121 Guests, 1 User
Spacecowboy1979

Author Topic: phiscal diminsion of 2.l&2.3 eng.  (Read 1316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline johnhu

  • Pinto Driver
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • FeedBack: +0/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 1
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter
phiscal diminsion of 2.l&2.3 eng.
« on: December 10, 2013, 11:41:58 PM »
I am starting new project&its not a ford.i plan on putting a2.l or a2.3  in a 1966 mgb/gt.with a turbo down the road .before I get to far ahead of myself.i think I should say I just help remove the eng/trans from the same model mention early, but have question.is the block the same heath if not,what is the defferent?do they use the same motor mount?thanks for your time..

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: phiscal diminsion of 2.l&2.3 eng.
« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2013, 12:24:40 AM »
Go to Turboford.org this has been done before on a MG,  after all if an inline 6 can be made to fit why not a I-4 turbo...The cost to use an I-4 2000 twin cam turbo is not really to be talked about unless you have a lot of money or are in Canada or the U.K. ie Cosworth RS 500 twin cam etc.. from a breakers yard etc...Or an engine from any of the hot hatch Japanese engines for example. There are differences between the Ford 2.0 or 2.3 so if you want to do this in one shot find any Turbo Ford with a engine , transmission and a good rear end. Think a rusty Ford Thunderbird or Mustang with a 2.3 Turbo but not an SVO, they are getting few and far between...Any good Mustang with a 2.3 can have the SVO bit's put on however there are just so many left.

Offline oldkayaker

  • Pinto Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 727
  • FeedBack: +113/-0
  • Gender: Male

  • Total Badges: 5
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Signature Windows User Tenth year Anniversary Fifth year Anniversary
Re: phiscal diminsion of 2.l&2.3 eng.
« Reply #2 on: December 11, 2013, 04:36:01 AM »
The Pinto 2.0 is physically a little smaller than the 2.3, but I do not have the dimensions.  The motor mounts are different but this should be a small part of the fabrication involved in this swap.  The larger 2.3 does fit: http://www.britishv8.org/MG/TimOBrien.htm.
Jerry J - Jupiter, Florida

Offline amc49

  • PCCA VIP
  • Pinto Master
  • ***
  • Posts: 1256
  • FeedBack: +242/-1
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 4
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter Poll Voter Windows User 1000 Posts
Re: phiscal diminsion of 2.l&2.3 eng.
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2013, 05:46:42 AM »
Not trying to kill your SOHC idea but look here. Close to 40 more base HP, modern engine and easily available now, they also last forever and turbo like nobody's business if that's what you want.......... ..............

http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=302371

Offline Wittsend

  • Pinto Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2038
  • FeedBack: +239/-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: phiscal diminsion of 2.l&2.3 eng.
« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2013, 12:21:42 PM »
In swaps like this the engine length is generally not much of an issue.  The areas of greater concern are the oil pan clearance with the front suspension and the intake/exhaust dimensions to the sides. One other area with the British cars is that their transmission tunnels seem to be rather small also.

As Old Kayaker has already directed you, the British V8 site has a host of engine transplants that are great resources.

Tom

Offline johnhu

  • Pinto Driver
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • FeedBack: +0/-0
  • Another Pinto Driver

  • Total Badges: 1
    Badges: (View All)
    Topic Starter
Re: phiscal diminsion of 2.l&2.3 eng.
« Reply #5 on: December 12, 2013, 06:08:34 PM »
I know all about the mg swap I have been  member there for some time.thanks for the info. I have known for quite sometime.