In reply to 93EXCivic:
Anyone else picture a blacked-out Ranger with AWD and a turbo'd V6?
In reply to 93EXCivic:
Anyone else picture a blacked-out Ranger with AWD and a turbo'd V6?
Nope. You would have to use the f150 transmission which I think is auto only. No fun...
The Cyclone has a 60deg V-angle. However, it might be too tall to fit in an older sports car with a sloped, low nose (S13, any RX-7) without a domed hood, thanks to being DOHC. I don't know how much it weighs, but the Cyclone long-block is probably 100-200lb lighter than the Coyote long-block, going by the GT and V-6's curb weight difference. AFAIK, most of the weight difference between the V-6 and GT is in the engine.
I can try to get the rough measurements of my Mustang's engine tomorrow. There's quite a bit of space between the radiator and the front of the engine, enough for a turbo or two...
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forums/central-florida-motorsports/353185-official-cfm-performance-3-7l-v6-mustang-single-turbo-thread.html
And I've posted this multiple times before, but it looks like the Cyclone bottom can handle up to 550rwhp safely. The pistons don't last long at 650bhp, though...
grpb wrote: The Ford 'Cyclone' a.k.a the modern D35, 3.5L DOHC V6
Thank you!
Some of us older guys don't call things by the factory codes so we don't know the code names. This one was a new one for me.
In reply to RexSeven:
Also note that they reached 600+ on stock n/a internals in the 3.7L.
The SHO guys seem to have figured out it will kill their awd systems long before the 3.5L internals give out......aside from the rare "cracked piston" occurrence.
I got some rough dimensions for my Mustang's engine. It's about 23" wide by 24" long by 28" tall.
Here are some Chevy dimensions for comparison.
I measured across from one valve cover to the other, from the back of the valve covers to the pulleys, and from the skid plate to the top of the intake manifold (minus 1" for the space between the skid plate and oil pan).
The second post here is close to what I got and the poster claims the engine weighs about 330lb. He didn't mention long- or short-block, though.
Bring this thread back form the dead. Anyone accomplish swapping this engine into anything?
Nobody?
80sFast said:Bring this thread back form the dead. Anyone accomplish swapping this engine into anything?
Almost four years later, I'm here wondering the same thing. With these engines now being in vehicles as much as 12 years old, they should be showing up in U-Pull yards soon.
On a related note, does anyone make a Cyclone to SBF bell adapter?
I suspect that the GM V6 has a better aftermarket as the Miata community has picked it up for swaps. The LS probably fits better in most things as it is.
Seamus' mk2 Escort is powered by one of these with a sequential transmission behind it- it just won the ARA National 2wd Championship, again.
Well there you go! Nice escort!
Toyman01 said:yamaha wrote: In reply to Toyman01: It'll still be slow, but I can guarentee that it would sound better than an lsx......Can't be slower than a blown up 12A and different is good. LSX has been done to death. Granted it's with good reason but I like different. It's a toss up between a 3.4 V8 and a supercharged 3.8 at the moment. Subject to change without notice, of course.
If it is any consideration, supercharged 3.8 will either require parts from Oz or severely hacking the firewall or both. The supercharger/throttle body overhang the bellhousing by a lot in front drive applications.
Seems to me that when I was comparing the Cyclone to the LFX one thing that the Cyclone had going for it was easier engine management in transplant applications.
In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :
Hmm.. I thought the LFX management was pretty much a no brainer - stock ECU can be easily used.
I mean just look at the GRM LFX Miata - it's running the stock ECU and its so strong it's shredding axles 
When I think of "easily swapped into a different chassis" the first thing I think of is GM, and Ford is not on the list.
GM makes life easy because if something is required for the computer to work, those inputs go directly into the computer. The only time this isn't the case I can think of is early drive by wire V8s that had a separate TAC module needed for the throttle body. This was only for a small number of years before they put the throttle control in the engine controller. Later engines have a fuel pump control module, which has its own network lines separate from the normal high speed CAN bus... or you can run the pump full time and use a fuel pressure regulator.
Fords are not always that pleasant.
In reply to singleslammer :
I'd be looking to put it in a '91 F150 as a replacement for the 4.9. I prefer to keep my swaps in the same manufacturer family whenever possible. Isn't the GM V6 direct injection? That's one of the nice things about the Ford 3.7. Even though it's a fairly modern engine it's still FI.
Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:Seems to me that when I was comparing the Cyclone to the LFX one thing that the Cyclone had going for it was easier engine management in transplant applications.
That was what I was thinking, although I'll admit to knowing more about Ford stuff, so I'm biased in that direction. And again, the fact that it's FI rather than DI should make it a "better" swap candidate.
You'll need to log in to post.
