, what difference does it make in consuming?
Nitro but if your engine will endure it long?
[/quote]
Webber 40 DCOE's
Your engine can only take in 2000cc of air fuel mixture, so changing the carb from downdraught to side mounted it can still only suck in 2000 cc ( 500 cc each cylinder )
Air can be compressed: Fuel ( liquid ) cannot be compressed. In my opinion, the only reason why 40 DCOE's produce a bit more power is because a standard downdraught carb' manifold makes the air mixture go round 2 tight bends and one curve, and DCOE's have two very slight bends, as it is directly onto the inlet port of the head, hence more efficient, and less change in air direction.
For more power means you need more petrol and more air ( still in the correct ratio ) and for that, you have a turbo charger or supercharger. A Naturaly aspirated tuned engine just gets the air in smoother, maybe increases the size of the inlet ports a small amount, and engine is balanced ( or should be ) gets fuel in and out smoother, and balanced engine does not slow down the free reving of the engine therefore you have a resonable increase in power.
Maybe an increase in compresion ratio, but you may need fuel additive ( lead ).
I have built a few engines myself, had crankshaft reground, and parts mentioned balanced. You can "hone" the cyliner bores with a "flexhone" if bores are good ( not too much lip where the pistons change direction at the top.)
Do NOT fit piston rings that say they are for a worn engine, as I find them to be too big, and stick in the piston grooves, therefore you lose compresion.
Nitro. if you have a good crankshaft ( within manufacturers tolerances ) new bearings, and pistons, then short bursts of nitro wont harm the engine. You can get the connecting rods shot peened to remove any potential weak / stress points.
A tuned engine is maximum free reving via balancing and get fuel / air in and out quickly.
There is nothing wrong with you getting a pre built tuned engine as you suggest, and Decent low budget carbs and 4 branch exhaust manifold. The more power you produce and use, the less time the engine will last. a 1300 VW air cooled engine used in anger ( no power ) will last 20 times longer than a 2000cc turbo Evo used in anger.
what difference does it make in consuming? ( Carb ) I used up to one gallon ( 4.5 L ) more in 160 miles ( 257 Km )if used in anger. ( Motorways )but keep below 65 mph ( 104 Kmh )and you get good consumption.
It is your choice what you do. Suggest build yourself, ( only if you have done it a few times and had no problems ) to save money.
good luck, but remember, you will have to sell it at some point and you will lose a LOT of money, and as you have a few eagles, so go Get an Evo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2014 16:16:03 GMT
I've built a few engines in the past, and air-cooled have little secrets, however, each building off a engine and tuning is different, and Ford watercooled i have never done.
What I am totally agree with is that balancing both the crankshaft and connecting rods makes an enormous difference, that so for aircooled and the same for watercooled engnines. Currently it is still in the direction of an rebuild engine, either let him build, but more and more towards a combination, so the cylinderhead provide with lead-free valves, grinding slightly for a better compression and editing the inlet and outlet channels for better flow. The Nitro is tempting, but is completely new for me, are there people on the forum who have it? What are their experiences and especially what it takes for such a system before it works like it schould.
|
|
Graham Wood
E.O.C. Chairman
Webmaster
User name = RAM
Posts: 516
Location, Town please: Southport, U.K.
|
Post by Graham Wood on Aug 8, 2014 5:50:01 GMT
NITRO -What are their experiences and especially what it takes for such a system before it works like it schould. To be honest, even though I suggested Nitro, I think you should just get your tuned engine ( make sure the crank / rods / pistons / flywheel are balanced ) , as nitro may be too extreem, even for the Eagle. I think you will find with a ford 2000 single OHC,( Pinto engines they are called )done the way you suggest, you will have enough extra power. You can always add nitro later, which is set up by the installer to operate correctly. Another way of looking at the Eagle is , It looks fast, therefore there is no need to prove it is.
|
|