TT331
Thanks guys.

There is not alot of guys left that like pintos alot of the escorts on this site seem to be nissan powered

I`m a fan of the original engined option, or at least keeping it in the family (ford)

Definitely Pinto all the way!!
 

Now thats a nice tidy install, they dont usually look that neat

Looks great chuff

Any build or power specs?

This is the finished carb combo its
Running on e85. But im going to change to efi as its the next step or challenge in the build.
The carb combo works ok. E85 definitely the best option if running a carb .doesn't seem to foul plugs and the tuning window is alot wider with a carb.
Only problem i have is the motor is standard and the valve springs are too lazy its getting valve float and only running 6 psi

Story goes like this.
 
Late 1980's, I was in my early 20s and decided to turbo my RS2000 Coupe. Spent far too many $1000's and the final incarnation after many upgrades was a fully prepped bottom end running Cosworth 8.5:1 CR forged pistons topped with a ported head, oversize stainless steel valves and custom Wade turbo camshaft. The engine was pretty much bullet-proof. Turbo was a standard Garret T03 mounted on a genuine cast Garret exhaust manifold, externally wastgated with in-cabin adjustability from 7 PSI to BANG, blowing straight into a Weber DMTL topped with a cast plenum exactly as shown here: http://www.turbosport.co....viewfull=1#post2172262. All machining was done by Duggan Balancing, assembly was done by myself and the tuning, rejetting & distributor recurve were all done by Frank Lowndes on his dyno back in the day when he owned Northern Tuning Service. Never got any power figures off Frank (and they're all dyno dependant anyway) but the car was tuned perfectly. To give you some idea of performance, 0-100 km/h was timed at 3.9 sec and she spun easily to 7000 RPM in all gears running the original 3.54:1 diff. Maximum boost I could run was 18 PSI before surge hit in a big way. Finally, after many broken gearboxes, diffs and clutches, in a moment I can only describe as temporary insanity, I sold the car. Didn't take me long to realise it was one of the worst decisions of my life.
 
Many pining, boost-less years later, around 2005, I could bear it no longer and decided to do it all over again, only this time it would be on the cheap, so when a draw-through turbo setup became available I quickly snapped it up, ditched the draw-through manifold & SU carby, and built the crossover pipe and plenum which mounted onto the original Escort 32/36 Weber carby. All this was strapped to a rebuilt bog standard engine with absolutely nothing done to it apart from a rebore and new oversize cast pistons & rings. Crank was fine, so in went a new set of bearings, reused the original oil pump, new set of gaskets and slapped it together. The head I used was already ported with oversize valves, but they were not stainless steel. Cam was another Wade turbo grind. Compression Ratio was lowered using a 1mm copper decompression plate between the block and head-gasket. I had the distributor once again recurved by Frank, who was now working from home and didn't have a dyno, so the jetting was done by myself using a combination of seat-of-pants and reading of the plugs. The turbo was the same spec T03 with external waste-gate, again adjustable from 9 PSI (had a heavier spring in it) all the way to BANG, and again, turbo surge would hit with a vengeance at 18 PSI. 0-100 km/h was done in 4 seconds flat, again with a 3.54:1 diff, and she spun to 7000 RPM just as easily as the first engine, but only in 1st and 2nd, as I never tried in 3rd or 4th, but I'm sure it would have. Older. Wiser. Yada yada... The photo I listed in my previous post is the 2nd cheaper engine.
 
In the end, the performance of the 2 engines were near identical, and the driving experience was just as exhilarating, if not more so the 2nd time around as the car I built the cheap engine for was an ex club-car RS2000 and handled far better than my 1st one which had all the money thrown on the motor. I didn't blow any gearboxes of diffs thanks to gentler, older driving, but clutches were still a problem. The only other issue I had was as discussed in the above link. After opening the carby numerous times in order to get the jetting correct, it was proving difficult to get a reliable seal between the body and the top of the carby, and eventually the gasket got a habit of blowing out as the boost got wound up. Apart from that, it ran beautifully for around 16,000 km, at which point the cast pistons finally gave up. The constant high boost ended up compressing the pistons, clamping the top ring and restricting their ability to seal properly, and very quickly power died off and piston ring blow-by increased. Had I not installed the in-cabin adjuster, and left it at 9 PSI constantly, I have no doubt that the engine would have lasted just as long as if it had not been boosted, but once you've tasted higher boost, it's near impossible to stop reaching for more. In the end, it only got wound down in the wet, and even then, 9 PSI was too much.
 
The car was sold off long ago, but I still have the engine, turbo and running gear tucked away next to all my other goodies waiting for the day when I can start all over again, only this time, better.

Nice sounds like you had a lot of fun with it and alot if experimenting. Learn the right way without conputer technology! .

My engine pictured is bone stock and 10 to 12 years old .very cheap set up and its very reliable.

My last pinto in the late 90's early 2000 i built started of draw thru with a single su carb. But i ran nitrous direct fogger kit and used it as anti lag .setup through a hobb switch to turn off after 7 psi. And ran to 12psi. Never dynoed it but it ran 13.4 in a mk2 at the strip.

I then changed it to blow thru and put a 2 barrel holley on it. No intercooler . 12 psi it went 140 rwks at low revs 5500 cam went to 7000. All this done on a cast piston standard rods and crank only work being mild port job double valve springs and a crow 26661 cam.

So back to the track and it destroyed the heavy duty clutch. So in went a brass button 4 puk clutch. Back to track again and first pass snapped all 6 flywheel bolts out the back of the crank. Upgrade again ended up modifying crank and uses Cleveland flywheel bolts. All sweet front mount added and some more boost 18 psi it went 178 rwks. By that time we had no track to race at so it was never raced. And i sold the car.

The one u see in thread is being built just to cruise and maybe enjoy occasional track day its no power house but can still be alot of fun. And if they are well built and tuned right no exotic motor is needed.

A mate of mine back in the 80s built a draw-draw set-up after I took him for a ride in mine. He had a hiflow T03/T04 hybrid sucking through an SU and he would wind it up to 24 PSI regularly. We swapped cars a few times, just for comparison, and his car pulled harder than mine, as you would expect running the extra boost, but the responsiveness of the draw-through system was horrible. It felt like there was a rubber band in the throttle cable and the carby took a second or so to respond to the throttle being floored. Makes sense using a fogger NOS kit. Did you find this the case between the draw-through and blow-through?
 
I've got a 26661 grind cam which I have run without boost, but never boosted. What did it perform like and did you ever run a standard cam to compare it against?
 
I too in the end went with a solid centre button clutch on my 1st engine and it was not only the last clutch I bought, but the only one that held up. Took a bit of practice to engage from standstill, but once you got the hang of it, it was OK, but I'd never call it smooth.
 
Both engines ran their exhaust systems down the passenger side, just like a factory Escort. 1st engine was 2.5 inch non mandrel bent with only a single muffler in the original location under the rear seat. Sounded deep and throaty yet very quiet. 2nd engine was 3 inch mandrel bent with both a muffler and resonator. I had read that 3 inch systems were prone to droning, but I thought I'd give it a go anyway. Big mistake. Anything over 90 km/h and it was like driving while sitting inside a bass drum. I still have the full 3 inch system, which comprises a 3 inch dump pipe from the back of the turbo to about level with the top of the sump, then bolt on from there. Did it this way to avoid having the joining flange under the car due to already tight clearances. If I build another one I plan on using the 3 inch dump pipe then reducing to a 2.5 inch system from there and will just run it down the driver's side as I don't have a drop tank.
 
And I absolutely agree with you. If they are well built and tuned right no exotic motor is needed.

The biggest difference from draw thru to blow thru was the lag or lack of lag. No comparison . The change in driveability after changing to blow thru was phenomenal. Hence why i had nos on the draw thru setup to eliminate lag.



The 26661 cam responds well to turbo charging due to its wide lsa of 112. Most of the kent or known na cams have a narrower lsa. This might make better power on a na engine but on a bosted engine they are far from ideal. Should be aiming for a 112-114 lsa. numbers are on the board with this type of cam with turbo charging so I'd definitely use it again.

Yes compared to stock made a heap more power

I have recently ordered another 26661 and valve springs and are going to do it all again like the last engine i had.so will be good to compare the drive ability this time round too.

I have done similar to you with the 3 inch dump flanged it up higher aswell due to clearance . I run 3inch dump a 3 inch pipe to straight thru/hot dog before diff. Then a 2.5 muffler and pipe out the back. I would say its very quiet and no droning at all at cruise speeds. But when that external gate opens its a different note all together.
The old car ran 2.5 all the way with just 1 single muffler if anything thst was more droning compared to 3 with 2 mufflers.

Wat size id pipe is your turbo manifold. ?

I have tried 2 sizes 1/1/2 and 1/1/4 steam pipe as pictured in one of my earlier pics.

TT331
The biggest difference from draw thru to blow thru was the lag or lack of lag. No comparison . The change in driveability after changing to blow thru was phenomenal. Hence why i had nos on the draw thru setup to eliminate lag.

 
That's exactly what my mate with the draw-through set-up said after taking my car for a spin. The difference in response is night and day.

My first engine started off with a steam pipe manifold topped with a turbo off a factory Nissan Bluebird running the standard internal waste-gate. I then bought the Garret split-port cast manifold and T03 with the external waste-gate and fell in love with the in-cabin adjustability. Not sure what ID pipes are used in the manifold I've currently got, but it looks pretty much exactly the same as the first manifold I had made, only with an external waste-gate.
 
This is about the best photo I've got of my current manifold with the waste-gate visible underneath.
 

 

looks good jeff cant wait till we are both boosting them, 
good to see you  with an escort again