I been snooping around the UK net, and it seems there are quit a few Cosworth "YB" engines and parts around.
My understanding is the Cosworth head is a straight bolt on for the 2.0.
Does anyone know about such things?
I've been told that the Capri XRTI also had the Cosworth package, and that car was sold stateside. So maybe some of that stuff is around.
Anyone know?
I bought a complete normally-aspirated Cosworth YB from Cosworth in Torrance, CA. It came ready to assemble, complete from carbs to pan. I bought the ignition (mech advance distributor, coil, amplifIer) and a Tilton flywheel at the time of purchase, but I think everything else was standard issue. I don't think Cosworth supplies that engine as a complete kit any more, since they've been concentrating on the Zetec series engines.
But, you can still find them elsewhere, like on ebay. I found one from an SCCA racer (coincidentally in my area) that was reasonably priced. I didn't buy it, but now I wish I had, just for a spare. It was on Webers, like mine.
You can also find them turbocharged, like they came originally in Cosworth passenger cars (Escorts and Sierras). Make sure you get the wiring harness if you go that way. There are US suppliers of YB engines and parts apart from the Cosworth folks, but you need a fat wallet. Search for "Cosworth YB" on the 'net and ebay.
Incidentally, mine is finally going to be on the road by next spring/summer.
Paul (cossiepinto)
Thanks Paul,..
There is an Aluminum YB block still available from Cosworth USA,.. but the wallet couldn't bear that kind of project. It also seems the cylinder head is no longer available.
Please post pics of your Coswoth project when you get it together,..Or even before its together. I'd like to see it.
I'd love to put together a twin cam sedan,..I think it would be very sexy.
I read an article about naturally aspirated Cosworth on the Burton site. Looked like 225 hp was not difficult. What floored me was they have Sierra's with a stage chip that are buzzing around the streets of England with 340 HP. I'm a little in my own fantasy world here,.. but I'm envisioning an 1,900 pound Sedan with 300 hp at the rear wheels. Thats kind of scary,..... in a very appealing way! :smile:
BTW Pintny,..
I found 1 complete cosworth RS for sale in the UK for around $2000.00 dollars.
I have no Idea what it would cost to ship,.. but that issue is moot at any rate because the seller has it as pick up only.
Hey Pintony,..
Are you lookin for an entire Cosworth engine or just the Head?
I'm bidding on one right now.
Ironman,
If it is just a twin cam engine you are after, there are alternatives. Below are a few other Ford possibilities.
The 89 to 91 Volvo B234F twin cam head can be modified to fit the Ford 2.3 engine. I believe I have seen some Pintos set up with this head. You have to join the Yahoo group to look through this link.
http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/2300-16V/
The Ford Duratec and Zetec are also available state side. I have not seen this swap in a Pinto yet. This link may help with a swap.
http://quad4rod.accountsupport.com/index.php?page=shop.browse&category_id=3&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=31
One of the most over looked engines the Lotus/Ford 1.6 twin cam. If you look there's a few of these engines out there cheap.
(http://www.race-cars.com/engsold/lotus/ltwc04/ltwc04pb.jpg)
(http://www.race-cars.com/engsold/lotus/1116868983/1116868983pi.jpg)
(http://www.race-cars.com/engsold/lotus/1116868983/1116868983pk.jpg)
(http://www.race-cars.com/engsold/lotus/1135726777/1135726777pa.jpg)
Thanx so very much for the Duratec suggestion OldKayaker,..
I'm stoked!! I was outbid on the 4X4 Cosworth Head,.. ( luckily ) I see a trip to the junkyard to find a Focus.
Also appreciate the link to the bellhousing, makes putting a 5 speed behind it very easy.
Been doing some reading today, and It seems 200hp plus a couple is very doable from this engine without any internal mods. Man I'm ear to ear grin.
The sweet part is there seems to be some very active development for racing this engine, and parts will be readily available in the USA.
I included this excerpt from a web page at SB performance.
Tuning
You'd expect there to be plenty of scope for tuning the Duratec. Well, good news - there is. Up to a point anyway. Put simply, you don't have to do much to wring out the power, as SB Developments has done back-to-back tests all on the same day, after extensive preparation. By junking the standard induction system, which is intended for serious emissions control only, and replacing it with traditional induction methods, you can achieve truly staggering results.
With a pair of 45 DCOE side draught carbs and managed ignition they got 170 bhp - that's 25 bhp over standard. By taking them off and fitting parallel throttle bodies the figure then went to 195 bhp. Then, after replacing them with SBD's own tapered throttle bodies, the power increased to 208 bhp. This, of course, is all on a completely standard engine with no other mods. The Duratec engine we have run has been testing in two forms, parallel throttle bodies which produced an output of approximately 195 bhp and then running the engine on tapered throttle bodies produced 203 bhp (this was used in the American SAE corrections). The implications of this are obvious. The engine is effectively a plug and play unit. If you want to compete in motorsport and are looking for an efficient unit then the Duratec could well be an option. With secondhand low-mileage units retailing at around £700, all you need after that is £1781.90 (plus VAT) of induction. It's kit that's unlikely to break or wear out in a hurry either.
If you're unfortunate enough to blow the engine then all you need do is unbolt it and replace it with another. Compare that to tuning a traditional Ford engine such as a Pinto. To get in excess of 200 bhp you'd need eight grand-plus. And, if all you wanted was a good high powered plant, you could do the dirty and switch to H**nda power - then all you'd need is 'only' around five grand for a basic V-Tech unit. Put in these terms, the Duratec seems like a cheap motorsport unit.
ahhh........ strait axle pinto????? sounds fun to me
Pintony,
The bottom end clearance was one of the first things I took into consideration, along with motor mounts, ignition coil mounts, intake and exhaust clearance.
I have seen the exploded view of the 2.0, 2.3, and 2.5L engines. I cant be certain without first hand experience,.. but I don't believe there is any kind of a clearance problem that cant be rectified by a dry sump. As far as I can tell the major issue with the oil sump is due to the crank being "cradled" in the block much like an FE. The engine is also designed to keep the crank out of the oil. they even went as far as to put the oil returns external to reduce drag on the crank from drain back. Hopefully this will make a dry sump a very simple matter with an almost flat pan.
I hope to have one of these engines by next week,.. Brian is going to loan me a T-5 for "fit up" purposes. The only expenditure I might have trouble re couping if it doesn't work will be the bellhousing to adapt the T-5.
If it becomes nessasary to dry sump the engine, I'll subtract the depth of the pan from the overall,.. and I'll have about an inch and a half clearance under my 71 hood.
Apintonut also believes the rack can be lowered about 2 inches, and I tend to agree. If it becomes nessasary I'll have to come up with some kind of adapter for the tie rods so the suspension geometry stays the same.
Hopefully between Me, Brian,.. and imput from all you out there, this will work. I dont see it as "impossible". Who knows,.. we might even stumble upon a new super easy conversion. lol,.. ok now I'm probably too far in fantasy land.
I guess I'll find out.
BTW
There is no "balance device" in the sump that will interefere with the crossmember.
Quote from: Pintony on August 07, 2008, 12:09:25 AM
REALLY!!!
What do you call this????
It is a balancing device that is unique to the Mazda version of the Duratec, (2.3L only) which also has sequential valve timing. All other manufactures of the 2.3 Duratec, including European models are without this piece, or the sequential valve timming.
None of the 2.0 engines are fitted with it. :search:
This is a common Duratec engine
http://www.truveo.com/moteur-duratec-HE-4-cylinder-PFI-de-ford/id/3418346542
First off, I do not have a clue if the Duratec will fit in a Pinto.
That is an amazing video. It looks like water leaves the Focus engine from the rear of the head which might create a interference issue with the fire wall. Not sure how they handle this in the Ranger.
If you end up with a balancer equipped engine, this link indicates that it can be done away with.
http://www.focussport.com/cosworth-deletekit.htm
As to lowering the rack 2", the suspension books claim this will mess up the bump steer. This Pinto thread talks about it some.
http://www.fordpinto.com/smf/index.php/topic,6073.0.html
Good luck and take many measurements before committing to this experiment.
Quote from: Pintony on August 07, 2008, 09:19:21 AM
All the duratec engines installed in Ford cars-trucks are mazda engines... RIGHT????
The 2.3 is installed in the Focus
The 2.0 has the intake on the firewall side and the 2.3 is on the radiater side.
From Pintony
Negative,
Allthough the Duratec is a Mazda design,.. the engine is manufactured by Both Mazda and Ford for both Mazda and Ford,.. which are really one and the same. Kind of confusing huh? The engine is global, but there seems to be different opinions on what is available where. Some sources say no 2.3 in europe, others indicate it is available.
As far as the 2.0 goes, I'm still searching info. I'm not sure if there were pictures improperly placed,.. but it looks as though the 2.0 may have come both ways as far as intake/exhaust orientation. But as I said I'm still unsure.
OldKayaker,
Me and Apintonut were discussing the back of engine clearance issues last night. If it gets down to it firewall work will be the answer. I'm really hoping to plant this thing with minimal mods to the existing chassis. I'm heading to the Junk yard today with my tape measure. They have several out on the shelf. They forwarned me "there are several versions" of the engine, with intake and exhaust being on opposite sides, and other changes. What I'm hopeful of is there are two versions of the 2.0L,.. I'd much rather have the intake on the drivers side.
I'm hip to the bump steer issue,.. if there were "stantions" attached to the spindle at the point the tie rod connects that lowered the same distance the rack drops, wouldnt that allieviate any problems as long as there arnt any clearance issues?
Quote from: Pintony on August 07, 2008, 10:46:19 AM
Hello Ironman,
I have ABANDONED THE fOCUS dohc IN FAVOR OF A DIFFERENT POWERPLANT..
From Pintony
Ok, I didnt know you were interested in putting one in.
I'm starting another thread to cover the installation and whatever info I come up with.
From
IRONMAN
This is in answer to your question on bump steer. I do not understand this and will just try to describe what the books show to do in order to avoid bump steer. Look at the car from the front and draw a line between the upper A-arm inner pivot and the lower A-arm inner pivot, the rack inner pivot is suppose to fall on this line. Draw a line between the upper ball joint and the lower ball joint, the steering knuckle at the spindle is suppose to fall on this line. In order to lower the rack, you would need a shorter rack section (distance between the rack inner pivots) and longer tie rods (distance from rack inner pivot to the steering knuckle at the spindle). One book goes further and shows that lines drawn through the upper A-arm, tie rod, and lower A-arm are suppose to be angled so that they all intersect at the same point. Very confusing.
Fortunately per your new thread, you will not need to relocate the rack. Neat project.
Does "quad4rod" even have a website anymore?
Their home page is http://quad4rods.com/ (http://quad4rods.com/)