New Radical 3.7 v6
Discussion
ajf said:
Ford racing ecoboost as fitted in 3.5 trim to the f series pick ups in the states
If it is they also do a Twin Turbo version, brilliant bit of packaging, I have said to several people, if mine goes bang it will be replaced one of these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_EcoBoost_engineAdrian W said:
Why? how much? I'm pretty sure you can get them from the states with configurable ECU.
The engine can be a turn key as the ecu only needs 6 feeds to run as the crate engine comes ready to bolt in.But to bolt in to a noble the inlet manifold is to high so means new or replace the clam cover new exhausts and bell houseing plate and custom brackets to and mounts to fit. Might get cheaper if it starts to be used in the USA in a few nobles
it appears the 3.7 is the cyclone engine also known as the ecoboost
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine
designed to have room to bore it to 4.0 litres
i think 4.0 should spool those turbos pretty good !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine
designed to have room to bore it to 4.0 litres
i think 4.0 should spool those turbos pretty good !
Gadgeroonie said:
it appears the 3.7 is the cyclone engine also known as the ecoboost
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine
designed to have room to bore it to 4.0 litres
i think 4.0 should spool those turbos pretty good !
YEP thats correct,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine
designed to have room to bore it to 4.0 litres
i think 4.0 should spool those turbos pretty good !
its fords new range of eco friendly high output engines, and very good ones at that, I was looking at the 3.2L eco boost for a project.
Still have a gearbox prob though, unless its inline mounted, then a hole new world opens up, unfortunately the chassis is to short on the M12 by about 8 inches so it has to be fitted as is.
I have my engine out and I have a few porsche box's lying around and have done some measuring up... and Im very confident I could fit a porsche box behind my V6 with the drive shafts at a good angle.... unfortunately my twin turbo V12 with the porsche box is 6inches too large 
Currently I don't see any point changing the engine... despite the silly power I run, Ive STILL capped the torque and there is loads more to come (the decision not to go further was very hard and I can hardly believe I made it lol)... Ive got huge power over a 4000rpm range so its not a highly strung peaky motor either.
Saying that Ive also not broken a single box yet and Ive run well over 600bhp for years now!
IMO starting development on an all new engine before we have even achieved the potential of our existing one would be a little mad.
Currently I don't see any point changing the engine... despite the silly power I run, Ive STILL capped the torque and there is loads more to come (the decision not to go further was very hard and I can hardly believe I made it lol)... Ive got huge power over a 4000rpm range so its not a highly strung peaky motor either.
Saying that Ive also not broken a single box yet and Ive run well over 600bhp for years now!
IMO starting development on an all new engine before we have even achieved the potential of our existing one would be a little mad.
andygtt said:
I have my engine out and I have a few porsche box's lying around and have done some measuring up... and Im very confident I could fit a porsche box behind my V6 with the drive shafts at a good angle.... unfortunately my twin turbo V12 with the porsche box is 6inches too large
Currently I don't see any point changing the engine... despite the silly power I run, Ive STILL capped the torque and there is loads more to come (the decision not to go further was very hard and I can hardly believe I made it lol)... Ive got huge power over a 4000rpm range so its not a highly strung peaky motor either.
Saying that Ive also not broken a single box yet and Ive run well over 600bhp for years now!
IMO starting development on an all new engine before we have even achieved the potential of our existing one would be a little mad.
Completly agree, now mine is finished its night and day to how it was running before, i wouldnt change engine, and like you i also capped the torque, but cal 8 runs the full monty but dont use it, well not often Currently I don't see any point changing the engine... despite the silly power I run, Ive STILL capped the torque and there is loads more to come (the decision not to go further was very hard and I can hardly believe I made it lol)... Ive got huge power over a 4000rpm range so its not a highly strung peaky motor either.
Saying that Ive also not broken a single box yet and Ive run well over 600bhp for years now!
IMO starting development on an all new engine before we have even achieved the potential of our existing one would be a little mad.
I recently got myself an ST220, its quite a modified example so it made me look at the dyne charts for stock and mapped ST220 cars... they are supposed to have a better flowing inlet manifold and have a high cr than the noble etc etc.
I notice that my Noble engine despite having low CR and cams etc to make it rev to 8000rpm, actually makes the same or more power down low before the turbos kick in than the ST.
This surprised me as I was expecting our cars to be behind the NA engines down low.
Think this shows how far we have actually refined these cars.
I notice that my Noble engine despite having low CR and cams etc to make it rev to 8000rpm, actually makes the same or more power down low before the turbos kick in than the ST.
This surprised me as I was expecting our cars to be behind the NA engines down low.
Think this shows how far we have actually refined these cars.
andygtt said:
I recently got myself an ST220, its quite a modified example so it made me look at the dyne charts for stock and mapped ST220 cars... they are supposed to have a better flowing inlet manifold and have a high cr than the noble etc etc.
I notice that my Noble engine despite having low CR and cams etc to make it rev to 8000rpm, actually makes the same or more power down low before the turbos kick in than the ST.
This surprised me as I was expecting our cars to be behind the NA engines down low.
Think this shows how far we have actually refined these cars.
Andy, maybe the low end of the stock engines is reduced to allow for greater drive-ability of the stock car. I notice that my Noble engine despite having low CR and cams etc to make it rev to 8000rpm, actually makes the same or more power down low before the turbos kick in than the ST.
This surprised me as I was expecting our cars to be behind the NA engines down low.
Think this shows how far we have actually refined these cars.
The ford ST200 (2.5) had extra butterfly's in the lower inlet manifold to give better low end performance.
Noble removed this and the holes left in the walls from chamber to chamber were blocked with liquid metal of some kind. We think this may have been the reason for my engine failure as one of the the nuggets that was blocking a hole had gone and that this may have bounce around and took out the spark plug.
Noble removed this and the holes left in the walls from chamber to chamber were blocked with liquid metal of some kind. We think this may have been the reason for my engine failure as one of the the nuggets that was blocking a hole had gone and that this may have bounce around and took out the spark plug.
Gassing Station | Noble | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff