• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

Different Take on a V8 Swap - Duder's 4.6L Twin Turbo 245

Looking forward to this. As much as it pains me as a historically anti-ford guy, I think those v8's are the best sounding ones for domestics out there right now.

Agreed they can sound pretty sweet. But don't worry. I'm offsetting this project and the '64 Viccup with equal helpings of GM in the form of the 5.3L E36 and a Buick Roadmaster wagon.

There was a 242 at ipd two years ago with a dohc in it. It was tight in there.

This one isn't quite as tight; the 3-valve leaves a bit more space. I may need to offset the whole thing a little towards the passenger side to clear the column though.
 
Are you going to the Davis show? I'll be in the 2nd-slowest 240 known to man, a pea green 1975 245. Just follow the smell trail of unburned hydrocarbons.

Unfortunately no. I'm still rebuilding my engine and between that and the new baby, it just isn't happening.
 
Unfortunately no. I'm still rebuilding my engine and between that and the new baby, it just isn't happening.

:-( Sorry to hear that. One of these days we will need to meet up and geek out. But congrats on the bambino.

It's super cool to see something a bit different. And the turbo kit you designed looks great!

Thank you sir! Your 142 project is killer. I may just refer to pictures of your engine bay for inspiration of the overall aesthetic for this thing.

You might get a bmw e32 or e38 relocated brake booster to work.

Cool; thanks for the tip. I'll check into that.
 
I may need to offset the whole thing a little towards the passenger side to clear the column though.

If you do this remember you have to keep the crankshaft parallel to the pinion shaft otherwise you'll have U joint alignment issues. In other words you can't just move the front of the motor and not the tranny mount, too.
 
:-( Sorry to hear that. One of these days we will need to meet up and geek out. But congrats on the bambino.

Definitely. I might be coming out there to Socal Euro, so maybe I'll have to extend the trip and stop by or something.

Thanks, he's a good kid.
 
If you do this remember you have to keep the crankshaft parallel to the pinion shaft otherwise you'll have U joint alignment issues. In other words you can't just move the front of the motor and not the tranny mount, too.

Thanks for the reminder. I think there may be enough room to keep the crank axis straight in the car, but shift the whole engine & trans a bit to the passenger side. Trans mount doesn't exist yet so no problem there, so far. I'm also going to investigate scooching the column over towards the driver's side. The pierce point through the firewall could be adjusted a bit. The earlier style shaft between firewall and rack may help too - it's much skinnier and doesn't have the big mass damper dongus that all the later ones do.

Definitely. I might be coming out there to Socal Euro, so maybe I'll have to extend the trip and stop by or something.

Word. I'll see if I can go to that show this year. Last time was 4 or 5 years ago and there was some cool stuff to see.
 
Last year had a 4.6 2V for a while in a 242.

Moved the rack left as much as crossmember allowed nicely(1.5cm), moved lower end of the steering column left as much as the hole in the firewall allowed and engine was a little to the right. Otherwise cylinder head corner wouldn't clear the upper joint.

Was thinking of relocating the brake booster behind the left headlamp but decided to go for a hydro boost. Was a pretty tight fit anyways but a cleaner look than relocating the booster.

What are you going to do to the weight distribution? A 2V engine with a TR-3650 is much heavier than for example a B21AT and M45. I calculated around 120kg/286lbs more weight and most of it is on the front axle. Despite that it was pretty nice on a track.
Thought of a turbo too and because of the weight was tinking of locating it in the general area of front muffler. No other suitable place :-P
 
Last year had a 4.6 2V for a while in a 242.

Moved the rack left as much as crossmember allowed nicely(1.5cm), moved lower end of the steering column left as much as the hole in the firewall allowed and engine was a little to the right. Otherwise cylinder head corner wouldn't clear the upper joint.

Was thinking of relocating the brake booster behind the left headlamp but decided to go for a hydro boost. Was a pretty tight fit anyways but a cleaner look than relocating the booster.

What are you going to do to the weight distribution? A 2V engine with a TR-3650 is much heavier than for example a B21AT and M45. I calculated around 120kg/286lbs more weight and most of it is on the front axle. Despite that it was pretty nice on a track.
Thought of a turbo too and because of the weight was tinking of locating it in the general area of front muffler. No other suitable place :-P

Ah yes! I forgot about your thread, but thanks for the reminder. I found that I had already replied in it :-P

This 3V engine has an aluminum block, vs. iron for the Crown Vic 2V, so I think weight might not be such a huge concern. I have a T45 transmission that I plan to use with this, which is aluminum case as well and fairly light compared to other options. I have not weighed anything yet so this is all conjecture.

Hey, at least I have the extra rear weight of the wagon body helping me out!

My twin GT28 turbos will likely end up just ahead of the shock towers on either side. I think this is the best place to locate them for my situation, but I'll consider all other options first. I do like the fact that the exhaust manifolds would point forwards, which helps for packaging around the steering column & starter, but then the question becomes how to route the downpipes.

How did you like the driving experience with hydroboost?
 
Thanks for the reminder. I think there may be enough room to keep the crank axis straight in the car, but shift the whole engine & trans a bit to the passenger side.

All the old Converse kits placed the pushrod 5.0L's offset 1/2" towards the passenger side, and I used the same offset with the LS.
 
This 3V engine has an aluminum block, vs. iron for the Crown Vic 2V, so I think weight might not be such a huge concern. I have a T45 transmission that I plan to use with this, which is aluminum case as well and fairly light compared to other options. I have not weighed anything yet so this is all conjecture.

Hey, at least I have the extra rear weight of the wagon body helping me out!

My twin GT28 turbos will likely end up just ahead of the shock towers on either side. I think this is the best place to locate them for my situation, but I'll consider all other options first. I do like the fact that the exhaust manifolds would point forwards, which helps for packaging around the steering column & starter, but then the question becomes how to route the downpipes.

How did you like the driving experience with hydroboost?
Was thinking if that 3V is iron or not(could have looked at the pictures better). Aluminium and iron blocks seem to have 70-75lbs(?) weight difference which is something. That along with the wagons more heavier rear and mandatory battery relocation, the weight distribution might be just fine.

Downpipes straight through the hood? :rofl: 2.5" might be the biggest that can fit around starter, accessories, engine mounts and front cross member without cutting the body. Lack of route(s) for the piping was one of the reasons I planned installing the turbo under the car. Having it out of sight was on the list too.

To me hydroboost had similar pedal feel as a booster, just much more power with less pedal movement. Modulating the braking power on track and daily driving was easy after getting the hang of it. It wasn't too easy to lock the fronts even with 305mm front and standard rear brakes.
 
Forgot about this one Chris. Check out Fredrik Hillman's 122 build. He's doing a 3v into a 122, hoped to have at the show but it's not there yet. Plan is a pair of 16t's since he has them.
 
No idea how I missed this. Really looking forward to witnessing the enginerding and fabricobbling process.
 
enginerding and fabricobbling process

That's an accurate way to describe what's happening here. I need to get back at this project after the upcoming Lemons race. Part of the reason I start threads is to keep me motivated to make progress!
 
Little bit of a teaser:



I sold my 1993 E34 M5 back in January, which had these killer AC Schnitzer Type II, 3-piece wheels on it. For some reason the buyer didn't want them - weren't to his taste apparently - so I worked out a deal to buy them back and shipped the car on some old E36 wheels I had lying around.







The idea is to adapt the V8 245 to the Schnitzers. I'm looking at using E36 front spindles, hubs, struts, brakes, etc. to allow me to run the fronts without adapters. Mockup!



Rears will need adapters for sure, and I'm hoping I don't have to narrow the axle.
Edit: I meant to say re-drilled hubs to adapt the rear to 5x120.

Fronts are 17x8.5 ET+13 with 225/45R17, rears are 17x9.5 ET+13 with 255/40R17.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top