But that's just the point - a 205 is just a std later Block
They may be slightly thicker for big overbore but I think that's about it ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But that's just the point - a 205 is just a std later Block
They may be slightly thicker for big overbore but I think that's about it ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Can I send you a pallet of 205 blocks and you send shells back to me please 👍😀
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Seems a fair swop LOL!Originally Posted by alladdin
Shells are so expensive over here now thanks to you lot!
1970 Mk1 Escort Tarmac Rally Car
Sounds good to me ! Big horses pulling from a 1000 rpm .what cam ? Onyd
Stig Erson 134 if you want to pull from 1000 RPM.
A quick update....
The engine has been rebuilt and I have remapped the valve lifts. They spent quite some time getting the geometry correct with the valves I have (group 1 = too long) and although they got some of my missing lift back it wasn't all found. That was to be expected with the long valves though. I suspect all the found lift has come from using the correct Kent followers now.
The chart shows a 6% increase in the area under the curve for the inlet and 3% for the exhaust compared to the chart based on the pre-rebuild head. On the face of it this is 6% more HP (~10HP) but that is only a theoretical increase. I overlayed the original lift map onto the current (I moved the opening points to align just for the sake of easy comparison) and you can see that both values open at a faster rate. This is good for power!
Anyway, after they accidentally knocked out all my port filler, it is back in and the engine is together. I shall probably take it to the dyno just to see if there is much of a difference from the previous build.
1970 Mk1 Escort Tarmac Rally Car
Hi mk1 good work theres a big difference at tdc with new rockers new tdc is at 3mm were olds one at over 4mm at tdc that should make a big difference to better cylinder fill more power cheers Mario.
I think you are using CF36 Kent followers now which is the correct followers anyway. In Pinto, the role of the correct cam follower is important for getting at least close to desired ( or advertised ) values of the camshaft as it has been discussed here at TS many times. However, it is not a rare case that a cam could b grinded well out of spec. However, it seems that your cam is in spec. I am just about the return a GTS1 to the Kentcams due to a fundamental error in grinding. It is totally out of spec.
By the way, CF36 is the only follower Kentcams are suggesting for all their profiles since quite a while. In the past, they have also listed CF12 with some of their profiles if I am not mistaken. This means that, supposidly all their profiles is grinded to work with CF36 geometry. It is also true that ( as far as I know ), we can not really use Piper followers on Kent camshafts and vice versa since the camshaft is grinded to work with a certain cam follower geometry however in my opinion if the new geometry is still staying in the intended design envelope of the given camshaft, then it may facilitate to alter the camshafts character. Of course, my last approach is only an assumption and it may be totally wrong to do something like that.
I think you are using CF36 Kent followers now which is the correct followers anyway. In Pinto, the role of the correct cam follower is important for getting at least close to desired ( or advertised ) values of the camshaft as it has been discussed here at TS many times. However, it is not a rare case that a cam could b grinded well out of spec. However, it seems that your cam is in spec. I am just about the return a GTS1 to the Kentcams due to a fundamental error in grinding. It is totally out of spec.
By the way, CF36 is the only follower Kentcams are suggesting for all their profiles since quite a while. In the past, they have also listed CF12 with some of their profiles if I am not mistaken. This means that, supposidly all their profiles is grinded to work with CF36 geometry. It is also true that ( as far as I know ), we can not really use Piper followers on Kent camshafts and vice versa since the camshaft is grinded to work with a certain cam follower geometry however in my opinion if the new geometry is still staying in the intended design envelope of the given camshaft, then it may facilitate to alter the camshafts character. Of course, my last approach is only an assumption and it may be totally wrong to do something like that.
What a brilliant read, a lot of work! I am also wanting to learn, and glad i came across this post, what was the latest dyno result? Thanks ��
I have not dyno'd the car since the rebuild but it felt just as strong as before.
Looking to build up a 320+HP Duratec to make use of new regulations........stand by
1970 Mk1 Escort Tarmac Rally Car
The Duratec will be of huge interest to me as I am currently moving on from my Pinto builds in a Lotus 7 replica to a Duratec from a Fiesta ST in to a Fisher Fury
I couldn't agree more it would be nice to read a Duratec engine modificaion thread in detail with photos.
I have a 2.5 Duratec engine that'll be fitted with the ST head. The intention is to fit it into a Rally Car one day when it ever gets finished.
I have very little computer knowledge so to put a detailed thread on here with photos would be impossible without help from the younger generation.
This year my intention's to get the car up and running with it's Pinto engine and see what power it produces and how it drives before taking things any further.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks