pcmhacking.net

Have you got any more details on the 9" conversion?

oldn64 wrote:

Holden202T wrote:theres no doubt a V6 is going to slam a 202 in a heavy car, they are a good combo.

That would have been a hard tablet to swallow Holden202T, I mean i am a huge fan of the red and blue series holden 6's I am just realistic that the newer engine combined with a v configuration would be a better approach. Not to mention that the v6 had similar torque and power as the old red v8's.

give me 186T anyday for my EH hehe.

cheers
oldn64

yeah I'm of the same opinion, I love my straight 6's (if you hadn't guessed) but I pulled out a hot 202 from my torana and put in a stock ecotec with 2.5 inch exhaust and I reckon it was on par power wise from 2500-4000 rpm but the V6 was way better down low and didn't die off like the 202 over 4000rpm ... and so it should for half a litre more capacity .... but the main gain for me was that it was a stock cam so had good broad power range, the 202 would never make the same power with a "drivable cam"

even my brothers turbo v6, its god cleaned up heads and a small boost cam, and its making a lazy 353hp at wheels on 12psi, for my hot 202 to make 266hp at wheels was 20psi and a lot more duration a head work!

and in reality, the 202 hasn't really changed much from the 1960's motor and a V6 is almost 30 years newer!

Also the v6 had a lot of new modern designs and high tech well ahead of its years, much of what the modem GM v8s use today was first pioneered on the V6 out of all engines. Chalk and cheese really.

They even went as far as selling Chevy v8 heads with buick v6 ports and chambers they were that good lol

Yeah honestly I thought wtf is this shit when I seen supposedly good chev heads. The shit resembled some 1930 diesel crap of something, maybe briggs mower design?

Just got so used to thinking the v6 head design was below average but compared to everything pretty much pre LS it was actually miles ahead (no pun) efficiency and performance design wise. Overall its still very good even for today's standards for a 2 valve head. The ecotec was a bit of a step backwards though, not bad just not quite as good as the series 1 3800 as in the VN-VR engines. but the ecotec head design for for efficiency and emissions and not outright performance, the earlier v6 heads were just as a fluke a good performance design with decent efficiency as a bonus.

The ecotec chamber and port design is one of the key factors that allowed it to be the only? certainly the first push rod 2 valve engine to get ultra low emissions certifications.

EDIT: sorry, my bad it was the first engine petrol engine in the auto industry ever to get SULEV (super ultra low emissions vehicle certification)

The irony of an iron pushrod engine being called dirty when it out did them all in clean combustion haha.

delcowizzid wrote:https://www.teambuick.com/reference/lib ... d_head.php

Very good read. Thanks for posting that up.

v6bucket wrote:Have you got any more details on the 9" conversion?

This is all I have to go on....

you can convert the diff housing to take a 9inch centre. A bloke by the name of John Bradley in Sydney used to weld the front housing plate of the ford housing onto the dyna diff housing & then machined & drilled a pair of 28 spline commodore axles to fit onto the full floating hubs & into the diff centre. it took a bit of work but it was a good set up. If you do this then be sure that you machine the bearing seat on the axle to give enough clearance where it goes into the snout for the hub

I have at least seen the landcruiser conversion.....

https://www.mustangtech.com.au/Forums/v ... =2630.html

Not sure which way I will go yet.

Cheers
oldn64

The Toyota conversion looks easy enough, almost factory. The Toyota diff is 9 1/4" from memory, which is slightly bigger than the Ford option. With 4.11 gears in the Dyna, should give you about 2800rpm at 100 km/hr in 4th gear if you have 6.50r16 tyres instead of 3600rpm. You may find that the Dyna axles could be used or the Cruiser axles, the flange at the outer ends may be the same.