RWD Duratec DOHC V6 again.

I might have access DOHC Duratec V6 complete with the rest of the car it came in for reasonable money. Mention was made in another thread that the manual transmission out of a Lincoln LS would bolt up. Is the Lincoln LS engine the same as a Sable engine? Are all Duratec bellhousing patterns the same? The engine in question is a 1996. The transmission in question would be a 2000-2006

The Lincoln LS V6 bellhousing. This is an automatic, I would assume the manual is the same.

Duratec 3.0, I can't tell if this is the DOHC or not.

Anyone ever put eyes on one of these. They look kind of close, but it's hard to tell from a picture.

Starter is definitely in the wrong spot. The FWD has a solid wall of transmission where the RWD starter is. The FWD starter, I recall, mounts to the transmission and looks a lot like an RX-2 starter but backwards.

That's not to say that it won't work, since in both cases the starter attaches to the trans, not the engine.

Have you priced LS transmissions? That alone was enough to quash my RWD 3.4V8 plans.

In reply to Knurled:

The LS manual transmissions, on Car-Part, start in the $350 range. That's not stupid expensive. I've spent more on worse.

The Duratec 2.5, 3.0, and 3.4 DOHC should have matching patterns. Makes me think the 3.0 DOHC should match up, too.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_bellhousing_patterns

Use this info at your own risk.

And in retrospect, all that would look mighty nice under the hood of my Ranger.

Rangers deserve the v6 sho engines.....

The v6 in the LS is different, but the bell housing is the same. There's a guy on shoforum posting up pictures of a 3.4L into a falcon like cutter just sold.

N Sperlo wrote: The Duratec 2.5, 3.0 V6's, and 3.4V8 DOHC should have matching patterns. Makes me think the 3.0 DOHC should match up, too. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_bellhousing_patterns Use this info at your own risk.

Slightly more info to your post.

That being said- should is the operative word- I'm not totally sure.

edit- choice of engine wise- SHO vs. Duratec- the SHO has a lot more panache, but heat do head, the Duratec is a great motor, and has been used in the aftermarket a lot. Heck, a transverse manual version was used in a supercar.

And I thought I had heard rumors of other transmissions bolting to it.... they may just be rumors, but it was the internet...

http://www.key-ideas.com/DGKurTwo2112402Update.html

Quad4Rods offers a T5 bellhousing adapter. Giving me nasty thoughts of a 3.4 V8 in a Miata.

http://www.quad4rods.com/index.php?page=shop.browse&category_id=2&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=100041

In reply to JeffHarbert:

$781.25 for a bellhousing! Madness.

Yes, they are the same. You would have to use the Lincoln starter with the Lincoln trans, but it will bolt up.

And to answer an earlier question, yes, all of the duratec V6 bell housings are the same, except for the '07 up 3.5L (MKZ, MKX, Taurus, Edge, Flex, etc.). I'm not positive, but I'm guessing that the MKS 3.7L is similar to the 3.5L. Oh, and the early 2.5L duratecs are missing a bolt hole or two, but they'll still bolt up.

In reply to alfadriver:

Should isn't the operative word.....the 3.4L V8 is just a duratec with fancy heads and cams that break and destroy the whole engine.

I figured I would link some pictures from the guy's build thread over on shoforum

This might end up helping someone here out with choices of things. He was adapting a 4sp auto to his though using that t5 plate.

Acuronda @ shoforum said: I chose and automatic because I had not done anything with them before and I intended the Falcon to be a easy driver that I have no intention of driving in competition. I put a T5 in my SHO V6 powered '36 Ford and have enjoyed that but it was time for a new challenge. The 4r70w was chosen because it is of the same vintage as the engine and is a 4 speed so I was thinking that would simplify the electronic control of it (hopefully) using the stock engine computer. Also, they are strong, plentiful, good aftermarket support and relatively cheap. I looked at the Lincoln LS trannys but the automatic is a 5 speed and the manual has a 1:1 fifth gear which would make rearend gear selection difficult. I used a 4r70w from a 5.0 engined car because I found a site where someone had adapted a 5.0 T5 to a Duratec V6 which shares the bellhousing bolt pattern with the SHO V8. A 4.6 trans has a different bolt pattern than the 5.0 but it may have worked, too. I went with what I knew would work. I used a T5 bellhousing to dial in the adapter plate because it is short and has a large hole in the center to dial in to. The crank adapter was made to make up for the thickness of the adapter plate and to center the torque converter hub. The knob on the end of the SHO crank had to be ground off and the end of the crank opened up for clearance for the hub. I got lucky on the flexplate because '99 and '00 4.6 Mustang engines had an 8 bolt crank which was the same pattern as the SHO. Later ones have a 6 bolt crank. This necessitated the use of a Mustang 4.6 torque converter. A Mustang starter bolted up to the tranny bellhousing and lined up with the ring gear as long as the thin steel motor plate was left out.

I bet you need to be logged in at shoforum to see those pictures.

EDIT: I see them now, Thanks yamaha!

In reply to RossD:

I'll save and rehost them for you guys Just give me a few

How does the Mustang 3.7 relate to the rest of the duratecs?

In reply to DILYSI Dave:

All the rumors I've heard claim the bellhousing is different....I was hoping to be able to just "bolt up" the 3.7's 6sp to the 3.4L v8

Also, pictures are fixed......well, should be

DILYSI Dave wrote: How does the Mustang 3.7 relate to the rest of the duratecs?

If it's the same as the 3.5L duratec(which I'm guessing it is), it's different.

DILYSI Dave wrote: How does the Mustang 3.7 relate to the rest of the duratecs?

It has six cylinders in a vee configuration.

Here's another question. If the LS transmission will bolt up, what do you use for a flywheel. Everything I found today says the LS manual flywheel is unobtainable. What other FWD car used a manual flywheel with the Duratec V6? What are the chances the starter will engage?

Depends on if Mazda made the Mazda6 available with a manual. The transverse Duratec offerings were Tauruses/Sables (yeah, not happening) and Escape/Tribute/Land Rover somethingorother. Oh, and Jag X-type.

From what I understand, the old 2.5 is not quite the same engine as this one, so this may or may not rule out the Contour/Mystique/Cougar which WERE all available with manual/V6.

FWIW - When I was looking for transmissions, I actually wanted the autobox. It's easy to control with aftermarket shift controllers, and they made it have 5 gears with electrons so the 1-2 shift was absurdly close, but just PERFECT for the kinds of motorsport where you never see much over 60mph.

The 2.5 duratec flywheel might work.....that's how a couple 5sp v8 sho's came into existance

So what kind of specs are we talking about for these engines?

The Mazda 6 was available with the 3.0 and a 5 speed.

Here is a Contour flywheel. It's much cheaper.

I think I can work with that.

Next question. Is the ECU going to be looking for input from the automatic transmission? Will it throw a code if there isn't an auto? Will that code throw the ECU into a limp mode? I'd rather get it up and running with the OEM ECU. Fighting a Megasquirt and all the mechanics at the same time would kind of suck.

This is interesting.

Duratec 3.0L V6 140 'Race Supalite'

(Rear Wheel Drive) Lightweight billet steel Single piece design integral teeth Suits 140mm / 5.5" clutch type Dynamically balanced Weight: 3.6Kg Part number: 0869

I wonder what transmission they are using.

Edit, this is for the Jag S-Type. It was available with a 5 speed. They are pretty pricey.

I would have thought it was the same transmission as the LS. I thought they were on the same chassis.