adrianreeve
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 06:29 PM |
|
|
Anyone know anything about the 2.3 v6 type 9 gearbox?
Am I right in thinking that the 2.3 v6 type 9 gearbox has the same ratios as the standard sierra box, and it's only the 2.8 and 2.9 gearboxes
that have the shorter gearing? But the 2.3 does have the longer input shaft, requiring a spacer between gearbox and bellhousing if I want to use it
with a zetec engine?
Cheers
Adrian
|
|
|
|
|
spiderman01980
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 06:38 PM |
|
|
try looking on ere it might be a long read but it might answer your question!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_engines#6_Cylinder
and this page!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Type_9_transmission
[Edited on 27-5-10 by spiderman01980]
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 06:52 PM |
|
|
I didn't think there was a 2.3 V6? Prepared to stand corrected though!
|
|
|
spiderman01980
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 06:57 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by matt_claydon
I didn't think there was a 2.3 V6? Prepared to stand corrected though!
it was called a Cologne/Taunus V6
they came in 1.8L up to 4.0L
[Edited on 27-5-10 by spiderman01980]
|
|
|
Mr G
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 07:52 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by matt_claydon
I didn't think there was a 2.3 V6? Prepared to stand corrected though!
Yes I had a Cortina 2.3S
Used in the 2.3 Sierra as well.
Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a
car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes
and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it.
|
|
|
snapper
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 08:33 PM |
|
|
2.3 V6 had the power of a 2L and the weight and fuel consumption of a 3L
I eat to survive
I drink to forget
I breath to pi55 my ex wife off (and now my ex partner)
|
|
|
Mr G
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 08:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by snapper
2.3 V6 had the power of a 2L and the weight and fuel consumption of a 3L
Sounded nice with the air filter housing removed though 
Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a
car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes
and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it.
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 27/5/10 at 08:54 PM |
|
|
I do indeed stand corrected
|
|
|
scotty g
|
| posted on 28/5/10 at 08:06 AM |
|
|
I thought the 2.3 was an Essex V6 and the 2.4 that went into the later granada's was a cologne?
cheers
|
|
|
Mr G
|
| posted on 28/5/10 at 02:39 PM |
|
|
2.3 definately cologne
Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a
car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes
and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it.
|
|
|
robinj66
|
| posted on 29/5/10 at 07:54 AM |
|
|
The T9 ratios for the 2.3 V6 in a granada 2 were the same as the 2.0 (Pinto) engine :
3.65 : 1 (3.36)
1.97 : 1 (1.81)
1.37 : 1 (1.26)
1.00 : 1 (1.00)
0.816 : 1 (0.825)
The figures in brackets are for the 2.8 gearboxes
The Sierra seemed to fit the same T9 'box to all 4 pot engines (except the P100 vehicle) and the ratios are the same as the 2.0/2.3 above except
the 5th gear which is quoted as 0.82 : 1.
Sorry - I don't have figures for the V6 Sierra gearbox
The Granada 3/Scorpio fitted the same ratios as the 2.0/2.3 Granada 2 but the 2.8/2.9 T9 'boxes had the following:
3.36 : 1
1.81 : 1
1.26 : 1
1.00 : 1
0.825 : 1
All figures from Haynes
[Edited on 29/5/10 by robinj66]
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 30/5/10 at 11:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scotty g
I thought the 2.3 was an Essex V6 and the 2.4 that went into the later granada's was a cologne?
cheers
2.3 is to 2.4 as 2.8 is to 2.9. All colognes.
|
|
|
