FEOA Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
ok whell i need new rings and while im getting my engine rebuilt im going to bore out my cylinders. does anyone know how far u can go before u get tho the water ports? thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
I dont know the specs on the 1.9L very well, but I know not very far. The real power in engine building is stroking the motor. Just look at a 350 to 383 stroker....power gained from stroking over boring is INCREDIBLE. Look at a new crank, rods, and pistons to get a little stroke action going on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
That is so true. The 1.9 is basicly a Stroked 1.6. Ford even made the block taller to accomodate the longer stroke. I would love nothing better than to put a 347 (Bored and stroked 302 aka 5.0) into my Mustang. My las engine was a 306 which is a 302 bored .030 over, and that´s what I plan on building for it a again so I can see how much of a difference the new roller cam and higher compression will do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
how bout boring and making it a stroker engine.
. i cant find any crankshafts, rods, or pistons for that engine however. any sugestions, ive looked at je pistons and wiseco. plese help.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,291 Posts
you can get custom pistons from JE. i got 4 custom aluminum flattop pistons for $500 and they came with rings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
Actually the 1.8 IS a stroked 1.6. Same exact block, just longer. Interesting history of the BP series blocks through Mazda.

The 1.9L is actually a Ford designed motor, using Mazda 4cyl specs. However, because the 1.6L was a SOHC its ported just like the 1.9L and hence the EXP turbo Exhaust manifold will work


see what ya learn on here.

Talking about making a stoker...my friend Rob had an 8sec chevelle...the company that did his crank said they would make a crank, and custom notched pistons (on the back to clear the crank). They said it would cost about 6k and recommended using crower rods. But still a balanced crank that could support a rev to like 10k and getting up to a 4" stroke.

I did some quick math when I was at Rob´s house...we figured we could hit anywhere from 2.5-3.0L with the BP8 motor. So the project for the rest of my life looks like its going to be:

ported, polished head, with heavy exhaust lobed cams, cam gears, oversized valves, sodium valves, titanium springs, custom pistons, rods, and crank --- 3.0L running 2BAR of boost on an 8.2-8.5:1 motor reving to 9.5k ..... low estimates can go as high as 500HP.
Just my dream....too bad the drivetrain would never support it....it would be a blast in a Miata though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
I´m sorry dude, I never answered your original question of how far you can bore the block. I got caught up in the aspect of boring and how it helps make more power. No replacement for displacement right ;-) Anyway I was thumbing through the trusty old shop manual, and it looks like ford recomends a max of .020in overbore. Which wold change the bore from 3.23in to 3.25in increasing the displacement from 113.4 to 114.8, or 1.858L to 1.881L. Still not a true 1.9, but I let you in on a little secret, the 5.0 is really a 4.947L engine where as my 306 is 5.021L a.k.a a true 5.0 engine. if it weren´t for that extra 7cc´s Ford would have had to call it a 4.9.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
Thats very intersting pimp, I never knew the 5.0 wasn´t a true 5.0. Maybe you can answer thid, why did ford switch from the 5.0 to the 4.7 in the gt´s?? I was talking with my budddy about that the other day and we were both wondering that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
Actually they switched to a 4.6. The reason they did that is because just about every other car manufacturer out there has sent the pushrod engine the way of the dinosuar. They realized the potential and efficiency of over head cam engines and decided to go that rout. As far as why they Decreased the displacement, I´m not 100% sure but I think it was so the could build an engine capable of sustaining higher RPMs more easily. Back in the push rod engines hay days whenever people wanted to road race a Mustang they would usualy opt for the 289 instead of the 302 or one of Fords many bigger engines, due to the fact that they were easier to keep at the constant high revs needed on a road course. Other than that I´m not sure. Could also be for gas mialage sake, or emmissions. But I´d like to think it was for higher revs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
And just a little side note, if you look at what year they switched to the 4.6 it coencides directly with the year that OBD II became implemented as the official standard for cars sold in america. 95=5.0=OBD I, 96=4.6=OBD II. Kind of reemphasises the whole emissions and gas mialage theory. :-(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
1993 was the last year for the 5.0! ´94´s and ´95´s also had the 4.6L engines. These were in Mustangs, T-Birds, Crown Vics, Grand Marquies, and Lincolns too. :-( They should;ve kept the 5.0 tho.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
True, while 93 was the last of what is commonly refered to as the 5.0 Mustangs, or Fox body Mustangs, the 94 and 95 models, refered to as SN95 Mustangs, also carried the 5.0 engine. It wasn´t untill 96 that the SN95 model Mustangs recieved the 4.6L SOHC engines. You can usually tell the difference between a 94 or 95 and the 96-98 SN95 model Mustangs by their tail lights. the 94 and 95 models had 3 horizontal lenses in the tail light, and the 96-98 have 3 vertical lenses that look more like the classic Mustangs. If you see on with 3 horizontal lenses look at the badge on the front fender it should say GT and underneath that I belive 5.0Mustang, and the 96-98 I believe just says GT Mustang.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,915 Posts
Mustangs still suck, but that´s my opinion and experience with them. I know you´re talking about hte 4.6s but the 3.8 V6s suck. the 95 and 96 V6ers are slower than my 2nd gen EGT Inline 4. How could Ford do that to it´s most popular nameplate?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
I love the mustang body style and I wouldn´t mind owning one. But the reason I wouldn´t buy one is that it is the dog of the american muscle cars, both chevy and pontiac ran the 350 in their top line muscle cars. How come ford never did that with the 351? I don´t understand that one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,915 Posts
Well Chevy and Pontiac are basically the same company. Pontiac is a secondary brand to Chevy...which is why the Firebird and Camaro are obviously, so closely related. I had always liked Mustangs, but since my friend had gotten one and his ego swelled and he treated me and my car like a piece of shit, I just lost respect for Mustangs, well...part of it was jealousy. Yes I admit it, it was partly jealousy. But knowing Z28s will murder Mustang GTs, I just laughed everytime I pictured my friend trying to take one on and getting his ass whipped by about half a second. Think about it, Ford is so desperate to murder Camaro´s they had to Supercharge the latest SVT to FINALLY beat the latest SS (naturally aspirated), which Chevy didn´t care about because they new they were closing up production on Camaros/Firebirds. Rumor has it that the Camaro isn´t DEAD...in 30 years they´re planning a return...so mark your 2033 Calendars...Camaro V6/Z28/and SS are all making a comback. lol yeah. I hope they bring them back in about 10 years...
But for now all we have are more freakin´ Mustangs that are being produced, but Ford "retro" styled the latest Mustang, set to debut in I think 04 or 05...can´t remember exactly, they made it look like they did back in the 60s. Looks pretty cool if you ask me.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top