Crash Test Joey

iTrader: (1)

I installed a carbed Chevy 350 in my FC and the air cleaner was above the hood. So I'm quite familiar with what that "hump" is like - and it's not just RX7 guys that notice it, at least not where I live. I didn't mind it so much on the FC, but until a hood is available that will cover it AND look good, I'm not interested in anything taller.

I picked my 2001 LS1 up for under $5k with trans, accessories, wiring harness, pcm, basically everything I needed to install it in the car. Bone stock with 23k miles and a warranty, and over 300hp/tq to the wheels just as I got it. No stock 302 does that without a head/cam swap and/or a power adder. Dollar for dollar, I'll take the LS1 any day of the week. And the place I got it has about 5-10 available at any given time.

As for all of the other engines discussed in this thread - all I can say is good luck. I don't know how to work on them, and most of the people I know stick to V6's or larger. If you have the skills to work with the smaller, more complicated motors, more power to ya

AF1

I wonder if gentlemen have ever done some track time. Ls1 swap will make the Fd a more balance car. And im talking about performance balance not weigt. Try track racing with high performance european super cars and you might have a change of thinking.

Merc63

And they weren't designed around widebody kits, larger turbos, FMICs, 18" wheels, etc. An RX7 BP road race car or autocrosser with fiberglass/CF fenders, hood, lexan rear hatch, thin doors, roll cage, coil-overs, 12" wide slicks and a 400 hp turbo 13B wasn't how it was designed, either, but are you over in that part of the forum bitching that that's not how the car was designed? Are you over in the Turbo performance section bitching about guys using theri RX7s withrotary engines on the drag strip with tubs, drag tires, etc? No, you're simply hung up on teh engine tiself as bing the SOLE thing the RX7 was designed around, and you can change EVERYTHING else without a problem, but if you swap that engine, the car's a POS that won't work as originally intended. And you say all that with no direct experience in how these cars work. THAT'S why you offend everyone.

Well, you're right in one regard, it won't work as intended. It'll work BETTER than the mass produced compromise that the production line RX7 was.

jimlab

Just a little.

"well as far as piston engines go v8 = crap unless its DOHC or has VVT"

People who make statements like that show an obvious ignorance that's very difficult to ignore, even if they do make valid points elsewhere. Something to think about in the future.

But nothing says that they have to stay that way, and conveniently, Mazda had the foresight to leave enough room for a real engine to be installed.

rotorbrain

haaaaaaaaaahahahaha, they were totally thinking ahead on that one!!!!

MDoe8

on a side note, my old camaro had a 430 rwhp n/a ls1 in it. got 29 mpg

rotorbrain

little more fuel to the fire. . . my research shows that an ls1 is 28.75"L x 24.75"W x 28.25"H and that a fuel injected mustang 5.0 is 29"L x 24"W x 27.5"H. those "H" measurements are from the oil pan to the highest point on the engine (this includes the intake manifold on the 5.0). if thats the case, then why cant the 5.0 fit? the only problem is that the ls1 is way beyond the curve when compared to the 5.0. you can put a 5.0 in your car, but youll spend just as much on that project to get the hp to that of a stock ls1. . . when you could have put an ls1 in the car. . . and not had to mess with making your own cradle.

ls1 FTW. . . still

if only it could be purchased a little cheaper. cause man. . . those 5.0's are about a dime a dozen now.

jimlab

It can. Crash Test Joey was probably thinking of the 4.6 and 5.4 modular OHC engines, which are physically much larger.

rotorbrain

oh yeah, i love those pics. . . by the way. . . the 4.6ltr sohc is: 28"L x 28.7"W x 26"H and the 4.6ltr dohc is: 28"L x 30"W x 30"H

those motors are GIGANTIC!!!

Crash Test Joey

iTrader: (1)

No, I know it will physically fit in the car. But a stock 5.0 with it's distributor is gonna poke a hole in the hood, at least on every FC conversion I've seen pics of. And the FD hood is a bit lower in that area. I don't think they make a short enough distributor/cap to clear the hood.

I did find a thread on TC that shows what needs to be done to get it to clear an FC hood:
http://www.torquecentral.com/showpos...7&postcount=11
Pic isn't that great but it was all I could find. Still looking for the EFI version but I'm pretty sure there's a clearance issue there too.

Merc63

The reason for the Ford issue is that on the Chevy, the distributor on the old ones is in the back, putting the oil pump there. The LSx doesn't really use a distributor, but the oil pump is in the same place. That allows the engine to sit lower in the car, due to the part of the pan with the pump in it being way back behind the crossmember/steering rack.

The Ford has the oil pump in the front under the distributor, meaning you can only go so low with it before it interferes with something important in the chassis. You could cut the firewall and set it farther back, which I've seen done, but that's a LOT of work. You'd have to move the engine 6 inches reaward to clear the rack...

jimlab

Good point, and I hadn't thought about that. However, if I'm not mistaken, FC conversions use the stock subframe with bolt-on mounts, and an FD conversion would typically have a complete replacement engine cradle, so it might be doable. Not worth it, but doable.

jimlab

Dry sump.

AF1

lots of good info so far. So would everyone agree that the Ls1 series are the best bang for the buck?

GUITARJUNKIE28

for power, weight, reliability, economy, blah....

best power for the buck is a forced induction old school 350.

Crash Test Joey

iTrader: (1)

Bingo. And nobody does it yet, so any cost or timetable variable just put the project out the window for a non-fabricator.



Sorry, I had to


Most that have actually done a swap, yes (see Torquecentral's user base for evidence of this)


Disagree. If you don't already own either the motor or the power adder and want to leave that out of the cost equation, I doubt you're going to beat the LS1 in bang for the buck either.

GUITARJUNKIE28

Disagree. If you don't already own either the motor or the power adder and want to leave that out of the cost equation, I doubt you're going to beat the LS1 in bang for the buck either.

guess it all depends on what deals you find.

Pat McGroin

If you check the boxster race series in Gran Turismo, the class only accepts h-opposed motors. But I am sure boxer and boxster is a tomato-toemahtoe kinda thing.

Also the porsche boxster has a 6 cylinder horizontally opposed motor, they don't call it a boxster for no reason.

BTW, best bang for the buck = sportbike.


On the subject, I wanted to go LT1 for a little bit when there were times I was feeling cheap and poor, but if I went ahead and bought an LT1 I would have always had the craving for an LS1. Thank god I saved my pennies and bought an LS1, especially a 2002.

rajahFD

pat my growing tee hee

88IntegraLS

Because the FC steering rack is located right under the 302 oil pump, so most swappers move the engine up and forward as a workaround. Most.........

I wouldn't settle my opinion on how a 302 would fit under an FD hood until I saw where the FD steering rack was with respect to the firewall.

Merc63

I don't use a Japanese video game as the basis for making opinions on cars or car knowledge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_engine

The CAR is a Boxster, the engine is a "boxer." Porsche was making up a word combining "boxer" and "speedster" for the original showcar, (which was a modern day interpretation of the old 550 RSK Speester race car.

The combination of the two words to make the car's name is why "boxer" and "Boxster" aren't a tomato/tomahtoe thing. They are separate things entirely.

Merc63

Woulda cost more than my whole conversion. I built the car when I was making under $10 an hour.

Crash Test Joey

iTrader: (1)

I never measured but having put V8's in my FC and my FD, I seem to recall them being pretty evenly matched.

Assuming there is a workaround (lowered mounting position, modified firewall, different oilpan) the fact remains that for the money involved, it's still not worth it unless you're a die-hard Ford fan or want the only one in existence. Of course this is a matter of opinion.

stilettoman

iTrader: (1)

My experience is only with the 1st gen, which is rear steer, so it is pretty easy to fit a small block Ford. For the 2nd and 3rd gen cars, people seem to go to a lot of trouble to make new crossmembers/cradles, relocate the steering, or whatever. I am wondering if it might be posssible in some cases to modify the oil pan and relocate the pickup tube to fit the chassis. Some people seem hesistant to modify the engine. My welder/fabricator friend does it all the time, as when he moved the front sump to the rear of a Nissan Sylvia turbo motor to fit a BMW Z3. The pickup tube was a bit tricky, but it works fine, makes about 350-400 hp.

Unfortunately, Ford built the small block with the oil pump protruding down into the front of the oil pan, so that limits how much it can be shortened. That hokey double sump pan was an attempt to work around this problem. For the 1st gen, I modified a front sump pan to fit in front of the crossmember.

Merc63

Considering I had no problems with handling afterward, the only concession I made was to have the air cleaner sticking out. Had I not just done the candy blue [paint about 2 months before the rotary died, I woudl have put on a low cowl scoop (about 2" max) and not had anything sticking out. But matching candy is almost impossible without repainting most of the car, so I said screw it.

Anyhow, the motor/trans mounts cost me all of $20 to make and it sat in there just fine. Easy to get to all the bolts, from the starter all the way around the bellhousing, while still sitting back far enough to end up with a 49/51 /r weight distribution. So the cost of doing the Ford in a 2nd gen ended up vastly less expensive than the late Chevy, especially the LSx (which, to be honest would have been financially impossible back in '93 when I did my Ford conversion).

Still, for a car that is primarily a street car, the Ford is the cheapest way to get on the road, and most of the sub-$3000 conversions are using Ford power. Like I said, mine was a low 12 second car and the one at the GRM $2005 challenge was an 11 second car, and that's damn quick by anyone's standards in a street car. So yeah, for the money involved, it's not a bad choice in an FB or FC.