General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > General [M]ayhem > Automotive [M]ayhem
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
occupant
 
School me on 3.8L Ford (Essex) V6 engines

I Wiki'd it and Googled it.

How many differences between the RWD 3.8 in the Mustang/T-Bird/LTD and the FWD 3.8 in the Taurus/Continental/Windstar? Other than fuel injection styles (carb, CFI, EFI, SPFI) can they be interchanged? Bellhousings match up or able to be machined to fit? Motor mount positions similar or interchangeable?

Thinking of buying a 1984 Marquis wagon and a wrecked '95 Taurus sedan to do this swap. Each is $500, the Marquis drives nice, cold air, 88K, clean and well kept, but uses much oil. The Taurus runs off starting fluid but is damn near broken in half from a telephone pole. It will never see the road again but I should be able to sell the front clip and some bits for a tidy profit.

I also know 302 V8's were put in these Fox bodies. What about a 4.6L V8? They came in later Mustangs but will they squeeze into a Fox body front clip? That would give much better performance and probably better mileage than the smog-choked 3.8 CFI engine.
__________________
sex is a sport like racquetball, you play hard for half an hour, work up a sweat, and hope you don't get hit in the eye
why the fuck aren't you folding already
Old 02-11-2008, 04:35 PM occupant is offline  
Reply With Quote
#1  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Dongboy
I am Kruzens Brother
 
Dongboy's Avatar
 
why not spend the extra 500 bucks (1500ish) and get a driveable mid 90's taurus and save a TON of work?
__________________
bitch faced lobster OMGOMGOMGOMG - g0rg0n describing me
My '80 VW diesel buildup thread - http://genmay.com/showthread.php?t=645277
Old 02-11-2008, 04:37 PM Dongboy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2  

occupant
 
1) because I like the LTD/Marquis body style and this car is exceptionally clean.

2) because I have yet to find a suitable donor 94-up Mustang V6 wreck

3) because I got a bunch of goosebumps while reading this thread:

http://www.3.8mustang.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217820

I'm thinking 200hp V6 in a 24-year old station wagon getting better mileage to boot.

I need to bug these Mustang guys some more about whether FWD V6's can be used at all.
__________________
sex is a sport like racquetball, you play hard for half an hour, work up a sweat, and hope you don't get hit in the eye
why the fuck aren't you folding already
Old 02-11-2008, 04:41 PM occupant is offline  
Reply With Quote
#3  

claffix
 
claffix's Avatar
 
Watch out for head gasket issues on that motor.
__________________
I've spent most of my money on booze and fast toys...the rest was just wasted.

I like my girls like I like my bikes: fast, naked, and barely legal.

Slow and steady wins the race, but fast and reckless steals the show.
Old 02-11-2008, 04:41 PM claffix is offline  
Reply With Quote
#4  

MrBill
 
supercharge it plz
__________________
1978 Volvo 244 DL - Holset powered
1986 760Tic - stock
Old 02-11-2008, 04:43 PM MrBill is offline  
Reply With Quote
#5  

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 

i doubt a 4.6 will fit unless the 5.0 had a ton of room around it
Old 02-11-2008, 04:44 PM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#6  

Rancidpunk666
 
Rancidpunk666's Avatar
 
headgasket, bout the only major issue i can think of. they can be done without removing the exhuast manifolds.
__________________
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Senator Date Rape
.......v
Grandpa Motors (GM) pussrods and leafsprings
Old 02-11-2008, 05:28 PM Rancidpunk666 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#7  

occupant
 
I seriously doubt the DOHC 4.6 would fit, wonder about the SOHC 4.6 engine though?
__________________
sex is a sport like racquetball, you play hard for half an hour, work up a sweat, and hope you don't get hit in the eye
why the fuck aren't you folding already
Old 02-11-2008, 05:46 PM occupant is offline  
Reply With Quote
#8  

ZMan
title fixed for good of forums
 
no the rwd and fwd bellhousings are not the same. The FWD 3.8 uses the same bellhousing as a 3.0l Vulcan. You could use the tranny from a 3.0l Ranger or Aerostar on the FWD 3.8. (stay away from the automatics made before '95) The RWD has the same bellhousing as a SBF.

You could get a 4.6 into a foxbody with some shoehorning, plenty of guys have stuffed big blocks in em, a 4.6 would probably take the same amount of work.
__________________
[M] Ranger Club
'92 x-cab, 4.0l V6 5spd
'94 longbed, 3.0l auto, bagged and chopped.
'95 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 5.2l
'13 F-150 Ecoboost

Last edited by ZMan; 02-11-2008 at 08:30 PM..
Old 02-11-2008, 08:26 PM ZMan is online now  
Reply With Quote
#9  

DopefishLives
The Artist Formerly Known As StratocasterMaster, I was so [H]ard Kyle could feel it in Texas and got
 
DopefishLives's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZMan View Post
no the rwd and fwd bellhousings are not the same. The FWD 3.8 uses the same bellhousing as a 3.0l Vulcan. The RWD has the same bellhousing as a SBF.

You could get a 4.6 into a foxbody with some shoehorning, plenty of guys have stuffed big blocks in em, a 4.6 would probably take the same amount of work.

On the plus side the RWD and FWD intakes and fuel delivery systems are interchangable.

It really sounds like a futile idea, especially considering the Essex motor didn't get that phenomenal of gas mileage in the first place (relative to other six cylinders) and it's going to be working REALLY hard to pull that boat around (It had a hard enough time in my mom's 3700lbs Thunderbird). My 4.6L powered Thunderbird would tend to get better mileage than her's due to me being able to drive it much easier to get up to speed.

Another tid-bit, the pre 1999 Essex block only produced 160hp, it wasn't until the 1999 redesign with the cross-flow intake that power levels bumped up to 200. Although the 3.8SC from the SuperCoupes offered 240hp and a lot of low-end torque. If you have a dead hard on for a V6, I'd say stop pussy-footing about and get the Supercoupe motor. Otherwise get a 5.0 and be done since the pre-4.6L powered chassis is what your heart desires. A 4.6L would definitely fit but you don't seem to want to go to the troubles that would necessitate.

Edit: The underpinning of the current Crown Victoria/Etc has been around for over 25+ years, "Panther" body IIRC, there is room for lots of motor, no matter the origin.
__________________
Wow | So E92 | Very 335i | Much ///M Sport

Last edited by DopefishLives; 02-11-2008 at 08:34 PM..
Old 02-11-2008, 08:32 PM DopefishLives is offline  
Reply With Quote
#10  

L1n34r_3urn()
 
I drive a (non-wrecked) '95 Taurus with the 3.8L . . . and . . . well, it's slow . . .
__________________
c10bb5c23148250a25da9a2326a01377 [y yuo throw haet :( :(] porn may <3's yuo.
Old 02-11-2008, 10:04 PM L1n34r_3urn() is offline  
Reply With Quote
#11  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:19 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.