129 Guests, 1 User
Wittsend

Author Topic: 2.0 horsepower question  (Read 3347 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 1oldtimer

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 42
  • FeedBack: +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Pinto Motor

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Signature Mobile User Windows User
2.0 horsepower question
« on: June 26, 2016, 02:37:24 AM »
How much horse power could you reasonably make with a carb'd motor. I'm taking about safe, reliable, something that won't eat away at cam bearings....so mething with possibly bigger valves, head work, decent cam, header, holley 2bbl carb and slightly higher compression.

I'm looking for a ball park. Is 180-200 out of the question, I know about torque vs hp but just wanted to compare.
'72 2.0 in a '28 Ford.

Offline 72Wagon

  • Pinto Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
  • FeedBack: +26/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • My First Car (31 years)

  • Total Badges: 7
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Tenth year Anniversary Apple User Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2016, 07:17:13 PM »
Anything naturally aspirated above 150 hp gets expensive and drivability goes down in my opinion.
1972 Wagon
2.0 (not stock), 4 Speed with Hurst shifter and roll control, Holley 390 4bbl, Spearco intake, MSD Ignition. 8 inch rearend 3.55 gears, custom dash and interior.

Offline 72pair

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
  • FeedBack: +56/-0
  • Gender: Male

  • Total Badges: 6
    Badges: (View All)
    Tenth year Anniversary Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2016, 09:01:35 PM »
I agree with above. 130 to 150hp is reasonable normally aspirated. This will still take headwork, bigger cam and hardware, header, more carb, etc. There are a lot of dirt racers in my area and 200hp is expensive to come by even with the 2.3 and a much better aftermarket parts supply. They're turning upwards of 8000 rpm to do so. 130hp would still be a 30++% increase over a stock 2.0. My $.02.
72 sedan 2.0, c-4 beater now hot 2.0, 4-speed
72 sedan 2.3, t-5, 8" running project
80 Bobcat hatchback 2.3, 4-spd, 97K

Offline 1oldtimer

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 42
  • FeedBack: +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Pinto Motor

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Signature Mobile User Windows User
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2016, 11:53:24 PM »
Thanks for the input guys.

I'm trying to decide to either build the 2.0 up or save my money and get some cosworth parts for it. I was wondering if a 2.0 re worked head will compare to a stock cosworth dohc head. I found a cosworth that was build by a race engine builder, that claimed 170hp from a stock 2.0 pinto lower end, ported cosworth head and stock cams. I was thinking you could get it to maybe 180-185 with some cams.

I'm thinking that with 2 cams I could make more power with less strain on the motor or at least the valvetrain, but is it enough to make the extra expense worth it.
'72 2.0 in a '28 Ford.

Offline D.R.Ball

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 558
  • FeedBack: +36/-2
  • Gender: Male

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Tenth year Anniversary Poll Voter Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #4 on: June 27, 2016, 09:35:22 AM »
If you want power out of the 2.0  EFI + turbo is the only real way to go. After all the this no replacement for displacement except for boost !

Offline dick1172762

  • Vintage Pinto Racer
  • PCCA Management Board
  • Pinto Sr. Master
  • ******
  • Posts: 2623
  • FeedBack: +362/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a llama!

  • Total Badges: 7
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Windows User 1000 Posts Tenth year Anniversary Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #5 on: June 27, 2016, 10:44:54 AM »
The only way you can make over 150 hp is by moving the intake ports ($$$$) upward on the head. Lot of work and money. Racer Walsh once told me that he had only seen 5 motors that made over 175 hp on the dyno.  2.3L is not the greatest but much better than a 2.0L.
Its better to be a has-been, than a never was.

Offline 65ShelbyClone

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
  • FeedBack: +28/-0

  • Total Badges: 7
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Mobile User Linux User Windows User
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2016, 08:20:56 PM »
I was wondering if a 2.0 re worked head will compare to a stock cosworth dohc head.

In my opinion, an 8v iron head absolutely will not compare to an aluminum 16v Cosworth YB head. 170bhp out of a 16v 2.0L is "only" 85hp/L and ought to be pretty doable on pump gas compression ratios, especially if the cams are bigger and the power happens at a higher RPM.

Quote
I'm thinking that with 2 cams I could make more power with less strain on the motor or at least the valvetrain, but is it enough to make the extra expense worth it.

Well, that's a question only you can answer. So far you haven't elaborated on what you want out of the overall package. Is it a street car or track car?

I would be more inclined to use a turbocharger on an iron-headed 2.0 to get to 200hp than to try twisting to get there. After all, RPM Ruins Peoples' Motors.  ;)
'72 Runabout - 2.3T, T5, MegaSquirt-II, 8", 5-lugs, big brakes.
'68 Mustang - Built roller 302, Toploader, 9", etc.

Offline 1oldtimer

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 42
  • FeedBack: +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Pinto Motor

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Signature Mobile User Windows User
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #7 on: August 06, 2016, 02:51:33 PM »
Ok, the Cosworth motor is off the table.......I couldn't pay that much sight unseen (plus the pics left more questions then answers). I did get a used bigger valve head set up by Esslinger (valves, port/polish, skim), so I'll see how it looks.

On the carb side I'm thinking of a few options and would like some input. I have the stock intake that I made an adapter for a Holley 350 2bbl on it now, but which one is better......fo r power, streetability and somewhat mpg.

1. Holley 350 with modified stock intake
2. Short intake with 2 45 DCOE Webers
3. Custom intake with 37mm bike carbs

I'm new to the Pinto motors and some books to read. I did find 2 of David Vizzards books online (How to hot rod your 2.0 sohc ford and How to modify sohc ford engines) and a Des Hammill How to power tune your sohc Pinto and Cosworth for road and track.

Thanks for all the help.

I'm making the header now.


The intake
'72 2.0 in a '28 Ford.

Offline Srt

  • Original Pangra Master Builder
  • PCCA VIP
  • Pinto Master
  • ***
  • Posts: 1338
  • FeedBack: +100/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Pinto Stampede ROCKS

  • Total Badges: 10
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Tenth year Anniversary Poll Voter Linux User Mobile User Windows User 1000 Posts Fifth year Anniversary Photographer
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2016, 10:50:21 AM »
The only way you can make over 150 hp is by moving the intake ports ($$$$) upward on the head. Lot of work and money. Racer Walsh once told me that he had only seen 5 motors that made over 175 hp on the dyno.  2.3L is not the greatest but much better than a 2.0L.

I've always thought that too. the stock ones are too close to horizontal and straighter shot at the valve head was looking real attractive.  nearly did it back in 1972 but life got in the way. 
the only substitute for cubic inches is BOOST!!!

Offline robertwwithee

  • Pinto Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 228
  • FeedBack: +4/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 2
    Badges: (View All)
    Mobile User Topic Starter
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #9 on: August 18, 2016, 09:37:36 PM »
I did the bike carbs when I was 25 and every day lifting the hood to choke them individually stunk

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk


Offline 65ShelbyClone

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
  • FeedBack: +28/-0

  • Total Badges: 7
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Mobile User Linux User Windows User
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #10 on: August 19, 2016, 09:03:05 PM »
It makes me wonder if the later Euro 8v heads are better than the '71-73 parts we got. A quick browse on select forums and youtube reveals numerous claims of power levels in the 200hp range and approaching 250 for very serious, yet supposedly reliable 9000rpm+ race setups.

I did the bike carbs when I was 25 and every day lifting the hood to choke them individually stunk

Choke cable?
'72 Runabout - 2.3T, T5, MegaSquirt-II, 8", 5-lugs, big brakes.
'68 Mustang - Built roller 302, Toploader, 9", etc.

Offline robertwwithee

  • Pinto Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 228
  • FeedBack: +4/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 2
    Badges: (View All)
    Mobile User Topic Starter
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #11 on: August 19, 2016, 09:04:56 PM »
I guess it was possible but I personally didn't have access to make brackets work at that time of my life. 

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk


Offline turbopinto72

  • Master Mechanic
  • Administrator
  • Pinto Sr. Master
  • ******
  • Posts: 3055
  • FeedBack: +169/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Your never to old to go fast.
    • Brads Pintos and Pangras

  • Total Badges: 10
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Mobile User Photographer Windows User 1000 Posts Webmaster Tenth year Anniversary Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2016, 06:30:48 PM »
I am anticipating 160 - 170 hp with my new 2.0 engine . Lots of head work done, big valves big cam etc.
 
Brad F
1972, 2.5 Turbo Pinto
1972, Pangra
1973, Pangra
1971, 289 Pinto

Offline L.D

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • FeedBack: +16/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Windows User Linux User Mobile User
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2016, 04:45:49 PM »
I had a 2.0 I built in the early 80,s with an esslinger head fully ported big valves and shaved down around 100 thousand with flat top trw pistons and total seal rings with zero deck clearance top of piston level with top of block and a crane cam headers the hole nine yards esslinger estimated around 180 hp depending on intake. I had a Weiland 4 barrel intake with a holley 390 also had the esslingers 4 mukinis . My buddy had a 2.0 with the AK Miller set up draw thru with a 45 weber and head work mild cam good rods and forged pistons pulled alot harder and was more streetable. But since you have the head that's been shaved go with dual 45 webers. 

Offline dick1172762

  • Vintage Pinto Racer
  • PCCA Management Board
  • Pinto Sr. Master
  • ******
  • Posts: 2623
  • FeedBack: +362/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a llama!

  • Total Badges: 7
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Windows User 1000 Posts Tenth year Anniversary Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2016, 10:52:14 PM »
Ok, the Cosworth motor is off the table.......I couldn't pay that much sight unseen (plus the pics left more questions then answers). I did get a used bigger valve head set up by Esslinger (valves, port/polish, skim), so I'll see how it looks.

On the carb side I'm thinking of a few options and would like some input. I have the stock intake that I made an adapter for a Holley 350 2bbl on it now, but which one is better......fo r power, streetability and somewhat mpg.

1. Holley 350 with modified stock intake
2. Short intake with 2 45 DCOE Webers
3. Custom intake with 37mm bike carbs

I'm new to the Pinto motors and some books to read. I did find 2 of David Vizzards books online (How to hot rod your 2.0 sohc ford and How to modify sohc ford engines) and a Des Hammill How to power tune your sohc Pinto and Cosworth for road and track.

Thanks for all the help.

I'm making the header now.


The intake

     Tri=Y header is not the way to go on a 2.0L Pinto. The 2.0 likes RPM and more RPM. 4 into one is the only way to go. Been there / tried that since 1973.
Its better to be a has-been, than a never was.

Offline dick1172762

  • Vintage Pinto Racer
  • PCCA Management Board
  • Pinto Sr. Master
  • ******
  • Posts: 2623
  • FeedBack: +362/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a llama!

  • Total Badges: 7
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Windows User 1000 Posts Tenth year Anniversary Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #15 on: August 29, 2016, 03:01:42 PM »
By the way, your intake looks fine if you remove the steps below the adapter plate.  Racer Walsh said the 500 Holley 2 barrel on the stock intake made with-in 5HP of the duel 40mm dcoe set up.  Go for it!!!!
Its better to be a has-been, than a never was.

Offline 1oldtimer

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 42
  • FeedBack: +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Pinto Motor

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Signature Mobile User Windows User
Re: 2.0 horsepower question
« Reply #16 on: November 19, 2016, 07:08:11 PM »
I went with the tri y header because that's what they are selling over in the UK for the 2.0l and figured it works for them. I did blend the the intake to the adapter, the motor is in a Ford Model A with a T5 and 4.11 gears. I'm looking for a good street car with some power to get around, I'm always on the lookout for a AK Miller set-up also. I drove it home on the freeway (about 75 miles) with the pinto motor in stock form and a C4 behind it (not sure of the rear end ratio). It was slower and down shifted on the hills but made it, so I figure it's going to be a lot better.
'72 2.0 in a '28 Ford.