my 2ltr had a standard block,

power wise it had twin 40's, cam, porting work, and exhaust

it loved the thrashing i used to give it, if u look at my engine post, the oil pump flange bolts came loose, dropping oil pressure, if that had stayed on i wouldn't be suprised if it continued strong for many years to come.

it had good, fun power, and the engine was mostly stock!

I had my mk2 dyno'd a few yrs ago and with my own 'home' tuning, try and see method the dyno printed out 96rwkw@8200 !! A little frightening on a rather new but std bottom end.. it ended up with 90kw@ 7300 with some cam adjustments. The dyno man reckoned if it had 2x 45s instead of 40's it'd crack 100rwkw. What i done to get those figures was ...
skim the head 0.120th, approx 11;1 compression
stainless 45.5 inlet/38.5 exh
VS9 valve springs (kent cams)
Piper BP300 cam, 3800-8000?
Ported at home not too large as wanted some air speed!
2x 40 webers with 36mm choke
0.100th oversize pistons(capri 2.8i)
deck the block 0.040th
0.40th offset crankshaft
lightened flywheel.
cost was about $2500 not inc carbs.

Thanks for the specs martymexico. From those im assuming that the bottom end will handle power std. But if i wanted peace of mind i would beef it up with arp bolts shot peen the rods or replace with stronger ectect.

Whateva gets done to my car between now and when its on the road is how its staying for a min of 3years. Unless something breaks in which case i fix it back to the way it was. So I want it right the first time. I have download vizards book, its a good read.

Once im out of uni and have a good paying full time job i will start the upgrades again. Which will either be cosie'n it or supercharged pinto. But as i say that a min of 3years away.

Thanks again for the spec Marty

quote:

---

Originally posted by martymexico

I had my mk2 dyno'd a few yrs ago and with my own 'home' tuning, try and see method the dyno printed out 96rwkw@8200 !! A little frightening on a rather new but std bottom end.. it ended up with 90kw@ 7300 with some cam adjustments. The dyno man reckoned if it had 2x 45s instead of 40's it'd crack 100rwkw. What i done to get those figures was ...
skim the head 0.120th, approx 11;1 compression
stainless 45.5 inlet/38.5 exh
VS9 valve springs (kent cams)
Piper BP300 cam, 3800-8000?
Ported at home not too large as wanted some air speed!
2x 40 webers with 36mm choke
0.100th oversize pistons(capri 2.8i)
deck the block 0.040th
0.40th offset crankshaft
lightened flywheel.
cost was about $2500 not inc carbs.

---

120 thou sounds like a lot!!! that's like 3mm and with a 100thou oversize pistons would of been higher than 11.1!! i was running 10.9:1 in my old n/a motor with only a 60thou bottomend and definetly not that much shaved off the head

I would be inclined to accept Martin's specs rather than yours Joey. The standard Pinto compression ration is 9:1, so it is hardly likely that you are going to get 10.5:1 with just a 60thou overbore. Are you sure there wasn't a bit of block and head skimming in the mix.

Getting back to the original question on this thread, ask yourself what you want to use the car for. There is no good in building a high hp engine if it is going to be your daily driver. I can tell you from experience that you'll find it cheaper to have a Falcon ute as your daily driver.

Just go a Duratec and look forward to plenty of power and relaibility.

Something along the lines of that motor on ebay with sierra injection should give you a good, torquey, reliable engine that will be plenty of fun. Probably won't quite make 130rwhp though.

Beyond that as muzza says, you're really getting into an area where every extra horse power is going to cost you in dollars and drive-ability.

Honestly with all the mods i have done to a Pinto engine(more than 10), the best road combo is so simple, minimum o.080 skim off the head(from std), port match only, not reamed out to the size of a battleship cannon. a 40dfav carb, or modify the std 2.0 so both barrels open together+ extractors. Not 130rwhp but plenty low rev torques . I was getting skids in 3rd with a 3.77 diff!!
I agree with Smcka , go late model engine, Duratec / Zetec, $4k will get them on the road...easily...even easier in 3yrs !!

Joeyjonesy, 3mm oversize is easy by using 2.8i capri pistons, they also have a shorter crown height so decking the block is very necessary . my pinto was approx 2176cc

4k to get a duratec or zetec on the road... for some of you guys yeah, wheneva i price stuff like that its not so cheap. And i dont have the skills to do some of the stuff I see on here.

I'm also wanting to keep the car old school. Its just a realization I've come too. I might change the engine in the future as i plan to keep the car long term. But the 1st evolution will use the standard engine peeped up a bit.

The car will most likely just be a weekend drive. 130rwhp is probably a lil optimistic but i can always dream.

I have a 40DFAV carby but I want to have twin down drafts if I cant find any twin sides will have to do.

I suppose I will end up paying whatever a local engine builder wants to build a pinto and just live with it. martymexico has given me a good spec to go with 90rwkw engine so i'll aim for something like that.

Thanks guys.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bloodyeck

I would be inclined to accept Martin's specs rather than yours Joey. The standard Pinto compression ration is 9:1, so it is hardly likely that you are going to get 10.5:1 with just a 60thou overbore. Are you sure there wasn't a bit of block and head skimming in the mix.

Getting back to the original question on this thread, ask yourself what you want to use the car for. There is no good in building a high hp engine if it is going to be your daily driver. I can tell you from experience that you'll find it cheaper to have a Falcon ute as your daily driver.

---

do the sums then i had a 60 thou bottom end with the pistons protruding 5 thou and a 45cc chamber with a felpro gasket ??? then try doing the sums with a 100 thou bottom end with and even smaller chamber what ever the size is with 120 thou off the head

ps. i was most likley mis understood when i said only a 60 thou bottom end but i was meaning only a 60thou compared to martys 100 thou

what was the chamber volume marty surely you can't be working out compression ratio with just the thickness your shaving off the head ?