31 Guests, 0 Users

Author Topic: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.  (Read 14883 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Flygirl62

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • FeedBack: +1/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 2
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Apple User
2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« on: September 05, 2013, 10:47:41 PM »
Is that really true?

I was just talking to someone about the 2.3 swap into my '73 Runabout. Runs great now, but thinking about the future. Kind of, what if?

I've always wanted a small block Ford under the hood, but lots of folks say it's too heavy, makes the car handle worse, etc. So, in the fantasy, maybe the 2.3 became a good alternative.

But, is it really that heavy? That doesn't seem to bode well, except for maybe it's an easier install(?)

I also understand that some of the early 2.3s were carb'd, with a blow through carb no less...? Were they crazy at Ford back then? I can't imagine even finding one of those carbs. That means the float bowls are pressurized, too? Otherwise, the fuel wouldn't flow correctly under boost.

I remember driving a new 80 Mustang Turbo 2.3, with I believe the carbureted 2.3. I wanted that car so bad! But, turns out it was okay fast, even then, but nothing special. Hopefully it's better in the Pinto.

Sounds like the '86 and '87 motors are the ones to go for, with the smaller IHI turbo that spools up faster, less max power but more responsive for the street.

Does that sound correct?

Offline Wittsend

  • Pinto Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2222
  • FeedBack: +241/-0

  • Total Badges: 8
    Badges: (View All)
    Tenth year Anniversary Mobile User Topic Starter Poll Voter 1000 Posts Linux User Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2013, 11:42:08 PM »
Well, you asked a man who has "been there, done that" with a 1973 Wagon.  I wrote up a "So you want to build a Turbo Pinto" a while back. Here is the link http://www.fordpinto.com/general-pinto-talk/so-you-want-to-build-a-turbo-pinto-part-1/msg76893/#msg76893 .

There is a "Part 2" http://www.fordpinto.com/general-pinto-talk/so-you-want-to-build-a-turbo-pinto-part-2/msg76894/#msg76894

To your initial question; it does not seem accurate that the 2.3 would be nearly as heavy as a small block V-8.  You have the additional weight of the extra head, exhaust and (larger) intake manifolds. The extra pistons and rods.  You have the support structure in the block etc.  That said, the iron block and head of the 2.3 likely makes it one of the heavier 4 cylinders.  I'm sure there are weights available for both engine out there on the internet.  I'll just take a guess and say the 2.3 is 75 to 125 pounds lighter than the V-8.

Tom

Offline OhSix9

  • Pinto Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
  • FeedBack: +7/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Positrac Intercooler Nitrous Turbo Overdrive

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2013, 12:45:59 AM »
OK you have a 73 so getting a v8 in it takes a BIG shoe horn, the 2.3 didn't arrive till 74 so motor mounts and such all have to be changed to work as well.   the bottom end of a lima is built like a shick brithouse, yes it's really that heavy, especially after you hang a turbo and accessories on it, compared to the v8 it uses a comparable amount of iron, has a balance shaft, crank weight is pretty much a wash so the only real savings is one head and thats chewed up in turbo and cast exhaust manifold vs tube steel headers.

74 and up cars are commonly 2.3 powered so the pressurized version pretty much falls in the hole.  install a wiring harness and "adjust " the passenger inner fenderwell and its esentially job done. Yes some 70s and early 80's cars where blown, Draw through not blow.  Blow thru,,, well blows...Stupid hats or sealed boxes, collapsed floats and usually slobbering rich off the boost, the only real advantage to blow thru is you can intercool the turbo before the hat,   almost as dumb an idea as converting the vam to blow through on the efi versions to force more air through it. ( i could write another paragraph on why its a foolish solution but i digress...) draw thru generally runs better throughout the range but because the fuel is in the mix as its pressurized you can't intercool or the fuel drops out of suspension and pools, fuel pooling is common (especially when cold) in the early carb setups too where the carb tends to be low on the motor. the 20 different ways to skin the efi cat pretty much take the whole carb option out of consideration on any new build except for the stubborn or stupid.  there is a reason the last production carb rolled off the line in '86ish.

87 and 88 bird motors are the shizod, best efi processors and hardened seats but the ihi stinks. the t3 will make more power every time and if you want it to spool hard get one from an auto with a.48ar vs the .60 in a stick.  early turbos are not water cooled and none of them have a bov or recirc making compressor surge the main culprit when it comes to causing failure.   Turbos are not really the black magic they seem.  anyone competent and confident can do bearings and seals in one for about 40 bucks assuming the blades haven't contacted the housing.
I wouldn't worry about the spool speed, the pinto is light compared to the bird and a .60 will make more top end power,   plus again the car is light and if you go 5 speed 1st is steep it'll get up and move plenty fast either way. And if it's not spooling, downshift...

Now the other good option might be to drop in some forged slugs and turbo the current engine if you happen to have a 2.0.  there is an exhaust manifold for doing it, add megasquirt in either the maf or speed density flavour and get a local speed shop to put some injector bosses in a good 2.0 intake, pair it up to a 65mm tb and some 45-52 lb injectors  'n away you go.  If you really want to you can make it look very vintage ak miller-ish yet have all the goodness of injection.  also if your car currently happens to be a stick start looking for a t9 tranny out of a merkur, its basically the pinto hummer with overdrive tacked on so it will bolt to the original 2.0 4 speed bell and also neatly falls in the hole
Modest beginnings start with the single blow of a horn man..    Now when you get through with this thing every dickhead in the world is gonna wanna own it.   Do you know anything at all about the internal combustion engine?

Virgil to Sid

Offline Wittsend

  • Pinto Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2222
  • FeedBack: +241/-0

  • Total Badges: 8
    Badges: (View All)
    Tenth year Anniversary Mobile User Topic Starter Poll Voter 1000 Posts Linux User Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2013, 01:13:30 AM »
Well, interesting enough, these numbers are from the http://www.team.net/sol/tech/engine.html site:

ENGINE                          WEIGHT
Ford 289/302 V8            460

Ford 2.3 Lima/Pinto L4    418    
Ford 2.3 Lima/Pinto L4    450    (turbo)

So, surprisingly it seems the answer to the question of the post is, "Yes," they do appear quite similar in weight.  Good thing I said "I'll guess."

Interesting from the 60's, the Chevy II 4 cylinder is listed as 350 pounds but the 4 cylinder used in the Pontiac Tempest (8 cylinder engine with a bank whacked off) tipped the scales at 470 pounds. I guess GM wasn't sharing parts as readily back then.

Offline Flygirl62

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • FeedBack: +1/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 2
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Apple User
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2013, 02:24:16 PM »
That's what I saw, too, which kind of blows the weight issue out of the water.

Also, to be honest, seems like the 2.3 Turbo in any stock form is getting a bit long in the tooth. Seems like there are other significantly more sophisticated setups that are lighter and more efficient/powerful.

A small block Ford V8 remains, however, a small block V8.

In my case, the fantasy may be a hotter, normally aspirated 2.0. With maybe a T-9 backing it up? (thanks for the tip, below). Just reading the thread about the bellhousings and what fits, and what doesn't.

Like I said, it's a fantasy right now. But I like to have stuff in the pipeline so I know what I might want to do next.

Offline Flygirl62

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • FeedBack: +1/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 2
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Apple User
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2013, 02:27:59 PM »
Also if your car currently happens to be a stick start looking for a t9 tranny out of a merkur, its basically the pinto hummer with overdrive tacked on so it will bolt to the original 2.0 4 speed bell and also neatly falls in the hole

Thank you for that tip. The car runs very well right now, probably the strongest "stock" more or less engine I've ever had in it. An extra cog in the gearbox would be very welcome.

And yes, it's a four speed. The bummer is, it's basically tached out at 75 or so mph; a fifth gear would make it a surprisingly good freeway car (except for all the wind noise, rattles, creaks, and lack of flow through ventilation, that is).

Offline Grumpy

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
  • FeedBack: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2013, 11:56:16 AM »
Flygirl62


The 5.0(302 W) motor weights ~500 lbs stock(iron heads), 450 or so with aluminum heads. The 2.3 weights 325 lbs, stock, with turbo figure about 360 or so.
The Rover 4.0/4.6 weights 315, a nice little V8 if cared for(it's a 60s era Buick 215 all grown up). My current interest is the Mercruiser 3.7L 4 cylinder(224 cubic inches, stock), it is a boat motor that is basically half of a 460 Ford V8, it uses the heads, pistons rods, etc. out of that engine in an aluminum block and can be offset ground on the crank(using Chevy Big Block rods)to a 260 cubic inch 4 cylinder(250 hp/ 275 torque naturally aspirated, who knows how much with a turbo), did I mention that Boss 429 heads bolt right on?


Grumpy 8)
79 Pinto Hatch, Yellow w/White Pony stripes, Pony wheels, 6650 miles

Offline Wittsend

  • Pinto Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2222
  • FeedBack: +241/-0

  • Total Badges: 8
    Badges: (View All)
    Tenth year Anniversary Mobile User Topic Starter Poll Voter 1000 Posts Linux User Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2013, 04:53:38 PM »
Well a few posts above I conceded that the 2.3 (Turbo) must in fact weight 450 pounds based on the "Team.Net" website.

However, I have done some investigating and found the following (below) at "The Ranger Station."  Some guy took the (2.3) parts and weighed them. There is a lot there, so I'll condense it (but the full parts list is further down).

1.  Short block (w/ pan, flywheel, water pump + dist)-212#
2.  Head (w/ manifolds but no cam and followers)-85#" (297# cumulative)
3.  Cam and roller followers----------5# (303# cumulative)
4.  Steel rocker cover-----------------2.7#  (306# cumulative)
5.  Turbo (Garrett T03)----------------25# (331# cumulative)

OK, so, maybe the throttle body, oil cooler and a few other things are missing.  But they sure don't add up to 129 pound to get to 450 pounds.  And note that this includes the flywheel too (which isn't light).   So, judging by these number the 2.3 is right about 100 pounds lighter than the 5.0.  That is also near what "Grumpy" stated. And, as I look back it is right in the middle of my 75-125 pound estimate.

Frankly though, I'd still like to see both engines equally equipped, sitting on a scale.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Engine and component weights, all are +/- a pound or so. (bathroom scale)

Bare 2.3 large journal crank-----33#

Bare 2.5 crank---------------------40#

Bare 2.3 turbo block (w/ caps)--105#

Set of 4 2.5 pistons and rods-----10#

Cam and roller followers----------5#

Manual tranny flywheel-----------18#

Auto tranny flexplate---------------3#

Short block (w/ pan, flywheel, water pump + dist)-212#

Head (w/ manifolds but no cam and followers)-85#

Bare head---------------------------54#

Steel rocker cover-----------------2.7#

Turbo (Garrett T03)----------------25#

2.5 piston w/ rings, wristpin and small rod end-1.56#

2.5 large rod end w/o bearing shells--------------.9375#

2.3 N/A piston w/ wristpin and small rod end---1.9375#

2.3 large rod end w/ bearing shells---------------1.1688#

2.3 N/A standard bore piston------------------------1.15#

2.3 N/A wrist pin--------------------------------------.32#

2.3 N/A rod-------------------------------------------1.40#

2.3 large journal bearing shells----------------------.09#/pr

Offline Grumpy

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
  • FeedBack: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2013, 11:00:02 PM »
Oh, and the Mercruiser accepts 302 flywheels and clutches and bolts to a small block Chevy bellhousing. Altogether, with an aluminum head the Merc weights the same as the Rover, about 315 lbs. Now if I can find someone with half a set of Boss 429 heads I can build my Sawed Off Shotgun(TM) motor.


The weights I'm talking about are the complete engine block with flywheel and harmonic balancer. The engine dress(alternators, carbs, etc)are basically the same from one engine to another and add the same weight to both engines.








This is a Mercruiser with an A4 Boss Pro Stock head.

Grumpy 8)
79 Pinto Hatch, Yellow w/White Pony stripes, Pony wheels, 6650 miles

Offline amxtra

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • FeedBack: +1/-0

  • Total Badges: 3
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2013, 10:43:40 AM »
  I noticed things like the large chunk of metal they used for the upper alternator bracket is heavy enough to be a deadly weapon.
Could this and other accessories be whats adding to the weight problem of the 2.3?
Trying to save a few pounds atm by making an aluminium one work. but the stock pinto one sits so low ( no power steering ) its nicer for clearance.

Offline Wittsend

  • Pinto Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2222
  • FeedBack: +241/-0

  • Total Badges: 8
    Badges: (View All)
    Tenth year Anniversary Mobile User Topic Starter Poll Voter 1000 Posts Linux User Windows User Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2013, 10:58:44 AM »
In all this discussion there is no statement of what is attached to the engines when the weight was measured.  After I saw the numbers from "The Ranger Station" I pretty much concluded that there was error in the internet postings. It may be that we are comparing a completely outfitted 2.3 vs a small block Ford that might have had components missing (flywheel, fan, alternator etc.).

Also, from what I've read the small block being heavier seems to bare out in the descriptions I've read regarding how the V-8 Pinto's handle. It is true that the small block Ford is one of the lightest V-8's.  And, the 2.3 is likely one of the heavier inline 4's. But, I'm still incline from my investigations to still feel the 2.3 is still near 100 pounds lighter than the small block Ford. But, until we see each comparable equipped sitting on scales the debate will be simply "bench racing."

Offline 74 PintoWagon

  • Pinto Sr. Master
  • ******
  • Posts: 3105
  • FeedBack: +540/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Windows User 1000 Posts
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2013, 11:12:59 AM »
Quite a bit of variables..

 Ford Engine weight chart
engine weight pounds comments

Ford Model A four 475
Ford 1600 Kent OHV 260
Ford 1600 CVH 282 (US Escort)
Ford 2.0 Pinto SOHC L4 320
Ford 2.0 Pinto 286
Ford 2.3 Pinto 328
Ford 2.3 Lima/Pinto L4 418 (also 2.0, 2.5)
Ford 2.3 Lima/Pinto L4 307
Ford 2.3 Lima/Pinto L4 450 (turbo)
Ford 2.3 L4 Turbo 380 Turbo T-Bird engine w/turbo, flywheel
Ford 2.3 Polimotor 152 plastic motor, experimental
Ford 2.3 Polimotor 168 plastic motor, experimental
Ford Germany Taunus V4 205 (and SAAB V4)
Ford/SAAB V4 230 1.5, 1.7L
Ford England Essex V4 327
Ford Zetec-SE 1.3 DOHC 202 1996 Fiesta
Ford Zetec 238

Ford Germany 2.0-2.8 V6 305
Ford Cologne 2.0-2.8 V6 380
Ford Capri/Pinto V6 365 2.6, 2.8L Cologne
Ford England Essex V6 379 (3 liter)
Ford England Essex V6 430
Ford England Essex V6 405
Ford 3.8 V6-90 351 (w/start, alt, less clutch)
Ford 3.8 V6-90 311 ("fully dressed")
Ford 3.8 V6-90 298 "complete"
Ford 3.8 V6 402
Ford Duratec 2.5/3.0 V6 360 ("fully dressed")
Ford CDW27 60 deg V6 365 "as delivered to assembly plant"
Ford/Mazda Mondeo V6 225 60 deg, all aluminum, 4v
Ford Taurus SHO 3.0/3.2 465 Taurus SHO V6
Ford 170-250 L6 385 (except Australian w/aluminum head)
Ford 4.2 V6 488 flexplate and front dress, no A/C compressor. Shipping wt w/skid
Ford 3.8L V6 376 1998 Mustang, dressed (dry)
Ford flathead V8 525 1932 model, integral b'hsg, iron heads
Ford flathead V8 569 ('53 239 CID)
Ford flathead V8 616 "complete with clutch and gearbox"
Ford Cosworth DFV 353 (racing engine, DOHC, 3.0L)
Ford 255 Windsor 468
Ford 289/302 V8 460 (late 5.0s are a bit lighter)
Ford 221-302W 460
Ford Indy 255 pushrod 360 all aluminum, 1963
Ford Indy 255 DOHC 400 1964, later known as Foyt Coyote V8
Ford 5.0 V8 450
Ford 5.0 V8 411 89 Mustang 5.0 GT (dry) inc: manifold, carb(?), headers and alternator. Not inc: starter, smog pump, power steering pump, AC compressor,flywheel
Ford BOSS 302 500
Ford 351 Cleveland 550 (includes BOSS and Australian 302-C)
Ford 351 Windsor 510
Ford 351 Windsor 525
Ford 351M-400 575
Ford Y block V8 625 (272-312 CID)
Ford FE big block 650 (332-428 CID)
Ford FE big block 670 ('59 352 CID)
Ford FE 625
Ford 427 SOHC 680
Ford 429/460 V8 640
Ford 429-460 720
Ford 460 V8 720
Ford BOSS 429 680 (iron block, aluminum heads)
Ford BOSS 429 635
Ford 4.6 SOHC 530 iron block, aluminum heads
Ford 4.6 SOHC 473
Ford 4.6 SOHC 600 (Mustang)
Ford 4.6 DOHC 464 "9 pounds lighter than SOHC"
Ford 4.6 DOHC 437 without accessories
Ford 4.6 DOHC 521 aluminum block and heads
Ford 4.6 DOHC 576 (Mustang)
Ford 4.6L (SOHC) 529 w/flywheel 1998 Mustang, dressed (dry)
Ford 4.6L (SOHC) 492 w/flexplate 1998 Mustang, dressed (dry)
Ford 4.6L (DOHC) 535 1998 Mustang, dressed (dry)
Ford Taurus SHO 3.2 V8 390 Taurus SHO V8, no accessories

Ford Triton V10 635 "dressed"
______________ ____

Art
65 Falcon 2DR 200 IL6 with C4.

Offline jeremysdad

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
  • FeedBack: +83/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Restoring a Daily Driver

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Poll Voter Windows User
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2013, 10:03:26 AM »
This part confuses me:

'Ford 2.0 Pinto SOHC L4 320
Ford 2.0 Pinto 286'

Ummmmm...what? lol Maybe top is with A/C, bottom without? Having recently pulled my compressor out (weight savings ftw), I can see it being in the 30+ pound range.

Offline 74 PintoWagon

  • Pinto Sr. Master
  • ******
  • Posts: 3105
  • FeedBack: +540/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Windows User 1000 Posts
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2013, 10:23:54 AM »
Yeah I saw that too, could be with accessories?, did they ever come with aluminum head?.
Art
65 Falcon 2DR 200 IL6 with C4.

Offline Barn Owl

  • Pinto Driver
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • FeedBack: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Former pinto driver

  • Total Badges: 1
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2013, 06:21:10 PM »
Oh, and the Mercruiser accepts 302 flywheels and clutches and bolts to a small block Chevy bellhousing. Altogether, with an aluminum head the Merc weights the same as the Rover, about 315 lbs. Now if I can find someone with half a set of Boss 429 heads I can build my Sawed Off Shotgun(TM) motor.


The weights I'm talking about are the complete engine block with flywheel and harmonic balancer. The engine dress(alternators, carbs, etc)are basically the same from one engine to another and add the same weight to both engines.









This is a Mercruiser with an A4 Boss Pro Stock head.

Grumpy 8)


Hey Grumpy I am new here and I came across this interesting engine you posted about. Did you have a complete write up on the power plant or any more info. I am very intrigued. And I think it is just what I might be looking to build.
Mike

Offline Grumpy

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
  • FeedBack: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #15 on: October 01, 2013, 11:21:34 AM »
If you are interested in the Mercruiser, here is a site that covers it pretty well...


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=256713


Grumpy 8)
79 Pinto Hatch, Yellow w/White Pony stripes, Pony wheels, 6650 miles

Offline jeremysdad

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
  • FeedBack: +83/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Restoring a Daily Driver

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Fifth year Anniversary Topic Starter Poll Voter Windows User
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2013, 11:42:03 AM »
Yeah I saw that too, could be with accessories?, did they ever come with aluminum head?.

Yes...and...I have a birthday coming up, guys!!! :) http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SIERRA-COSWORTH-2WD-CYLINDER-HEAD-138-5MM-/181227391418

Offline rbohm

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
  • FeedBack: +4/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • dont believe in miracles, rely on them!

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Windows User Tenth year Anniversary Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2014, 03:01:47 PM »
Oh, and the Mercruiser accepts 302 flywheels and clutches and bolts to a small block Chevy bellhousing. Altogether, with an aluminum head the Merc weights the same as the Rover, about 315 lbs. Now if I can find someone with half a set of Boss 429 heads I can build my Sawed Off Shotgun(TM) motor.


The weights I'm talking about are the complete engine block with flywheel and harmonic balancer. The engine dress(alternators, carbs, etc)are basically the same from one engine to another and add the same weight to both engines.








This is a Mercruiser with an A4 Boss Pro Stock head.

Grumpy 8)


hey grumpy, if you are still looking for boss 429 type heads, check this link out;

http://www.summitracing.com/search/part-type/cylinder-heads/make/ford/engine-family/ford-big-block-385-series?SortBy=BestKeywordMatch&SortOrder=Ascending&keyword=ford%20cylinder%20heads
64 falcon
66 mustang
82 fairmont

a man's fate is a man's fate
and life is but an illusion

fordsix.com admin

Offline Grumpy

  • Pinto Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
  • FeedBack: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Poll Voter Fifth year Anniversary
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2014, 10:03:10 PM »

This is the one I want. John Kaase's best Boss 429 head. Those intake ports almost swallow a tennis ball!





With these valve covers. But the tag should read "Sawed-Off Shotgun".


The main problem is cams, the best one(the 488)only has .497 valve lift and 224 degrees on 112 centers, not a performance grind, more a low end torque cam. Big blocks(which this is half of)like lots of lift and duration. The standard 4 barrel on the 488 was a 750cfm Quadrajet with vacuum secondaries. Stock it was rated at 190hp continuous at 4800rpm.


Grumpy 8)
79 Pinto Hatch, Yellow w/White Pony stripes, Pony wheels, 6650 miles

Offline don33

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
  • FeedBack: +5/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Fifth year Anniversary Poll Voter Windows User
Re: 2.3 Turbo nearly as heavy as a V8?? And other questions.
« Reply #19 on: January 28, 2014, 06:04:11 AM »
if you are looking for a light weight 2.3 you might consider the Ford 2.3 duratec engine, it's all aluminum and came in ford rangers and the focus....