Alternative pistons options and Sleeving Ford 6 Engines

[xctasy]

I made a few statements about sleaving old 200 and 250 engine blocks. You guys stateside might like to contemplate this if you are bored!

WARNING. Saving Iron for Environmental Reasons Rant follows:-


I favour sleaving any Windsor I6 block for a common and cheap modern piston and rod assembly from a later model Ford V6 or I6 or Chevy V8. Any 250 engine, especially the US 250, is an investment, and I can't think of a better way to eliminate the problems with thinwall cylinders than by using a 2.9 V6 3.66" piston on reamed out 5.88" forged steel rods and Diesel Ford 2.3 Transit engine liners which you can make locally for very little money. They are something like 3.78" in outside diameter, 93 mm internal, and cope with 21:1 compression ratios.

The other option is using 4.8 "Generation 4" pistons by Zoliner. Mate this with the GM liner, and its 6.1" conrod.

There is also the prospect of using the latest 1.21" tall 3.7" diameter 5.0 Modular SVO OHC piston, which is to be used in the comming 6.0 or 6.2 liter Modular V8 truck engines. You get the engine fully relinered to 3.88", and using a 90 thou thick liner should allow the 5.4 V8 conrods and the 5.0 modular piston to be.


These pistons have had millions spent on them by Ford and GM. Back in the late 90's, Ford and Chev had issues with warranties on cold piston slap in service. So they worked very hard with Zolliner to elimate it. Along with detonation reistant conrods and the brillant work on piston ring clearances, there isn't a better cast alloy piston around. It would be silly not to work out a price on doing an linered up 250 engine block, and eliminate the prospect of ever having to do an engine rebuild again. Linered-up engines are able to resist detonation better, and if the liner is thicker, they are stronger than a stock Ford cylinder wall.

Talk it over with your machinist.

Option 1. The best option I can think of is GM 4200 Atlas LL8 pistons. They are 3.66", and have rods with 2.25" pins. There are 5.7" rods, in a 9 inch deck engine with a 4.05" stroke, and 1.335" decks. It would fit a 250 with 300 Ford rods and no mods asside from a cylinder sleave.

Option 2. The 200 could use these too, but with Ford OHC Pinto 2000 rods. These were popular Baja engines, and were made in Europe from 1969 untill 1988, but are available from Scatt or SVO. They are 4.96 to 5", but can be made to suit 4.905 by carefull close and grinding procedures. They have a 0.912" or 0.945" pin version, and the rods and Atlas Chevy pistons could be made to be 'friends' without too much effort. Early 2000 Pinto rods are very tough, and plentiful overseas.

(The 4.8 Chevy Gen 3 LR4 has a 3.779 bore x 3.27 stroke and 6.278 inch centre spacing rod, 1.335" tall pistons
The 5.3 Chevy Gen 3 LS4/LM7 has a 3.779 bore x 3.622 stroke and 6.098 inch centre spacing rod, 1.335" tall pistons
The 5.7 Gen 3 LS1 has a 3.893 bore x 3.622 stroke and 6.098 centre spacing rod, 1.335" tall pistons.
All Gen 3's have a 9.24" deck, 2.2" rods, so the pistons and rods won't fit a 250 block unless the crank is welded up).


Option 3 a. The US 250 has heaps of room for a welded stroker or good 300 six rods. On a wildly sleaved up 250, the 5.3 pistons with some bushed 300 I6 rods and a set of custom 3.88" steel liners would be possibe without too much outlay. 263 cubes.

Option 3 b. Weld the 250 crank, take stroke up to 3.985 with Gen 3 6.1" rods, and you've got 268 cubes.

Option 4 a . Stock 4.0 Falcon AU pistons, 1.163", 3.632" bore, 6.06" rods. These pistons would fit the US 250 with sleaves, but you'd have to run 6.375 Pontiac rods, bushed to suit.

Option 4 b The 4.0 pistons would fit the 200 with sleaves, and then you could use 5.09" 302 Ford conrods.

Option 5a. 250 sleaved. The 2.8 Cologne V6 3.66" Pistons have a 1.59" deck, and are tough. They have 0.945" pins, so might fit the stock 5.88" rods and fix the piston shortfall these engines are renown for.

Option 5b. 200 sleaved. The 2.8 Cologne V6 3.66" Pistons have a 1.59" deck, and are tough. They have 0.945" pins, so would need a spirolock and bush from a SBF to work. They should fit the stock 4.71" rods resized to 4.65".

Option 6. No sleave required, just a pristine block or 20 thou over 3.72" versions. These would use oversize +150 thou, 3.7" 5.0 piston used in the alloy 5.0 Cammer 4V crate engines, listed SVO part M-6007-T50EA. The pistons are 4.6 and 5.4 height, but can only be used with a rod about 6.35 " tall. On a 200, you could use the 2.0 Pinto (overseas its the common as mud Cortina/Sierra/Capri engine)

 

[ASMART]

Correct me where I am wrong. #6 would give te same as 60 over 200 oistins but would change the rod ratio. Is that why you would choose that combo? How much work to use the Pinto rod?

 

[xctasy]

Correct me where I am wrong. #6 would give the same as 60 over 200 pistons but would change the rod ratio. Is that why you would choose that combo? How much work to use the Pinto rod?

Generally, all engine upgrades and part swaps have to make financial sense. Everwhere. Evertime we play automakers with engineering, we have to use benchmark parts with the same manner a power plant engineer would in 2006

Priority 1 . Thinwall block strengthend with a liner/sleaves, plus the orginal engine number.
Priorty 2. Better modern Detriot-style cast alloy pistons which don't cold slap, yet can hack the loads of a turbo or nitrous or high compresion head
Priorty 3. Better rods with more strength,
Priorty 4. Better rod ratio. Very expensive to change, and not worth doiung unless you get large gains in items 1, 2 and 3.

Option 6. Yep, two reasons. On the stock tall deck US 250 has a 9.469" deck, and normally, a set of 5.88" rods and 1.53" pistons. Reason 1 . The piston then sits down below the block about 104 thou down below the block, sometimes 134 or 159 thou below with aftermarket pistons. Even the 2.5 HSC or 255 pistons, still 52 thou below. Ew, yukk!

The +150 thou oversize cammer 5.0 pistons are so trim, 1.19", and can fit a bushed 6.275" Aussie 200 X-flow rod or some kind of Buick or Pontiac 6.325" rod in there, if you can bush one down to suit the punny 0.866" wrist pins Ford use. Reason 2. The Rod ratio improves from 1.505:1 to 1.62:1. Ford Australia spent a few million on a rod ratio improvement from 1.505:1 to 1.53:1 in 1998. That was with an OHC engine with a similar rod and crank combination to both US and Aussie 250 engines. If you can improve on that by 5 times the amount, then it may be worth looking into.


Option 2.
On the nice 7.803" low deck US 200. With 3.632, 3.662, or 3.66 inch Ford Falcon AU 4.0 or GM 4200 pistons. Reason 1, sleaved blocks last a long time, and a stock numbers match Mustang 1965 to 1970 block may be a keeper for ever if you just liner it. Reson 2, the rods are a step up for durability. A Pinto 2000 rod is a great swap. You can then get one of the strongests rods, capable of 8500 rpm. The blueprint height was around 4.96 to 5.00". To then be able to fit a stock Falcon 4.0 (1.163") or 4.2 GM 4200 pistons, you'd get a great rod ratio with little extra effort. The 5 inch Ford OHC rod is stronger than most stock 302 V8 rods. I've seen some varying specs for the GM 4200 as 1.07" or 1.335's as the deck height.

Reason 3. Rod ratio improvement of to 1.59:1 or more from the stock 1.505:1 is an improvement, especially if it comes with an explosion proof conrod.

 

[ASMART]

Option 2. How much work other than sleeving? Does the Pinto rod fits with out any work to the us 200 crank and the pistons you mentioned? That would be to good to be true!

 

[xctasy]

Option 2. How much work other than sleeving? Does the Pinto rod fits with out any work to the us 200 crank and the pistons you mentioned? That would be to good to be true!

The Pinto 2000 rod has a 2.047" bearing diameter, and a 4.017" bore spacing. This verses 2.124 and 4.08" on the I6 . Width is similar. On the crank, it's just a remachine of the crank pins to fit it all. It's just a 76 thou cut to the blueprint Ford OHC crank pin, and you can go up to about 96 with the +20 undersize rod bearings .

A variation on that is to offset grind the crank to get perhaps a 3.200 to 3.220" stroke, depending on your machinists accuracy . If the GM 4200 really does have the 1.07" compression height, then add the 5.00" Ford 2000 OHC rod and see if there is a +25 thou piston to suit a 5 hou honed out standard 3.68" bore.

 

[lyonsy]

in option 6
whould you think the cammer pistons are better then say the race series one from acl as in lighter or same weight but more durable.
and have you seen 60 up pistons anywhere for a 4l au/ba engine anywhere ive only found 40 if you could get a 60 with a nice bore you could use them.
drift

 

[xctasy]

The aftermarket Aussie Cammer pistons don't come in 3.68 or 3.71 sizes just yet.

The ACL Race items are the best bet in the meantime.

Anything from 3.632 to 3.710" is very bad for piston choice in general. Over the last 5 years, Chrysler, Ford, Chev and have gone to 3.66, 3.67 and 3.70" sizes, so the choice is expanding rapidly.


Remember, Ford Australia went to the 3.612 and 3.632" bore sizes on the 88-92 and 93-06 OHCengines so they could pick up smaller pistons without stiffeners in them. Mitsubishi (2.6 Astron), Ford America (4.6 modular) and Subaru (2.0 and 2.5) and Toyota (3.4) had gone to these pistons.

 

[woodbutcher]

How would sleeving the 300 ci work?I have a block that is already punched .060.Would like to sleeve back to std bore and go from there.
Thanks.Would like to save the block if possible.
Leo

 

[xctasy]

There is a standard sleeve for 4" bore USA and Aussie engines. 352, 351, 350, 360 Mopar, 304/308 Holden, 400 Ford, etc.


Engine builders get a little worried, because they think that iron liners don't conduct heat as well as plain iron bores, and that, as the sizings of the ring gaps has to be on the bottom end of the recommended values, that there is a risk involved. They also worry about a liner comming adrfit, and less cylinder wall support. All are achedimemic issues, as the stock bores on most thinwall Detriot engines were under 150 thou anyway, and an unsleaved older engine is more of a risk anyway.

Use any common 4" bore sleeve in your 300. Most come in 4.030, 4.04 or 4.060 or 4.0625 outer diameter anyway.

When you consider the cost of even 6 items, then sleeving a stock block with a good quality Iron sleeve is a great idea. There are stacks of local companies in America just looking for trade. A good deal of them are being forced to outsource to India and China becasue there is no local demand for a brilliant product. As a result, a good deal of them are in protection mode, looking after their intellectual property.

Darton Performance Cylinder sleeves
LA Sleeve Cylinder Sleeves
See http://www.performance-auto-parts.com/cylinder-sleeves/
Slogan is

Call 1-877-354-3812 to order your Cylinder Sleeve Today!!

Arrow Engine Company (makes parts for Ajax, Fairbanks, Caterpillar; Waukesha, Lufkin, Witte, Gemini, Ford and Hercules engines and offers a wide assortment of Impco carburetors)
www.arrowengine.com

Other out-source companies like JJ Desiel (India) see http://www.fuzing.com/vci/00126362c232/J-J-Diesel

Honda's Marysville Plant in Ohio won't help, but they are starting to make components for out-sourcing.
http://www.hondanews.com/CatID1020?mid= ... 7&mime=asc

 

[woodbutcher]

Hi xctasy,thanks for the web addy.
Leo

 

[xctasy]

One other option is to check with Does 10'S. His wife's turbo 250 is a living legend!

He (Will) had his excellent machinist do his 250 with one sleeve at number one. (It's common for Ford 200's and 250's to have core shift or cracking from the highly cooled section adjacent the water pump at the front).

 

[Does10s]

Ya Kelly's block was sleeved in the #1 cyl. As far as I know it wasn't a big deal at all! It was just a standard bore job (a lot of material was removed though) and the sleeve was "frozen" then pressed or maybe even just slid in.
So far we've had no issues with that at all.

Xctasy,
For the record the #1 cyl. crack was caused by a frozen (gulled) wrist pin. This caused the piston to rock in the cyl. cracking the cyl. wall.

Here's a pic of the installed sleeve. You have to look real close to see the very fine line between the cyl. bore and the O-ring.

Later,
Will

 

[xctasy]

Thanks Will.

In your case, it was just the opposite. I hope I haven't 'bad mouthed' the awesome 250! That sleeve is a work of art!

I've taken a few excerpts from some development engineers from Ford (Bill Santacecione has been quoted for his commons on I6's and the dentonation common X-flow heads). He said that the I6 was way too cool up front, and that wear was common in the front.

Asside from the more common 380 to 600 hp engines,Nizpro Turbocharging engineers automatically sleeve number one as it is a known problem point on I6's. They had to do this on the famed 1200 hp 4.0 dohc turbo.

http://www.nizpro.com.au/images/article ... /ghia7.jpg

 

[Anonymous]

Used NASCAR stuff appears on Ebay all the time. Here's some NASCAR Carrillo rods. They are 6.00" long, better than stock 250, not quite as good as 200 rods length wise, they have a .866 wrist pin, and 1.850 on the crank journal. I'm just not sure of the 250 crank journal size or width. These are .830 wide. Why couldn't we use something like these for a nice upgrade? They should be plenty strong and if they could work it should open up all kinds of doors for us. They throw these things away every week-end. If they break one, there's still seven left...



http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/NASCAR-C ... 3206QQrdZ1

 

[woodbutcher]

This thread remended me of an article in Hot Rod Magazine(R) a few years ago.There is a place in North Carolina that you can go to and purchase NASCAR(R) racing items used from a warehouse.Every thing from a single rod to everything you need to build a complete engine.
Leo