Ford Duratec-HE Engine Swap

[seagrey]

Max_Torque said:

Speak for yourself lol!

I have spent too much time to think about doing powertrain calibration for Ford over the last 15 years! And, although i have not been directly involved with the duratc 2.0 / 1.8, they will be calibrated to the same calibration guides / procedure as all Ford powertrain platforms. So, they WILL have a 15% rich adaption limit, and the WILL set a "lean limit trim code" at between 10 and 12% (long term adaption).

You can estimate the differences between the ignition maps as a proportional change based on burn rate. I'm not going to bother to calc the differences, but suffice to say i would expect approx a 3 to 5% error in the MBT timing, and as much as 8% in the BLD portions.

The manifold filling model will be wrong by the ratio of diff in CC / diff in intake manifold volume.


But as i mentioned early, i'm sure that if you stick a 2.0 on a 1.8 map it will run, and the "average" driver probably won't spot the difference (without being able to A-B-A test the results back to back). What it won't be however is as "good" as using the proper 2.0 calibration.

Thats just the point any estimation makes a theory imprecise.
theory by defenition means to come to a conclusion based on evidence collected,it cant be considered accurate until tested,thats why its a theory.
if theories were so accurate given that some companies spend billions on theoretical models to assess out comes of certain designs why do they then still go ahead and build those designs then spend more billions developing them,changing and retesting? then redesigning them,surely by your thinking all that could be theorised?
and once the theory is out the way its straight to the production line.(bit like tvr)BTW the manifolds are the same part for both capacities.

[Mr2Mike]

seagrey said:

Thats just the point any estimation makes a theory imprecise.

I really don't understand what you are saying here. You can make perfectly useful estimates based on known theory and experience, exactly as MT has done.

[seagrey]

Mr2Mike said:

I really don't understand what you are saying here. You can make perfectly useful estimates based on known theory and experience, exactly as MT has done.

im not denying that you cant make a good estimate of the outcome of any given situation given enough information.
If you dont have all the precise facts,then test your theory it will always be an assumption given by experience.
If I said to a builder I want a roof fitted that about 20`X30` he will give me a rough estimate if I said 19`6"X29`2" he would give me a better estimate,if I told him excactly how many tiles he would need then it would be even better,bearing in mind none of us know the EXCACT amount of tiles needed then its always an estimate until he gets up there and nails them on and thats simple maths.
Estimating/theorising a certain outcome and actually getting that outcome,specifically in a modern car when there are a multitude of variables involved is always going to be hit or miss or there would be no need to develope anything after the design/theory stage.


In theory if you spoke to Ford the car wouldn`t run,let alone go up the road but it does in reality,and has been for 5 years.a bee in theory shouldnt be able to fly but it does.

[cristival]

seagrey said:

I have done excact same swap a few times. T
The 1.8 seems a bit harder to find,don`t bother swapping the ecu it is just going to cost you money reprogramming it to your car the original ecu runs them perfectly well.

Hello everybody,

does anybody know if it is possible to interchange a Ford Ti-VCT 1.6 engine with another one, but with other code ?
I have a broken KGBA engine and I find only used engines with different codes like: PNBA, PNDA, IQDB, IQDA, RHBA..etc

My car is a Mondeo MK IV, 1.6 Estate, 2011, 120 HP. The other engines have 115 or 125 HP.

Do you know if they are compatible ?

many thanks,
Cristian