Possible headgasket failure...
Discussion
great stuff you'll soon be back on the road mate! Thats a very healthy looking top end there zig. 
No excessive carbon deposits on the valves or piston tops. It doesn't look like its been cleaned up by the garage dudes yet neither.
Internet diagnostics are very difficult and no good for your health.
Shoot the doom sayers and only believe what you see.
Seems the only head that is cracked is the one on your shoulders
No excessive carbon deposits on the valves or piston tops. It doesn't look like its been cleaned up by the garage dudes yet neither. Internet diagnostics are very difficult and no good for your health.
Shoot the doom sayers and only believe what you see. Seems the only head that is cracked is the one on your shoulders
....mrzigazaga said:
Hi Peeps..It seems that ever since i changed the inlet manifold i have been losing water somewhere..There is none in the oil..No sweet water coming out of the exhaust...No wet patches on the floor or white marks around or near anything..I did use some gasket seal on the gaskets, Not loads..I have re-tightened the bolts on the manifold as they needed a tweak..I am losing around a third to a half of a header tank each time i drive it..
I am coming into this thread a bit late. 
Sorry. I read the key part of your post with interest.These engines are notoriously pesky about finding their proper coolant level..whether you use your coolant system in a overflow or an expansion mode. The upper rad hose is a bubble maker. Even if you rock the car throughly after filling it with coolant, there will be still air left in the system. As soon as your engine reaches a decent temperature, it will escape and the coolant that replaces it will drop the coolant level. I do the best I can to rid the system of air and then fill the reservoir and let it find its happy level over the next 2-3 drives. That happy level is normally 1/3 of the header tank.
Yet you speak of losing a 1/3 to 1/2 of the header tank. How full are you filling it?
P.
plushuit said:
you speak of losing a 1/3 to 1/2 of the header tank. How full are you filling it?
Hi Mate..It normally levels just below where the plastic marker is..Pretty much where it should be..And if i do over-fill it always finds the same level..Up until the discovery of a leaky head gasket it was losing a good half sometimes all of the header tank..I know what you mean about the top hose being a bubble maker, At one point i was going to fit the cooling fan thermo switch into the bottom hose so i can set it just after the thermostat opens up..But it does work ok when i dont lose water..Hopefully those problems are history as from tomorrow..Cheers..ZigaEdited by mrzigazaga on Thursday 29th March 23:23
Good news !!
Looks good from the photos, no obvious corrosion around the waterway holes or cyl bores, so good to reassemble.
Again we have the 'change to carbs' viewpoint. I don't know why this persists - sure if you want to go nuts, you can go that way, but it's a sh.tload of money, and there's nothing wrong with the 'K' system, even Turbo Capri kept it, with nearly all standard parts, and good for 200bhp.
a single 38 DGAS from an older Granny is cheap if you can find one, but power drops noticeably.
Yeah, OK, if you start to fiddle with cams, heads, it's not easy to recalibrate like carbs, but then I would go to an electronic system with a EEC-IV modifier plugin - the bits are there to bolt on (but not common - the very first Scorpios were 2.8 EEC-IV)
Just being grumpy and supporting the 'why change' side.....
Looks good from the photos, no obvious corrosion around the waterway holes or cyl bores, so good to reassemble.
Again we have the 'change to carbs' viewpoint. I don't know why this persists - sure if you want to go nuts, you can go that way, but it's a sh.tload of money, and there's nothing wrong with the 'K' system, even Turbo Capri kept it, with nearly all standard parts, and good for 200bhp.
a single 38 DGAS from an older Granny is cheap if you can find one, but power drops noticeably.
Yeah, OK, if you start to fiddle with cams, heads, it's not easy to recalibrate like carbs, but then I would go to an electronic system with a EEC-IV modifier plugin - the bits are there to bolt on (but not common - the very first Scorpios were 2.8 EEC-IV)
Just being grumpy and supporting the 'why change' side.....
Its all good info but in reality i have looked at most of the options..Burton do a triple carb inlet manifold..Price..
..3 X Carbs...Price......Engine rebuild...Same price as a fitted turbo and its one or the other, Both come to..£5K..on an engine.....How much for a mustang V6 5.0..
..Gearbox...Prop and driveshafts..Ignition and anchillaries......The turbo option is more affordable and it can run on stock parts up to 200bhp..There was an "Ultimax" 2.8i that was 3.7ltr but that wernt cheap to build..I think if anything the turbo is a good option..The supercharger would be better for constant power but the fuel will go through the roof....I think i will just enjoy as is for now..
...Cheers..Ziga
..3 X Carbs...Price......Engine rebuild...Same price as a fitted turbo and its one or the other, Both come to..£5K..on an engine.....How much for a mustang V6 5.0....Gearbox...Prop and driveshafts..Ignition and anchillaries......The turbo option is more affordable and it can run on stock parts up to 200bhp..There was an "Ultimax" 2.8i that was 3.7ltr but that wernt cheap to build..I think if anything the turbo is a good option..The supercharger would be better for constant power but the fuel will go through the roof....I think i will just enjoy as is for now.....Cheers..ZigaZig, in case it helps, some rough rules of thumb I remember from stone age auto engineering a long time ago.....
A turbo adds the equivalent of 50% engine capacity (at 6lbs, approx half atmosphere boost)
and apart from turbo lag (and such) behaves as if it had that 50% extra, power and economy, but not from low end. (So 2.8 goes to 4.2, or same as 4.0 Cologne)
A Supercharger adds more like 75%-100% engine capacity (depending on boost) also power and economy
but is *FAR* better at low end, no turbo lag, and power right from idle. (so 2.8 goes to 5.0 +). There are low boost superchargers which run at 5-6lbs.
But a lightly driven 5.0 V8 isn't all THAT much heavier on gas, economy is far more dependent on how you drive, and weight and drag of vehicle, and only a (relatively) small amount on engine efficiency.
So if you can resist the extra power under your right foot, it's not necessarily going to turn into a gas guzzler.
Yes, yes everybody can argue about bhp and torque and V8 versus V6, but these are just rough rules, nothing more....
A turbo adds the equivalent of 50% engine capacity (at 6lbs, approx half atmosphere boost)
and apart from turbo lag (and such) behaves as if it had that 50% extra, power and economy, but not from low end. (So 2.8 goes to 4.2, or same as 4.0 Cologne)
A Supercharger adds more like 75%-100% engine capacity (depending on boost) also power and economy
but is *FAR* better at low end, no turbo lag, and power right from idle. (so 2.8 goes to 5.0 +). There are low boost superchargers which run at 5-6lbs.
But a lightly driven 5.0 V8 isn't all THAT much heavier on gas, economy is far more dependent on how you drive, and weight and drag of vehicle, and only a (relatively) small amount on engine efficiency.
So if you can resist the extra power under your right foot, it's not necessarily going to turn into a gas guzzler.
Yes, yes everybody can argue about bhp and torque and V8 versus V6, but these are just rough rules, nothing more....
RCK974X said:
A Supercharger adds more like 75%-100% engine capacity (depending on boost) also power and economy
but is *FAR* better at low end, no turbo lag, and power right from idle. (so 2.8 goes to 5.0 +). There are low boost superchargers which run at 5-6lbs.
What few (if any) installations seem to include these days is a clutch to allow you to disconnect the supercharger drive and run unboosted. You'd think it'd be a great selling point, the family car that does 100mpg around town for mum but turns into a fire-breathing dragon for dad...but is *FAR* better at low end, no turbo lag, and power right from idle. (so 2.8 goes to 5.0 +). There are low boost superchargers which run at 5-6lbs.
RCK974X said:
I'll always remember that little scene in Mad Max where Mel Gibson switches in the supercharger and the 'whoosh' sound, (even though it was all fake !!).
Wasnt that the NOS?...."Take a week off max, Grow a beard"..All of the mad max films were awesome..Just how life should be!!..Competing with road scag...A clutch on a supercharger, Now thats a brilliant idea..You could have a clutch type lever on the gearstick so that in normal operation no supercharger is engaged..Foot clutch in...Hand clutch in..Change down..Or up..Foot down..supercharger on.."I want..I want"...
Thanks for that mate..It seems to have been around for a fair amount of time..
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=c...
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=c...
mrzigazaga said:
Wasnt that the NOS?...."Take a week off max, Grow a beard"..All of the mad max films were awesome..Just how life should be!!..Competing with road scag...
A clutch on a supercharger, Now thats a brilliant idea..You could have a clutch type lever on the gearstick so that in normal operation no supercharger is engaged..Foot clutch in...Hand clutch in..Change down..Or up..Foot down..supercharger on.."I want..I want"...
Was it ?? Hmmmm.... I don't know. I just remember the click and the whoosh, and the supercharger pulley start turning... No worries anyway, we can all dream of a setup like that in our wedges !A clutch on a supercharger, Now thats a brilliant idea..You could have a clutch type lever on the gearstick so that in normal operation no supercharger is engaged..Foot clutch in...Hand clutch in..Change down..Or up..Foot down..supercharger on.."I want..I want"...
Gassing Station | Wedges | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff