RWD Duratec shenanigans

KATYB wrote: no they are not the same engine however it does share the same bolt pattern and there are a few other things thats that can be swapped back and forth.

Are you sure about that? From a post at locostusa.com:

"Okay, so just as a starting point in our wandering wonderings...Here is the spacing, center to center, of the top two bolts in engines I have on stands in my shop. Feel free to add measurements of other engines you may have access to.

Ford FWD 3.0 Duratec in FWD Taurus 3.25"

Ecoboost v6 about 2 3/4 inches between centers of 2 top bolts."

Also, from the Cougar boards:

"person 1: So has anyone checked this engine out yet ?

person 2: It will not work, the bell housing mounting points are different."

I can't remember if the FWD and RWD duratecs have the same bolt patterns or not. I think they do, but if they don't that could be the cause of some people saying the 2.5/3Ls and the 3.5/3.7Ls have the same bolt pattern and some saying they don't.

(this post was edited a couple of times because I confused myself).

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

Duratec adapter plate the owner fabricated to connect a T5 transmission and bellhousing.

It also required a custom flywheel http://www.key-ideas.com/DGKurTwo2-010503-Update.html

Knurled wrote: Anyone know if there's a RWD trans application for, say, a Duratec V6 out of a Mazda6? Cursory searching reveals nothing substantial other than "d00d just get a 5.0 LOL"

Quad4Rods has a bellhousing to adapt Duratec V6s to a T5. It's not challenge priced ($781) but if you're dead set on using a Duratec in a rear drive application it will offer stronger transmission choices that the LS trans.

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

schmid not sure no havent seen it myself but buddy at ford says they are the same pattern and wikipedia ect says the yare the same.

Hi KatyB, I edited my post because I forgot to add about FWD 3L vs RWD 3L and I think you posted while I was editing it. Hopefully my post didn't come off as snotty or condescending, it wasn't meant to be.

i can only go off the info given to me. i have yet to have my hands on a 3.5 or 3.7 to be sure on things. to be real tho if i had money im sure id be embarking on a 3.5 or 3.7 swap into my current car. i dont always trust info given on forums such as there are people on some forums that believe the 3.0 in an 06 to 09 fusion is completely different than the 3.0 in a first gen mazda 6 (they arent.... oil pan timing cover and valve covers anre wiring harness are diff but engines same same.

What about trying to compare the dust cover sheet metal spacer thingy that goes between the bell and the block of the two engines in question? Junkyard the one and parts window the other and see if the bolt holes line up.

the quad 4 rods box is the the 4cyl mzr duratec. not the v6

No, it's for the V6.

Quad 4 Rods Duratec V6 and SHO V8 to T5 Part # DU6T5

Here's a picture of the RFOB of the 3.5L:

Here's RFOB of the 3L:

The bolt patterns look different.

Don't know if it helps but here is a picture of the MT82 and 6R80. They are used in the 2011+ V-6s, GTs, and Boss 302s. V-6 and V-8 boxes have different gear ratios. The GT500 uses a Tremec TR-6060.

Schmidlap wrote: Quad4Rods has a bellhousing to adapt Duratec V6s to a T5. It's not challenge priced ($781) but if you're dead set on using a Duratec in a rear drive application it will offer stronger transmission choices that the LS trans.

The 5L55 is plenty strong, no need to worry. I'd trust it far longer than I'd trust a T5.

I should preface: Part of the reason I think about engine swaps is because I'm sick of constantly replacing transmissions and would like to just go to an automatic-based unit, but you need V6 or more to make an automatic worthwhile. If I wanted to keep breaking manual transmissions, I'd just as soon stay rotary.

I'm hoping that the use in a Mazda6 will technically count as a "Mazda Engine" for contingency purposes. If not, well, SHO V8s are cheaper and cooler because cheap DOHC V8.

Knurled wrote: I'm hoping that the use in a Mazda6 will technically count as a "Mazda Engine" for contingency purposes. If not, well, SHO V8s are cheaper and cooler because cheap DOHC V8.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but v8 shos are only cheap if still in a car. They have some serious cam issues that require the cams to be welded. I really like that motor though.

Knurled wrote:

Schmidlap wrote: Quad4Rods has a bellhousing to adapt Duratec V6s to a T5. It's not challenge priced ($781) but if you're dead set on using a Duratec in a rear drive application it will offer stronger transmission choices that the LS trans.

The 5L55 is plenty strong, no need to worry. I'd trust it far longer than I'd trust a T5. I should preface: Part of the reason I think about engine swaps is because I'm sick of constantly replacing transmissions and would like to just go to an automatic-based unit, but you need V6 or more to make an automatic worthwhile. If I wanted to keep breaking manual transmissions, I'd just as soon stay rotary. I'm hoping that the use in a Mazda6 will technically count as a "Mazda Engine" for contingency purposes. If not, well, SHO V8s are cheaper and cooler because cheap DOHC V8.

If a decent auto is the goal, what about the 3.9l V8 in the Lincoln? Still a small and light weight engine... (I have NO idea about performance potential, although it's the same family as the Jag and Aston V8's- so performance parts should carry over.)

singleslammer wrote:

Knurled wrote: I'm hoping that the use in a Mazda6 will technically count as a "Mazda Engine" for contingency purposes. If not, well, SHO V8s are cheaper and cooler because cheap DOHC V8.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but v8 shos are only cheap if still in a car. They have some serious cam issues that require the cams to be welded. I really like that motor though.

If you want to go that route, join shoforum and browse for rusty gen 3's.......theres one in ILL with cams welded for under 2500 IIRC.

90% of the cam failures were the reason those ended up in yards. As with the old sho v6, maintence is rediculous, although slightly better. You'll have cam weld, rod bearings, etc.....I don't think you have to reshim those though.

Or better yet, find a really nice running and driving car, pull the engine/trans out, then sell me the shell for pennies. I want a 96-99 to stuff a 3.2L sho v6 in it.....

That 3.9L v8 in the lincoln is decent, but like most jag engines, they're worth more in scrap than fixing

singleslammer wrote: I hate to be the bearer of bad news but v8 shos are only cheap if still in a car. They have some serious cam issues that require the cams to be welded. I really like that motor though.

I probably shouldn't mention this, but I could buy five of them right now for 5.3 money, with warranties.

Why not use the TII transmission? If you are breaking one of those with a rotary, you are doing it wrong.

It is a bolt in affair with the right pieces. Bell housing pattern is the same, you can mix and match teh clutch pieces and have a turbo driveshaft redrilled with the correct bolt pattern. Boom done.

These transmissions go for about $250.00 on ebay or RX7club.com.

Rob R.

TII transmissions shift even worse! Plus the remotely junkyardable driveshaft (I have an FB) turns into a $500 custom unit. No thanks.

Besides, I miss having a manual automatic. What's a missed shift?

Knurled wrote: What's a missed shift?

I don't know, I've never had a problem with them.