MakeEverything
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 11:21 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr hendersonWould I use an essex or cologne v6 now? No, AFAIC, the Zetec 2 ltr is cheap, plentiful and easy to fit,
it has 4 of what the v6 has 6 of, and only needs one exhaust system.
But the V6 has more torque which is 50% of the attraction to be honest. I hear what youre saying about the exhausts though. This could be a real
pain in the arse.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 12:08 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
But the V6 has more torque which is 50% of the attraction to be honest. I hear what youre saying about the exhausts though. This could be a real
pain in the arse.
It's probably weighs in at 50% more than the Zetec as well. The old Ford V6's were truly the king of boat anchors, something that
Pinto's could only aspire to.
With such a wide range of decent modern engines to choose form, the old iron block V6's don't seem like a particularly great choice for a
light weight sports car these day.
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 12:19 PM |
|
|
quote:
It's probably weighs in at 50% more than the Zetec as well. The old Ford V6's were truly the king of boat anchors, something that
Pinto's could only aspire to.
Its basic physics that something that is made of heavier material and is bigger will weigh more, but with more power than a pinto (and some zetecs)
balances the equasion.
The Essex V6 was a very heavy engine,but the cologne V6 is slightly lighter IIRC. The power potential from the V6 is appealing somewhat, and the
engine itself is simple technology.
The 2.9 has individual exhaust ports whereas the 2.8 has siamesed exhaust ports limiting its power potential. The 3.0L Essex is heavier and was not
as powerful as its european cologne cousin.
I see what youre saying MikeRJ, but its all relative.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 12:30 PM |
|
|
Essex V6 was a truly appalling heap of junk
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
rusty nuts
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 01:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
Essex V6 was a truly appalling heap of junk
I spent many a happy hour lapping in new valves on them after the fibre timing wheel had failed. And loads of time spent sorting out overheating
problems .
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 03:22 PM |
|
|
DUTTON UPDATE!!
Well, ive put in the borrowed Coil (12V not ballast) and the car fired straight up. Runs a treat, and i even drove it around the block. Got it into
3rd, and reverse works ok too. Big smiles now!!¬ 
All i need to do now, is make sure it doesnt burst into flames because of the wiring! 
[Edited on 25/5/09 by MakeEverything]
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 06:21 PM |
|
|
Ive jsut got back from a 5 mile run out around town. Everyone i drove by looked busy (visitors cars outside etc) so rather than bother them with the
new toy story, we drove on!
The car drove very well, albeit a little rattly. The engine runs quite sweet but is very underpowered for what im after. Maybe that 1600 replacement
should go in before considering the V6.....
Anyway, Quite a nice dusk run in a quiet town.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 25/5/09 at 08:51 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
quote:
It's probably weighs in at 50% more than the Zetec as well. The old Ford V6's were truly the king of boat anchors, something that
Pinto's could only aspire to.
Its basic physics that something that is made of heavier material and is bigger will weigh more, but with more power than a pinto (and some zetecs)
balances the equasion.
In terms of straight line performance I agree, but in terms of handling a very heavy engine won't do the car any favours.
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 06:08 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
In terms of straight line performance I agree, but in terms of handling a very heavy engine won't do the car any favours.
It depends on Suspension and Tyres.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 06:45 PM |
|
|
So, i took the car for a hoon today to try and pinpoint the rattles and get them all listed and in order of priority to fix....
...Then the throttle cable broke!
Managedto take the choke cable off the carb and lash it up to the throttle linkage so that i could use it as a hand throttle to get me home. Tried to
get aMk1 cable from the local motor factors and do you think they had the correct one??? No.
Cant find any Mk1 Escort parts suppliers anywhere that are of any use. Everything is geared around the Mk3+.
Looks like ill have to modify one.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
scudderfish
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 08:05 PM |
|
|
I replaced my throttle cable with a cable from the local bike shop. Cost me something like £2.50
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 08:10 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scudderfish
I replaced my throttle cable with a cable from the local bike shop. Cost me something like £2.50
Yes, ill be changing it to something similar. Just wanted to see if i could swap like-for-like first.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 09:05 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
In terms of straight line performance I agree, but in terms of handling a very heavy engine won't do the car any favours.
It depends on Suspension and Tyres.
You can't cancel the effects of physics just with the suspension and tyres.
Regardless of those things, a light car with a comparatively heavy engine is not going to be able to turn in as well as a similar car with a lighter
engine.
I know you are keen to use the V6, and it's your car to do with as you please. but you would be better off with a zetec or virtually any of the
engines that get discussed on here
John
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 09:27 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
In terms of straight line performance I agree, but in terms of handling a very heavy engine won't do the car any favours.
It depends on Suspension and Tyres.
You can't cancel the effects of physics just with the suspension and tyres.
Regardless of those things, a light car with a comparatively heavy engine is not going to be able to turn in as well as a similar car with a lighter
engine.
I know you are keen to use the V6, and it's your car to do with as you please. but you would be better off with a zetec or virtually any of the
engines that get discussed on here
John
John,
Ive seen the light! Im going to sell the V6 and go for a zetec type or maybe even up-spec the crossflow for now.
I agree that the car wont turn in as well as a car with a lighter engine, but in terms of straight line speed and power, im sticking to my guns!
Interested in a v6?... 
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 09:30 PM |
|
|
id upgrade to 900 or 1200ccs myself. 
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 26/5/09 at 10:15 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
id upgrade to 900 or 1200ccs myself.
I did consider going BEC.....Briefly!
Is the rent advert a trap for MP's as a second home?
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 27/5/09 at 06:51 AM |
|
|
nowt wrong with the old ford v6.
those who haven't used one tend to forget how deceptively good they actually are, a classic case of terrible on paper but actually good in
practise!
yep they weigh about the same as titanic, but a dutton ain't light anyway. I have certainly seen a ford v6 in a dutton and it was a nice
installation.
the v6 is of similar length to a crossflow, actually pretty small.
carb wont just fit onto 2.9, but you can get a carb manifold for a 2.9, or just fit a 2.8 instead and use a 2.3 carb inlet manifold.
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 27/5/09 at 07:28 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
nowt wrong with the old ford v6.
those who haven't used one tend to forget how deceptively good they actually are,
I daresay, but speaking as someone who has used one, and in a Dutton too, there is no way I would do it again. They were OK in their context
('70's) but things have moved on a great deal since then.
If I already owned a V6 and gearbox, complete with all the induction and exhaust stuff, and I knew it was in good condition, I would still be in two
minds about using it as I would still need to put in the time and effort of fit it. If I was in that postion I would probably sell it to someone who
had to use it for reasons of historical authenticity, or racing regulations, and use the money to buy a much more modern engine set-up
All the above IMHO, of course, and if M.E. still wants to do it then he should go right ahead.
John
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 27/5/09 at 07:53 AM |
|
|
I'm certainly not claiming that the old v6 will win any awards or indeed be particularly fast, but they are ridiculously reliable, can be pretty
much chucked in, have a great torque spread (actually better than most modern multivalve v6 engines of same capacity) and cost nothing.
I wouldn't choose one for the same reasons as you, but they are not the crap that most people say they are.
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 27/5/09 at 08:08 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
I wouldn't choose one for the same reasons as you, but they are not the crap that most people say they are.
Very true
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 27/5/09 at 08:43 AM |
|
|
Essex v6 was a very very rough nasty unreliable overweight heap of manure. The first ones in the Mk4 Zodiac were lucky to see 20,000 miles without a
major rebuild -- fibre timing wheels, big ends, head gaskets, flywheels.
Thing got better after about 1969 but not that much better.
The Essex V6 was actually quite a bit heavier than the Ford V8s used in the Sunbeam Tiger and AC 289 Cobra
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 27/5/09 at 08:46 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
I'm certainly not claiming that the old v6 will win any awards or indeed be particularly fast, but they are ridiculously reliable, can be pretty
much chucked in, have a great torque spread (actually better than most modern multivalve v6 engines of same capacity) and cost nothing.
Which was my original thinking. NS, i think we had conversations a bout this before i bought it anyway.
Ive still got the engine, and although i said i had seen the light, i still think its a lovely little engine once you take all of the crap off of it,
and with a fair bit of power too.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
.jpg)
