Close



Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: 200 inline 6

  1. #1

    Default 200 inline 6

    Hello, is there anyway to increase power from an Ď82 200 inline 6 without doing anything major? I know itís about 87 hp and about 154 ft-tq. with an automatic you lose some more power (c5). itís a pretty slow car but it will pull. It has a smog pump as well. Just thinking. Maybe timing adjustments? Ignition module change? (Since itís original I donít know if it loses its power as well)



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Aaron558; 07-15-2018 at 01:12 AM.

  2. #2
    1978 Mercury Zephyr boxtop 5.0 EFI T5Z 8.8
    1999 Ford Contour 2.5 V6 5 speed
    2016 Ford Focus ST 2.0 Ecoboost 6 speed

  3. #3
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    2,914

    Default

    At Fordsix.com, both Bill the Distrubtor man wsa111 billythedistributorman@live.com


    (and especially FalconSedanDelivery,




    a Supercharged FE engine and Duraspark ignition guru from Freeburg Pa)...these are the guys to chatt with.

    the ignition is what makes a good Ford in line Six stand up. If it likes 28 degree initail timing, then don't be afraid to see if it likes less or a lttle more.

    Before you fiddle with the air fuel ratios, grab a timing light, and re-baseline again the advance curve stuff like cr_bobcat did.

    https://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?f=...555788#p555788

    #7 by cr_bobcat Ľ Fri Aug 15, 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by cr_bobcat
    Alright, the results for timing events with vacuum disconnected are in:

    RPM Timing Vacuum
    -------------------------
    1000 17 0
    1250 19 DNM
    1500 25 DNM
    1750 31 5"
    2000 33 7"
    2250 33 8"
    2500 33 9"

    I forgot to look at my vacuum gauge for a couple of measurements. I didn't have time this morning to shut it down and tee into a manifold vacuum source, but do these ported values look healthy or not?

    It looks like I have about 16/17* of mechanical advance and then about the same 16/17* of vacuum advance. Appears that vacuum starts to kick in at around 1600-1700. Looks like I'm all in, mechanically, at 2000 RPM. I'm wondering if my numbers are a tad off because I've typically heard mechanical to be in the 20-24* range and vacuum to be 12-16*. Do I need to slow down and retake these measurements?

    Obviously, there is some variability in the measurements since this is me eyeballing something and I can very much see how a Sun machine would help out in tuning these things down to the gnats arse. That being said, I think I will definitely go forward with doing the mods myself until such time as I build up the new engine. With that I think I'll want to eeck every last ounce out of her and will only want to incur the cost of the recurve once. The local guy here doesn't even have his machine at the shop anymore because of lack of use so I may have to be talking to one of you guys to help me out when that time comes.

    Quote Originally Posted by cr_bobcat
    Alright. I've done some digging. And for the interim I am going to try to get my setup to here:

    37-38* of total advance
    20* of mechanical starting ~1100, all in ~2500
    17-18* static advance, which is basically where I am today, but slightly more aggressive
    I am going to try to limit my vacuum advance to 12* since I don't have an EGR
    Cam: unknown, assume stock
    CR: unknown, assume stock but slightly worse

    Granted, this probably isn't perfect but I think it will give me just a touch more uuumph. For those watching from home, I'm following the guidelines here:

    http://www.firstfives.org/faq/timing...ed_engines.PDF
    http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2000/03/timing/
    http://www.73-87.com/7387garage/drivetrain/hei.htm

    The numbers I'm going with are coming from a number of other locations but I thought these links above were pretty decent for a part-time weekend grease monkey. Not knowing what my internals are is leading me to extrapolate data from others, but basically all in my head right now. Maybe this week I'll spend some quality time with matlab and try to truly narrow things down with some fancyarse plots.

    I'm down with wsa111 and FalconSedanDelivery doing their thing. And will be hitting them up for a proper curve when the heavy work needs to get done. If I can get about 1 sigma of what they bring to the table I'll call it a win for now. Reading ain't doing, you can't replace real experience.

    :beer:

  4. #4
    FEP Member brianj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Raymond, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,890
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    What vehicle is this?
    1983 Mustang G.T. No-option stripper- I like strippers.
    5.0, GT40P heads, Comp Cams XE270HR-12 on 1.6 rockers, TFI spring kit, Weiand 174 blower, Holley 750 mechanical secondarys, Mishimoto radiator, Edelbrock street performer mechanical pump, BBK shortys, T-5 conversion, 8.8 rear, 3.73 gears, carbon fiber clutches, SS Machine lowers, Maximum Motorsport XL subframes, "B" springs.

  5. #5
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    2,914

    Default

    ex DSO - 52 Los Angeles 1982 Capri L 3.3 C5 auto low mount block Three door hatch.

    Was two tone Medium French Vanilla on Black and cool as heck, now metalic blue.



    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron558 View Post
    Hereís a pic from 1984-ish. My great grandma bought the car new. Still have the hubcaps

  6. #6

    Default 200 inline 6

    .....
    Last edited by Aaron558; 07-17-2018 at 01:28 AM.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron558 View Post
    Hello, is there anyway to increase power from an Ď82 200 inline 6 without doing anything major? I know itís about 87 hp and about 154 ft-tq. with an automatic you lose some more power (c5). itís a pretty slow car but it will pull. It has a smog pump as well. Just thinking. Maybe timing adjustments? Ignition module change? (Since itís original I donít know if it loses its power as well)



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Do the basics. Get a 2-barrel adaptor for the one if so equipped and free the exhaust. With an 82 you may not need to worry about emissions, so think about ditching that. YES, I am a guy who loves the earth and trees, but your SIX can run as clean as 90% of the cars on the road with a lot of that so-called SMOG stuff gone. A good running engine is cleaner than a so-so smog motor. Yes I have checked that with Baylor University years ago and my Ford 289 modified Hot Rod motor in a 1932 Ford show-winning coupe. Keep the PCV and tune it for best running with a vacuum gauge. My 65 200 SIX Mustang has only a Positive Crankcase Ventilator and runs great. Can you run better without a mask...so can a car. When you need to belch/fart do you feel better afterwards? So does your car. Intake/exhaust restrictions hurt power/MPG/Torque...so think that when you modify. OH, I am an ASE certified engine mechanic, charter president of the Dallas Area Street Rods, 75 years old, spent 50+ years building cars "frame up", and I am a retired federally licensed gunsmith.

  8. #8
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    2,914

    Default

    The engine falls flat at 2800 rpm to 3600, and then dies from 3600 to 5300rpm.


    It's carb flows 195 cfm, and is quite reasonable, but one point of fuel dispersal reduces the power because of unequal concentration times. The head flows quite well, but the single point 1-bbl intake design looses hp because the no two cylinders recieve anything like the same air fuel mixture. The emission package is fine, but not many distributor recurvers like any of the 85 emission devices, and current thought is no different to what it was in 1967-69 when Air Pumps and Thermactors hit California, or 1975 when cats came out, or in 1980, when the more strict California upper and lower AiR injection and bowl vent carbs came out.

    All of it is seen as Emissions Junk from gormless law pleasing Detriot Enginners.

    No one understands the primary light off catalyst, as your car has two of them. If you start lopping off systems like an ardent Johnny Appleseed in reverse, you have to figure out what your saying no to on the warm up phase.


    The solution is the remove the camshaft timing gear set, and install the pre-emission type without retard. Then buy or recondition the front pulley/balancer/harmonic balancer. Then pop in a ClaySmith 264 cam on a wide lob center of 112. Then cut off the 1-bbl mount with a cut-off disk and add a 2-bbl Ford Carpenter 366 V8 2-bbl 2380EG carb, and find the right valve springs, retainers/keepers and buy some SI valves.

    The linkage to control the C5 and the Holley 2-bbl 1.38 carb that was used for those Big Block trucks would be the Lockar HT36.


    Then have the head skimmed, and install a Victor Reinz gasket. Check the pistons and cylinder bores.

    The exhaust can stay as it is. If the primary catayst is blocked or the grid has burnt out, you can gut it.

    Air Pumps are minimal loss, EGR is a fuel economy aid, and all the emission systems can be dealt with in accordance with your desires. I'd personally keep it all.



    The 3.3 emissions pacakage was and still is state of the 1980 to 1983 art. Any engine that can be started cold after siting a year, and then idles, warms up, and runs without temprament is working fine.

    What Ford didn't do with the 3.3 is make it a balls out Performance engine like the 1980 351 HO, or 1982-1985 2 and 4V 5.0's.

    It was the lamest Ford engine ever because FoMoCo USA did nothing to that engine from 1965 to 1983, except refine the emissions equipement and downgrade some parts, while upgrading the igntion, carb and cylinder head porting. Its a boat anchor.

    The same year Australian 3.3 made 121 hp, and did 17.9 second quater miles with a 5 speed gearbox that used only 2200 rpm to cruise at 65 mph. Top wack was 111 mph, and about 31 US mpg at 62 mph. The Australians improved the intake manifold and head, 2-bbl-ed the engine, and it usd the same emissions package. When downgraded to unleaded gas in 1986-1992, it made just as much power, went as fast as quickly, and used the same amount of gas on 87 octane as it did on 97 leaded gas.

    Emssions equipment...its a dirty Job but someones gotta do it....

  9. #9

    Default

    xctasy, you are right about the Ford 3.3 engine...it is lame. However, as a daily driver my 65 Mustang with automatic, air, 2-speed wipers/washers and 14" wheels is okay for daily use...NOT racing. After .060" bore, opening up the exhaust, installing an Autolite 2100 Annular Atomization 2-barrel with a fabricated cool-air intake, Pertronix trigger, ACCEL coil and doing minor head work, it runs great. Adding front disc brakes, 15" wheels, rear sway-bar, gas shocks, poly bushings, GT springs, Monte Carlo bar, export brace and lowering it 1", I love the little SIX! Understand, I am an old drag racer who raced a 40 Ford coupe with a corvette 283 highly modified with 4-speed. I always built V8's but when I retired I began to look at little motors as a challenge. I am now installing a Ford 2.3 in a 67 Sunbeam Alpine, and the mods are still...better breathing (intake/exhaust), better fuel mixture (carb), better burning (hot ignition at the right time) and matching parts for the purpose one is building. STREET is NOT STRIP! Too many guys don't think about this and running clean is very important because I breathe the same air as my grandchildren and tree-huggers. My 2.3 will probably make 110 HP and run clean with overdrive getting mid 30's MPG doing 2900 RPM at 75 MPH. It ain't rocket science but it is science.Name:  IMG_1743.jpg
Views: 120
Size:  128.7 KB

  10. #10

    Default

    I dig it. Are you local to metro Detroit, I'd like to learn some things on my 4 days off from work lol

    Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    FEP Member Patrick Olsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Where the Navy sends me...
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    ... a balls out Performance engine like the 1980 351 HO, or 1982-1985 2 and 4V 5.0's.
    Tee hee hee!!
    '89 GT convertible - not a four-eye
    '82 Zephyr Z7 - future track car

  12. #12

    Default

    Advance the timing and ensure your EGR valve is working correctly, My EGR was not closing completely and my 82 notch ran like crap with no power. if it's a CA car then you have to deal with the CA only non adjustable carb. After those you are stuck spending money on a 2V carb, early timing chain set to advance the cam, header and exhaust. They can be made to run with a lot of $. The last one I built made 444whp and 501 ft lbs with 18lbs of boost.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •