The hose on the map sensor on the front should NOT be used in a blow through system. I'm the engineer at FiTech, so if needed, I can go take a look - we're in socal.
@@cerberes yes, the pressure regulator needs to be boost referenced. Ours is connected to the manifold, but sometimes a customer might do something with the hose.
This is Does10s! Great build Gus! Really liked seeing the Classic Inlines/Vintage Inlines parts which Matt Cox is keeping alive and producing the heads and intakes again! FiTech is great fuel injection, but for our 6s we found the best to get equal distribution was to go injectors at each port. The Falcon is still running strong. For those suggesting the 240/300, the block is too long to fit without major surgery to the firewall or radiator support. Thanks for keeping it inline Gus!
I'm seriously considering converting my 65 coupe to a 300. I want to do something completely different, and I don't mind doing a bit of surgery. Can you recommend any resources for this swap? I've searched high and low and cannot find any cohesive info about doing it. I've seen something about using "big block" mounts, but have found nothing describing what this actually means or what engine it's referencing. Any resources about this swap would be incredible, as I've found very little.
This is funny. I watched this again two years later, scroll down, see your comment saying the 300 won't fit, and decide to leave a comment disputing that, then realize I already replied 2 years ago haha. I've looked into this a lot more since my last comment and it seems entirely possible to mount the 300 in a 65 without major modifications. With custom mounts and an electric radiator fan, you can fit it. I'm being given a 300 in the next few weeks and will be doing a mockup to confirm this before I drop money building the engine up, but several guys have done it already and claim to have done no modifications to the car itself to fit it. I'll report back when I do mock everything up, but I'm almost certain it's possible.
@@PatricioGarcia1973 221 isn't available in the US. We got the 144, 170, 200, and 250 and we only have the log-headed engines here in the US. No cool Argentina or OZ 2V-250 heads. I would love to get ahold of a 2-v head if anyone has one 😅
@@NautilusGuitars Let me know how it goes, I might try the same after seeing the turbo build on power nation. I would like to know about doing something different than the v8.
@@michaelglenn2106 I wonder if it is more of a too tight ring gap tolerance that Richard has talked about before being the culprit or the actual piston itself? It would be interesting too see the results.
Having owned a 65 myself, it came as no surprise that he's got more work in the suspension than the engine. A wonderful car. I'm glad he went in this direction.
I couldn't afford the head and turbo,so I got a 1980 head.But pretty much the same deal in my 62 Ranchero.And with a 3.25 8" and T 5,I no longer worry about that 85 mph speed limit on the road to El Paso.When asked about h.p/torque,I do the Dr. Evil pinky thing and say one million.Been playing with it so long,I've now got a head for every day of the week.My favorite is the twin 32/36 on a 69 head. But it's thirsty.
Richard that was a great video. My youngest sister still has her 1960 falcon I bought her when she turned 16. We're going to pull it out and get started.
I think going with the Holley EFI setup with port fuel injection with the right throttle body might be the answer to the lack of fuel problem. Very cool car!
Yes those heads were put on our, (Australian) 250 cubic inch, 4.1 litre engines. A friend of mine built one in 1988 with 3 side draught Webers. They're called 2V heads in Australia. Nice stuff
I followed Gus's build on RUclips. Totally inspired my build this summer. I've been on the waiting list for one of those aluminum heads for almost two years now. Just broke in the new camshaft a couple of weeks ago, now it's snowing ;-(
In our early falcons here in Australia we had the 170pursuit or the big 200super pursuit. Would be cool badges for the front wings on that stang. He needs individual injectors either in the head or manifold, the bosses are there just waiting to be used.
Beatiful car!! Engine builders do magic here in argentina with those ford 200 cu.in. in our ford falcons cause its the only engine we have to play whith, currently there are using aluminum DOHC in that block for racing.congratulations to the owner of that beauty!
@@mpetersen6 topline in santa fe is the company where they cast them i think, don,t know if they sell to racing teams only or everyone can buy them, the actual block isn´t the original 4.0 either, racing engine builders are using new modified block castings, im not sure if the head fits in the original block, if i find some information about these i´ll let you know.
I'm an Aussie,I've only seen this head TWICE,both on Aussie falcons,one was a 4 door,one was a coupe,same colour,same interior and C4 trans with a V8 yoke spec tailshaft and pinions,this is so bad ass,very jelly right now,and aussie spec pursuit centres in some fat hoops
15:45 to answer your question i would say the exhaust had not enough back pressure so it probably why it wasn't making power. The pop off lets me believe there is to much fuel in the exhaust under power.
This is the perfect rival for the Nova when it receives the 292. Would love to see a drag battle! Love these other guys build reviews, please do more of these! Thanks for the video!
So not sure I'd the 292 fits in the nova, they were commonly a 250 or 230. I'm building a 200 mustang, but the 250 and 292 would blow these out of the water, the perfomance support for those engines is waaaaay beyond these engines. 292 is a 300 to 400 horsepower all day long, very hard to get out of a 200
I know on the Mitsubishi Starions with their TBI and turbo setups, the runners did cause an issue, and I think the runners on the Starion, are equal length, or at least closer in length to one another. Their path of direction was drastically different and even that caused uneven fuel distribution to each cylinder to where even slight modifications to air density would cause the outer cylinders to run leaner. People would tune the whole thing half a point richer on THAT setup just to get decent fuel delivery to the outer cylinders, because on those cars, 1 and 4 would always be the first to melt something due to heat from inadequate fueling. With this car, the length are Much longer on the outside to span the length of the ports while also having different shapes. On an NA setup, the pistons would be drawing it in, so a TBI setup would be fine because the cylinders pull in what they pull in, but putting boost into the mix adds another variable of air being rammed into the TBI and into the ports causing unwanted turbulence at the plenum where fuel and air has a hard time distributing properly to all of the cylinders. I'd say, at best, the two closest to the plenum are rich,, 2 and 4 are closer to the target AFR, and 1 and 6 are lean causing erratic AFR's giving you a poor baseline to tune from as well as being a recipe for premature engine wear if being run with that fuel delivery setup. I'd go MPI. My 2 cents based off what I know at least
@@CoreyBrasher yes they are, but the HSC pistons are the ones that actually fit in the 200. Something about the Lima pistons doesn’t fit in a 200. If they did you wouldn’t be reading about the HSC pistons being used in pages dedicated to building the 200 ci ford. The Lima ones have to be easier to find.
@@CoreyBrasher I looked it up for you. If you could find some “Lima” pistons that were .280 over they would fit in a stock bore 200. Yes I typed that right. 280 thousandths over. Gotta be rare as rocking horse poop.
The Dagenham transmission was a 4 speed from England and is fairly rare. The Ford 3 speed is just barely strong enough for the 6 cylinder and was not used behind the V8s.
I have a 68 mustang 200ci, my first car. Father, son Xmas project. 23+ yeas later I still have it. Vintage Inlines is making these aluminum heads plus they have lots of other goodies.. These are awesome engines. See the first Barra history....
As I recall, PowerNation had the same problem running TBI on a turbo Jeep 4.0. They had to switch to a Holley 4bbl to make it run right. There's something off on the fuel distribution on those long I6 manifolds. Port FI should work perfect.
I wanna do this, does anyone have s as link to the turbo setup? I’m new to turbos if someone wants to walk me through it, very mechanically inclined though…
My used 65 mustang also came with the 200 six with a 3 speed on the floor. All stock, but a fun little car. 54 years later, I still can't believe I let it get away.
Master you should drop a few recipes for inline 6 that would be really amazing. 🔥 sounds really interesting for the folks that want to keep their car org + adding more power.
The pistons probably aren't from a 2.3 Lima, as the bores are wrong (89.3mm vs 93.5mm). I think he's probably talking about the 2.3 HSC. If I recall correctly, the HSC was itself derived from the 200 design with a revised cylinder head, and was used as a stop-gap for a while when lima production wasn't meeting demand. That's an awesome car though, glad you showed it to us!
If you still have a 7M in that Mark lll I have a set of ARP head studs. I used to build Toyotas back in the day at Toysport and then later with my good friend Mike Urbano.
Ramiro Diaz thanks but car is gone now it had a mild built 7m and it was 400 hp horsepower to the wheels I really miss it I drive a fox body Mustang now
Brings back memories. I owned a '66 Mustang with that 200 & 3 speed on the floor. I thought if I had kept it that turbocharging it would have been neat. Alas I was young, and had a growing family to support so the car had to go to a new home.
I think it's a really neat project but way too costly for what he got. The head and intake are $2250 plus the late model block plus the t5z, bellhousing, neutral flywheel machine work and everything else. This is lots of work for something that isn't great. It's neat but old. I really think a 3.7l out of a new mustang is a better candidate for this car. Comes with a six speed and a whole bunch that you need. Weighs less and probably makes more power than this would with the turbo while still being a Ford six. You could probably find an engine and transmission for less than he paid for the head, and a whole smashed running car for less than he has spent in the engine. A 2011 v6 would also have 4 wheel discs and a whole bunch of stuff you could cheat and steal from. Running low mile ones are under $7k how much do you think smashed ones are?
@@frigglebiscuit7484 vintage in lines claims their head is 25lbs, 20 lighter than stock iron. I've got stock weights of 385 for the 200 and 362 for the 3.7l. The 200 head also has the intake cast integral making the intake weight a plus and the tiny autolite 1bbl will weigh less than any 4bbl. The weight, without the turbo, would be equal at best. The 3.7 has a somewhat large swap community being a Mazda compatible for miatas. The big difference is one makes more than 300sae off the showroom floor and would probably make almost as much as the 200 with all the equipment shown here, using pump gas, for less than half the price. The 3.7l has a way more durable bottom end where some guys have boosted them to more than 500 to the tire, through the factory tranny, without touching the long block. It's a neat build, but ridiculously expensive for the outcome. He will have more than $7k in parts alone for the engine and trans, including the Fi and turbo. For how much he has invested, a v6 swap is way more unique, way faster, lighter, and half the price. Without the turbo, it's more than 80rwhp up on the 200 as built and he is doing more to get it done.
@@timothybayliss6680 it is about uniqueness, it is a setup that nobody else have, it is not about HP that will be the easy to do, this is one of a kind with the purpose of just that, let's see what one can do with imagination and some thinking.
Sounds like your fuel problem is stemming from volume of fuel delivery, maybe run bigger supply and return lines from the fuel tank and pump? As long as the pump and pressure regulator and controls are good, that's what I would say from the armchair, as a possible direction to look at. Thanks for bringing such great content!!
If possible I would try covering up the carb port and drill and tap for multiport fuel injectors. Try that, that way you can make the runners the same.
Need to drill and tap those ports on the intake for fuel injectors. Ford I6 manifolds are very well known for a super lean 1&6, stoich 2&5, and a rich 3&4.
Got a 1966 mustang with a 200 inline six cylinder milled the intake off building a intake and a exhaust to a turbo t 5 eight inch rear end 3 .25 going to port a injection will see how much hp some day
When you start it and run it they all run to see what I did to make my car eat all the rest. I would pretend to left the keys home if I was you so you don't have to show people that shine and chrome don't get you home.
I've been waiting for years on the that aluminum head, Vintage Inlines supposedly sent the casting forms from Classic Inlines to a new foundry but I've not heard anything since... Great to actually see one put to good use!!! BTW, I've not given up hope yet, maybe someday!
I have ran in to this Issue on similar straight 6 designs I would be willing to bet it's your map sensor. If they don't sample correctly You will get all kinds of goofy problems. I would focus on Custom mounting Somewhere that measures More ideally. Being this is old you kind of have to play with it a little there's not a lot of Technology for them unfortunately I'm sure that will change. The other thing I would try to do Is a direct port fuel injection system. just some way to get equal fuel measurements to the cylinders. I hope this helps really awesome setup doing one something like this for my son 67 in the next year.
As said,the head is a copy of the Australian 2V After that came first iron then later alloy cross flow heads. Mainly on our 250ci but the 200ci was an option.
Awesome. So we have a little cruiser 200 powered 70 Maverick, and we have hotrods, so we just wanted a lil cruiser. I was thinking about a turbo on it.
First thing I noticed was the aluminum head. New it would not be stock. As for the fuel issues, Eisinger had similar fuel distribution problems with their four cylinder engines. They cured it with a rather ingenious little deflector which was bolted inside the plenum in the bottom of the intake and trimmed to give the proper fuel/air distribution between cylinders. One of the Power nation shows did a video of the tuning process after building one of the Ford 2.3 liter engines. Perhaps someone there could give some insight into your problem.
All high pressure, modern, aftermarket EFI has to have a return to my knowledge, even if it is regulated in the tank. The fitech throttle body EFI units have a high pressure return inside that require a return line, but if you aren't using that then a return regulator can be added somewhere before the throttle body and ran back to the tank. They expect between 43 and 58 psi depending on the unit. On the first generation mustangs it is easy to add a return fitting into the neck that goes from the tank to the fuel filler cap in the back, but several companies including Tanks Inc sell a bolt in efi tank that has baffling like a modern tank and can use in-tank pumps.
running into same problem on Studebaker 170 I added a turbo,will let you know what I do to get mine richer on boost. it's great fun at 3/4 or less throttle.
Getting 187 RWHP out of a NA-200 is pretty darn good. Would really live to see the Dyno results of the turbo once they get the fuel issue dialed in. Great video! Also, I bet that car handles quite well with the lightweight 200 and aluminum head!
info is very limited on the 200, i'm wondering if the car is streetable still with the cam and all the mods to make 180hp NA? seeing as these things make about 80 hp stock, i'm wondering if it can still be daily'd? and in the performance world no one really talks about this, but what is fuel consumption like on this setup? Is is just wasting ungodly amounts of gas?
What he calls the "Shelby lowering mod" was not Shelby's design, it was a Ford engineer named Klaus Arning who came up with that which increases negative camber through turns. It drops the front end between 1/2"-3/4" best to use ball joint angled shims to keep the ball joints from loading and blowing out. Shelby used the Klaus Arning mod on the GT350's.
I had a 6 cylinder 65 Mustang too with the 3 speed. I miss that car. The transmission was a weak link on the car. Glad someone figured out how to upgrade it to a better setup.
I put a turbo on a stock head years ago and fuel distribution was definitely a problem on the front and rear cylinders. Some day I'll build one with a multi port setup.
I seen on a 300 inline mod that they had to reconfigure the cam for a turbo. Seems that in stock setup the valves overlap which does not matter much when normally aspirated. When boosted it does!
Reminds me a bit of the Holden inline six, loosely based on an old Chevy design (the manifolds and distributor swap sides). I have a 202ci version that I would love to swing a turbo off the side of.
The 200 was in Aussie falcons, but was sure the manifolds were on the left, same as red motors , slants and hemis. The falcon motors were small enough to crank swap with red motors to stroke out the holden red. Edit: had to go check- I was wrong on the manifolds on the left!
Fitech is problem did a twin turbo 355 sbc with 1200hp unit runs great took a lot of tuning and adjusting and learning runs to get it to make good power it cuts out almost every runs but will give you more and more rpm every time seems like it is correcting its map from safe a little bit at a time eventually we had more power and boost than I was comfortable running runs great now just save your map
Richard, I love the simplicity of the fitech but this AWESOME CAR begs for multiport fuel injection with a proper log style intake that will deliver a "more" equal air charge! Man what a cool set up, I can't say it enough. I want to commend the owner on his great vision! I have a '74 Duster with a 198 Slant Six and am also collecting the bits to build a similar setup!
I think the problem was uneven fuel distribution caused by the 1 to 6 intake. Unequal runner lengths might starve the outer cylinders of fuel. Possibly could be inadequate fuel pressure or testing variance from measuring emissions at the tailpipe
Hello there Richard, I just stumbled on to this, as I'm one the "V8" guys... This was Acton of fun to watch!!! Yes, would enjoy seeing more stuff like this.. And please, if you haven't, I would love to see the outcome on this car.. Did they find decent power, and how ? Thanks...
I'm pretty sure the 2.3 pistons he's talking about are from the 2.3 pushrod 4cykinder offered in the tempo and tooaz. I think the pistons in the 2.3 ohc lima are different. Ironically I live in lima Ohio wear the lima engine plant is and my grandfather worked there from 57to87.
Did you have a boost referenced fuel pressure regulator for the fitech? I don't think it would be the carb hat because that would only restrict the incoming air.. not the fuel. It may be the extreme mismatch of intake runner length causing poor distribution. Of course, it could also be a misfire causing the O2 sensor to interpret it as a lean mixture.. Or just a regular old exhaust leak letting it suck air upstream of the O2 sensor. Side note: I'm not a huge fan of the fitech stuff. When I was researching before upgrading to self learning tbi, I found that fitech has only a 3x3 map x rpm fuel map. That is 9 cells. Holley has 31x31 fuel and spark map and typically learns in a 3x3 area. That, and the customer service at fitech was a nightmare. I'm glad I went with Holley.
I have an in-line 170 what breather cover are you using I have an aftermarket carburetor because the original one kind of bit the dust but it was 60 years old lol so I have a new carburetor on there with a smaller breather
My bet is the air flow through the Fitech and intake, wet flow is tough, might work better if they take advantage of the bosses on the head or intake to mount multiport injection and just push air alone through a throttle body and intake, it may make a huge difference.
Sometimes the position of angel of the boost reference line in the carb hat. If it dosnt see full pressure or worse makes a venture it can be hard to figger..
@DropDstar ya i shortend a rod in my blowthrow carb application due to not picking up boost pressure acuritly. Defenetly want the point of pickup facing incoming boosted air, and not in a area of turbulence
Richard need your help! I trying to get my brother to go with the 4.9L in his ‘64 Stang! Get a 300 inline on the dyno!!! Need to convince him he doesn’t need a 5.0!!
Very similar to my 70 Mustang coupe. 200 L6 + 3 speed standard on the floor, manual drum brakes, no options. Progressed to 302 + 4 speed toploader then later a 460 + C6. 4 point cage and subframe connectors. Nothing exceeds like excess.
I watched an old video from Brian Tooley and he explained that you don’t want boost to escape through the exhaust and that he actually made a lot more power by catching the boost with less overlap I’m sure every cam is a turbo cam but some are more efficient with boost ?
Ford made a 250CI version of this motor for use in the Maverick. I put one into a '63 Falcon after having several modifications done to it. Head machined for 2 more 1BBL carbs(3 total), a Clifford Engineering cam and header. SBF valve springs and retainers. Over size valves, porting and polishing the intake and exhaust runners. I don't know what horsepower it made, but it gave a lot of grief to stock small block Fords and Chevys!
Incorrect, they're not Lima pistons. People put pistons from the 2.3 HSC from the Tempo in these. Ford made a lot of fours with 2.3 liters of displacement, in fact there were two different 2.3s in the Tempo alone, during the same production period. There was an HSC, which stands for "high swirl combustion," and an HSO, or "high specific output." It's the Tempo's HSC that has pistons of the proper bore size, pin height, and they're flat top as stock. Anyway, I always do love when somebody saves a six instead of swapping for a V8. I'm putting a 200 in my '87 Thunderbird, almost entirely because as I was pondering it my coworker told me I can't do that. Gotta put a V8 in it. If I don't it won't be a Thunderbird, it'll be a Thunder-chicken. Even if the six is stronger and faster than the period correct 302. It'll be a Thunder-chicken. Even if I build it, and it revs higher and pulls harder than any factory V8 in a Thunderbird, ever. It'll be a Thunder-chicken. Guess what, bud. I'm building a ThunderChicken.
A lot of people forget that a well balanced combo can beat the big boys. The 6 doesn't make a lot of power compared to a V8 but it doesn't need the heavy drive train either, the car can be lighter and make the most of what it does have, smart choice to keep the 8 inch. Just a nice car overall and it's cool to be different.
It's the carb hat.Those narrow low profile hats cause big problems especially on blow thru carb setups.Airflow goes nuts inside those things.Fi Tech setup prob has same issue as a blw thru carb..
Ultra Cool, Brother.. And yes The 200 is the BEST small block Ford finer Inline. Have A terrific.. Oh, BTW... HERE around Chitown, by this time next, we COULD have feet OF SNOW And bitter winds . Got a few twisters for loan? God Bless!!! BRIAN.
WOW!...AWESOME BRO!!! Thank you SO very much!!! And THANK YOU to Gus...THAT is one cool car! I think, it's the blow-thru design AND the unequal runner lengths that is causing fuel starvation. I think he needs a nice throttle body with an injector per runner, and that will save his intake (albeit drilling for those injectors). Good luck Gus...and thank you again bro, for bringing some awesome content.
I love the car I specially love the steel wheels! They are really nice looking. I also like the idea that he souped up a 200 as opposed to just doing another V8 swap. Don't get me wrong I like V8s a lot too, but I love inline sixes as well. This is a really nice car. The only thing I would have done different personally, is I probably would have just gone all in and got the 250 and built it up. I know the 250 has a slightly taller deck height but visually it's indistinguishable from the 200 and the extra 50 cubic inches would really be nice.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
The hose on the map sensor on the front should NOT be used in a blow through system. I'm the engineer at FiTech, so if needed, I can go take a look - we're in socal.
could not having boost referenced fuel pressure come into play as well?
@@cerberes yes, the pressure regulator needs to be boost referenced. Ours is connected to the manifold, but sometimes a customer might do something with the hose.
If needed - bring the car to FiTech. I'll dyno it and figure out what the problem is.
I'll say you figured it out.
Made this same mistake myself the map sensor wasn't reading any boost so it wouldn't compensate!
This is Does10s! Great build Gus! Really liked seeing the Classic Inlines/Vintage Inlines parts which Matt Cox is keeping alive and producing the heads and intakes again! FiTech is great fuel injection, but for our 6s we found the best to get equal distribution was to go injectors at each port. The Falcon is still running strong. For those suggesting the 240/300, the block is too long to fit without major surgery to the firewall or radiator support. Thanks for keeping it inline Gus!
I'm seriously considering converting my 65 coupe to a 300. I want to do something completely different, and I don't mind doing a bit of surgery. Can you recommend any resources for this swap? I've searched high and low and cannot find any cohesive info about doing it. I've seen something about using "big block" mounts, but have found nothing describing what this actually means or what engine it's referencing. Any resources about this swap would be incredible, as I've found very little.
Is the 221 available in the US, we had the 221 and 250 Ford in Argentina
This is funny. I watched this again two years later, scroll down, see your comment saying the 300 won't fit, and decide to leave a comment disputing that, then realize I already replied 2 years ago haha.
I've looked into this a lot more since my last comment and it seems entirely possible to mount the 300 in a 65 without major modifications. With custom mounts and an electric radiator fan, you can fit it. I'm being given a 300 in the next few weeks and will be doing a mockup to confirm this before I drop money building the engine up, but several guys have done it already and claim to have done no modifications to the car itself to fit it.
I'll report back when I do mock everything up, but I'm almost certain it's possible.
@@PatricioGarcia1973 221 isn't available in the US. We got the 144, 170, 200, and 250 and we only have the log-headed engines here in the US. No cool Argentina or OZ 2V-250 heads. I would love to get ahold of a 2-v head if anyone has one 😅
@@NautilusGuitars Let me know how it goes, I might try the same after seeing the turbo build on power nation. I would like to know about doing something different than the v8.
I love the inline 6's especially Ford's 300. I keep hoping you'll do one with mods and possibly a turbo.
The 240 was a good platform as well . I remember seeing them at the drags and used in stock cars (hobbies) when I was young .
300 stock pistons don't do well under boost but a piston swap would work
@@jeffschwartz5199 243ci here in Australia sohc or dohc engine is amazing especially turbo destroys a lot off bigger engine's even turbo one's. Peace
@@wayneireland4802 cool 😎 . I love Aussie stuff too ! See I'm Canadian so , whenever I can go fast ! Ford guy too !
@@michaelglenn2106 I wonder if it is more of a too tight ring gap tolerance that Richard has talked about before being the culprit or the actual piston itself? It would be interesting too see the results.
Having owned a 65 myself, it came as no surprise that he's got more work in the suspension than the engine.
A wonderful car. I'm glad he went in this direction.
I couldn't afford the head and turbo,so I got a 1980 head.But pretty much the same deal in my 62 Ranchero.And with a 3.25 8" and T 5,I no longer worry about that 85 mph speed limit on the road to El Paso.When asked about h.p/torque,I do the Dr. Evil pinky thing and say one million.Been playing with it so long,I've now got a head for every day of the week.My favorite is the twin 32/36 on a 69 head. But it's thirsty.
Was the best interview and car build, I've seen in a long time. Very cool car guy/owner.
Richard that was a great video. My youngest sister still has her 1960 falcon I bought her when she turned 16. We're going to pull it out and get started.
Yeah Richard, built & turbo boosted Ford 300 big six, pulease!!
So happy to see these builds getting attention. I'm working on building a boosted 200 for my 65 Falcon Hardtop
I think going with the Holley EFI setup with port fuel injection with the right throttle body might be the answer to the lack of fuel problem. Very cool car!
Very cool! Richard types in ALL CAPS because he talks in ALL CAPS!
Love the content!
he is a tad LOUD
@@richardholdener1727 FiTECH had problems with their map sensor seal. It needs to be trimmed sometimes.
@@richardholdener1727 You look like you have the most fun on youtube, keep it up!
Yes those heads were put on our, (Australian) 250 cubic inch, 4.1 litre engines. A friend of mine built one in 1988 with 3 side draught Webers. They're called 2V heads in Australia. Nice stuff
I love the "thinking outside the box" attitude. Definitely a unique ride!
6 cylinder engines are under rated, they have so much potential!
I followed Gus's build on RUclips. Totally inspired my build this summer.
I've been on the waiting list for one of those aluminum heads for almost two years now.
Just broke in the new camshaft a couple of weeks ago, now it's snowing ;-(
What’s the channel? I can’t find anything on this car except this video
In our early falcons here in Australia we had the 170pursuit or the big 200super pursuit. Would be cool badges for the front wings on that stang.
He needs individual injectors either in the head or manifold, the bosses are there just waiting to be used.
Beatiful car!! Engine builders do magic here in argentina with those ford 200 cu.in. in our ford falcons cause its the only engine we have to play whith, currently there are using aluminum DOHC in that block for racing.congratulations to the owner of that beauty!
I'd love to get my hands on one of the DOHC heads for the Jeep 4.0.
@@mpetersen6 topline in santa fe is the company where they cast them i think, don,t know if they sell to racing teams only or everyone can buy them, the actual block isn´t the original 4.0 either, racing engine builders are using new modified block castings, im not sure if the head fits in the original block, if i find some information about these i´ll let you know.
I'm an Aussie,I've only seen this head TWICE,both on Aussie falcons,one was a 4 door,one was a coupe,same colour,same interior and C4 trans with a V8 yoke spec tailshaft and pinions,this is so bad ass,very jelly right now,and aussie spec pursuit centres in some fat hoops
AK Miller was a fan of Turbocharging the small Ford 6 back in the day, looking forward to the follow up on this!
Name/shop that built the engine in San Fernando Valley?
15:45 to answer your question i would say the exhaust had not enough back pressure so it probably why it wasn't making power.
The pop off lets me believe there is to much fuel in the exhaust under power.
This is the perfect rival for the Nova when it receives the 292. Would love to see a drag battle! Love these other guys build reviews, please do more of these! Thanks for the video!
So not sure I'd the 292 fits in the nova, they were commonly a 250 or 230. I'm building a 200 mustang, but the 250 and 292 would blow these out of the water, the perfomance support for those engines is waaaaay beyond these engines. 292 is a 300 to 400 horsepower all day long, very hard to get out of a 200
I know on the Mitsubishi Starions with their TBI and turbo setups, the runners did cause an issue, and I think the runners on the Starion, are equal length, or at least closer in length to one another. Their path of direction was drastically different and even that caused uneven fuel distribution to each cylinder to where even slight modifications to air density would cause the outer cylinders to run leaner. People would tune the whole thing half a point richer on THAT setup just to get decent fuel delivery to the outer cylinders, because on those cars, 1 and 4 would always be the first to melt something due to heat from inadequate fueling. With this car, the length are Much longer on the outside to span the length of the ports while also having different shapes. On an NA setup, the pistons would be drawing it in, so a TBI setup would be fine because the cylinders pull in what they pull in, but putting boost into the mix adds another variable of air being rammed into the TBI and into the ports causing unwanted turbulence at the plenum where fuel and air has a hard time distributing properly to all of the cylinders. I'd say, at best, the two closest to the plenum are rich,, 2 and 4 are closer to the target AFR, and 1 and 6 are lean causing erratic AFR's giving you a poor baseline to tune from as well as being a recipe for premature engine wear if being run with that fuel delivery setup. I'd go MPI. My 2 cents based off what I know at least
Not Lima pistons, they are from the HSC 2.3 (as in tempo topaz front wheel drive) I wish those heads were still available.
Late Lima Turbo four pistons were forged units!
@@CoreyBrasher yes they are, but the HSC pistons are the ones that actually fit in the 200. Something about the Lima pistons doesn’t fit in a 200. If they did you wouldn’t be reading about the HSC pistons being used in pages dedicated to building the 200 ci ford. The Lima ones have to be easier to find.
@@CoreyBrasher I looked it up for you. If you could find some “Lima” pistons that were .280 over they would fit in a stock bore 200. Yes I typed that right. 280 thousandths over. Gotta be rare as rocking horse poop.
And THAT engine was basically a sawed off 200.
You should do a turbo 240/300 Ford straight 6
Not enough room under that hood.
The 240/300 are very heavy compared to the 200.
The Dagenham transmission was a 4 speed from England and is fairly rare. The Ford 3 speed is just barely strong enough for the 6 cylinder and was not used behind the V8s.
This engine really makes the car for me. I wish more people gave the inline-6 some love.
My dad had a 65 Fairlane wagon with the 200 six. When he would try to pass on a 2 lane highway it was always pretty nerve wracking.
The trick is , to get all the family in the car to lean forward , that's what my dad would make us do , cool memory .
HAHAHA! Yeah that sure brings back memories as a kid. Wow, thanks for that.
Hah, back off and get a running start. Been there....
Love it .... Just bought a 65 yesterday that I just happened to come across at a great price .. Has the 200 inline 6 in it and this gives me ideas ...
I have a 68 mustang 200ci, my first car. Father, son Xmas project. 23+ yeas later I still have it. Vintage Inlines is making these aluminum heads plus they have lots of other goodies.. These are awesome engines. See the first Barra history....
Nice build hope he can dial it in. Thank you. The 300 Ford six with the Yates style head in NHRA comp eliminator was my favorite build.
Pat Nahan's 7.38@174.93 sure isn't hanging around !!
As I recall, PowerNation had the same problem running TBI on a turbo Jeep 4.0. They had to switch to a Holley 4bbl to make it run right. There's something off on the fuel distribution on those long I6 manifolds. Port FI should work perfect.
It worked with a turbo on the holley 4 barrel, but not TBI. Why?
I wanna do this, does anyone have s as link to the turbo setup? I’m new to turbos if someone wants to walk me through it, very mechanically inclined though…
My used 65 mustang also came with the 200 six with a 3 speed on the floor. All stock, but a fun little car. 54 years later, I still can't believe I let it get away.
Is the fuel system boost referenced?,maybe its time for port fuel injection?
Master you should drop a few recipes for inline 6 that would be really amazing. 🔥 sounds really interesting for the folks that want to keep their car org + adding more power.
The pistons probably aren't from a 2.3 Lima, as the bores are wrong (89.3mm vs 93.5mm). I think he's probably talking about the 2.3 HSC. If I recall correctly, the HSC was itself derived from the 200 design with a revised cylinder head, and was used as a stop-gap for a while when lima production wasn't meeting demand. That's an awesome car though, glad you showed it to us!
Started to point this out then figured I couldn't be the only one who caught that. As I thought I wasn't lol
Yes 2.3 ohv tempo engine is what they meant to say
You are correct sir! The 2.3L HSC is a 200 I6 minus 2 cylinders. :)
I would put six individual injectors in it there is spots on the intake and the head for them
If you still have a 7M in that Mark lll I have a set of ARP head studs. I used to build Toyotas back in the day at Toysport and then later with my good friend Mike Urbano.
Ramiro Diaz thanks but car is gone now it had a mild built 7m and it was 400 hp horsepower to the wheels I really miss it I drive a fox body Mustang now
Has to be the coolest fastback I have seen in 10 years easy. I wanna see the track footage. Intake is my guess with it different length tubes.
Brings back memories. I owned a '66 Mustang with that 200 & 3 speed on the floor. I thought if I had kept it that turbocharging it would have been neat. Alas I was young, and had a growing family to support so the car had to go to a new home.
Awesome episode, "do more with what you have", he didn't succumb to the temptation of installing a V8 in it, that takes a lot of discipline.
I think it's a really neat project but way too costly for what he got. The head and intake are $2250 plus the late model block plus the t5z, bellhousing, neutral flywheel machine work and everything else. This is lots of work for something that isn't great. It's neat but old.
I really think a 3.7l out of a new mustang is a better candidate for this car. Comes with a six speed and a whole bunch that you need. Weighs less and probably makes more power than this would with the turbo while still being a Ford six. You could probably find an engine and transmission for less than he paid for the head, and a whole smashed running car for less than he has spent in the engine. A 2011 v6 would also have 4 wheel discs and a whole bunch of stuff you could cheat and steal from. Running low mile ones are under $7k how much do you think smashed ones are?
@@timothybayliss6680 ew. also, really doubtful the 3.7 weighs less than an aluminum headed and intaked ohv i6. ohc engines are HEAVY.
@@frigglebiscuit7484 vintage in lines claims their head is 25lbs, 20 lighter than stock iron. I've got stock weights of 385 for the 200 and 362 for the 3.7l. The 200 head also has the intake cast integral making the intake weight a plus and the tiny autolite 1bbl will weigh less than any 4bbl. The weight, without the turbo, would be equal at best. The 3.7 has a somewhat large swap community being a Mazda compatible for miatas. The big difference is one makes more than 300sae off the showroom floor and would probably make almost as much as the 200 with all the equipment shown here, using pump gas, for less than half the price. The 3.7l has a way more durable bottom end where some guys have boosted them to more than 500 to the tire, through the factory tranny, without touching the long block.
It's a neat build, but ridiculously expensive for the outcome. He will have more than $7k in parts alone for the engine and trans, including the Fi and turbo. For how much he has invested, a v6 swap is way more unique, way faster, lighter, and half the price. Without the turbo, it's more than 80rwhp up on the 200 as built and he is doing more to get it done.
@@timothybayliss6680 it is about uniqueness, it is a setup that nobody else have, it is not about HP that will be the easy to do, this is one of a kind with the purpose of just that, let's see what one can do with imagination and some thinking.
@@remybrouwer8700 it's an old, outdated motor that the owner tried to mod it like a modern motor but only made it run like crap. Thats unique for you.
Sounds like your fuel problem is stemming from volume of fuel delivery, maybe run bigger supply and return lines from the fuel tank and pump? As long as the pump and pressure regulator and controls are good, that's what I would say from the armchair, as a possible direction to look at. Thanks for bringing such great content!!
I can confirm that vintage inlines does produce the head now but good luck getting one I waited close to a year and half for mine.
Need numbers and afr graph. Where was it leaning out?
If possible I would try covering up the carb port and drill and tap for multiport fuel injectors. Try that, that way you can make the runners the same.
Need to drill and tap those ports on the intake for fuel injectors. Ford I6 manifolds are very well known for a super lean 1&6, stoich 2&5, and a rich 3&4.
Solid build. I really like the ingenuity. Keep hot rodding alive!
Got a 1966 mustang with a 200 inline six cylinder milled the intake off building a intake and a exhaust to a turbo t 5 eight inch rear end 3 .25 going to port a injection will see how much hp some day
I own a six , super clean , chromed everything , when I pop the hood , people love it
When you start it and run it they all run to see what I did to make my car eat all the rest. I would pretend to left the keys home if I was you so you don't have to show people that shine and chrome don't get you home.
I've been waiting for years on the that aluminum head, Vintage Inlines supposedly sent the casting forms from Classic Inlines to a new foundry but I've not heard anything since... Great to actually see one put to good use!!! BTW, I've not given up hope yet, maybe someday!
It might be the foundry won't pour the castings until there is a big enough order.
I have ran in to this Issue on similar straight 6 designs I would be willing to bet it's your map sensor. If they don't sample correctly You will get all kinds of goofy problems. I would focus on Custom mounting Somewhere that measures More ideally. Being this is old you kind of have to play with it a little there's not a lot of Technology for them unfortunately I'm sure that will change. The other thing I would try to do Is a direct port fuel injection system. just some way to get equal fuel measurements to the cylinders. I hope this helps really awesome setup doing one something like this for my son 67 in the next year.
Is it the stock fuel pump? Not sure it delivers enough gas for fuel injection.
As said,the head is a copy of the Australian 2V
After that came first iron then later alloy cross flow heads. Mainly on our 250ci but the 200ci was an option.
Not an outright copy, it was massaged. Intake flow numbers as cast are 210 vs. 156 cfm on an original 250 2V head, with exhaust 174/105.
@@wallaka i thought that was implied, no one copy's an old head without making it better
Would love to see some Ford 2.3L turbo tests (SVO, Turbo Coupe)!!
I did more than a few of those way back with Dave from Tiny Avenger
Awesome. So we have a little cruiser 200 powered 70 Maverick, and we have hotrods, so we just wanted a lil cruiser. I was thinking about a turbo on it.
First thing I noticed was the aluminum head. New it would not be stock. As for the fuel issues, Eisinger had similar fuel distribution problems with their four cylinder engines. They cured it with a rather ingenious little deflector which was bolted inside the plenum in the bottom of the intake and trimmed to give the proper fuel/air distribution between cylinders. One of the Power nation shows did a video of the tuning process after building one of the Ford 2.3 liter engines. Perhaps someone there could give some insight into your problem.
This guy is a great interview.
Did he increase the size of his fuel lines? Is it a one-way system or a return?
All high pressure, modern, aftermarket EFI has to have a return to my knowledge, even if it is regulated in the tank. The fitech throttle body EFI units have a high pressure return inside that require a return line, but if you aren't using that then a return regulator can be added somewhere before the throttle body and ran back to the tank. They expect between 43 and 58 psi depending on the unit. On the first generation mustangs it is easy to add a return fitting into the neck that goes from the tank to the fuel filler cap in the back, but several companies including Tanks Inc sell a bolt in efi tank that has baffling like a modern tank and can use in-tank pumps.
pressure would drop if they're too small.
He did a really nice system with a modern tank and pump. They look like - 6 to me, supply and return.
@DropDstar which factory applications use deadhead efi at 43+ psi? I'm not aware of any
Fuel pump in the tank? Possibly not enough suction if external mounted. Also, is the tank vented properly?
Gus's car is awesome. I seen it at fabulous ford's a few years ago.
agreed
running into same problem on Studebaker 170 I added a turbo,will let you know what I do to get mine richer on boost. it's great fun at 3/4 or less throttle.
Getting 187 RWHP out of a NA-200 is pretty darn good. Would really live to see the Dyno results of the turbo once they get the fuel issue dialed in. Great video!
Also, I bet that car handles quite well with the lightweight 200 and aluminum head!
info is very limited on the 200, i'm wondering if the car is streetable still with the cam and all the mods to make 180hp NA? seeing as these things make about 80 hp stock, i'm wondering if it can still be daily'd? and in the performance world no one really talks about this, but what is fuel consumption like on this setup? Is is just wasting ungodly amounts of gas?
What he calls the "Shelby lowering mod" was not Shelby's design, it was a Ford engineer named Klaus Arning who came up with that which increases negative camber through turns. It drops the front end between 1/2"-3/4" best to use ball joint angled shims to keep the ball joints from loading and blowing out. Shelby used the Klaus Arning mod on the GT350's.
Aren't you the smart one. Shelby, smart person doesn't know all the answers he knows where to go get the answers
Dang, I really wanted to know what it made with the turbo, hope you keep us updated.
I had a 6 cylinder 65 Mustang too with the 3 speed. I miss that car. The transmission was a weak link on the car. Glad someone figured out how to upgrade it to a better setup.
I put a turbo on a stock head years ago and fuel distribution was definitely a problem on the front and rear cylinders. Some day I'll build one with a multi port setup.
The 300 is better option if it's in a truck and has room since they were made with fuel injectors in 90s but don't fit well in cars
I seen on a 300 inline mod that they had to reconfigure the cam for a turbo. Seems that in stock setup the valves overlap which does not matter much when normally aspirated. When boosted it does!
a stock 300 cam has negative over lap, and btw...positive overlap doesn't matter for turbos either
Could be the small volume of the bonnet. May be choking the engine out. IT wasn’t having pre-detonation. Issues was it?
Reminds me a bit of the Holden inline six, loosely based on an old Chevy design (the manifolds and distributor swap sides). I have a 202ci version that I would love to swing a turbo off the side of.
The 200 was in Aussie falcons, but was sure the manifolds were on the left, same as red motors , slants and hemis. The falcon motors were small enough to crank swap with red motors to stroke out the holden red. Edit: had to go check- I was wrong on the manifolds on the left!
Fitech is problem did a twin turbo 355 sbc with 1200hp unit runs great took a lot of tuning and adjusting and learning runs to get it to make good power it cuts out almost every runs but will give you more and more rpm every time seems like it is correcting its map from safe a little bit at a time eventually we had more power and boost than I was comfortable running runs great now just save your map
This is everything I wanted for my 200ci ‘73 Maverick coupe (my first car). I had done a lot of the suspension upgrades.
Richard,
I love the simplicity of the fitech but this AWESOME CAR begs for multiport fuel injection with a proper log style intake that will deliver a "more" equal air charge! Man what a cool set up, I can't say it enough. I want to commend the owner on his great vision! I have a '74 Duster with a 198 Slant Six and am also collecting the bits to build a similar setup!
I think the problem was uneven fuel distribution caused by the 1 to 6 intake. Unequal runner lengths might starve the outer cylinders of fuel. Possibly could be inadequate fuel pressure or testing variance from measuring emissions at the tailpipe
All i6 manifolds like this have fuel distribution issues
Is that a racing engine? I saw one awhile back on a racing Falcon that looked like this one.
Hello there Richard, I just stumbled on to this, as I'm one the "V8" guys... This was Acton of fun to watch!!! Yes, would enjoy seeing more stuff like this.. And please, if you haven't, I would love to see the outcome on this car.. Did they find decent power, and how ? Thanks...
I'm pretty sure the 2.3 pistons he's talking about are from the 2.3 pushrod 4cykinder offered in the tempo and tooaz. I think the pistons in the 2.3 ohc lima are different. Ironically I live in lima Ohio wear the lima engine plant is and my grandfather worked there from 57to87.
Kevin, you are correct. They are the 2.3 Tempo HSC pistons
Love it! Not another tired V8 build but something fresh and different.
Inline 6 is best engine design ever.
Did you have a boost referenced fuel pressure regulator for the fitech?
I don't think it would be the carb hat because that would only restrict the incoming air.. not the fuel. It may be the extreme mismatch of intake runner length causing poor distribution.
Of course, it could also be a misfire causing the O2 sensor to interpret it as a lean mixture.. Or just a regular old exhaust leak letting it suck air upstream of the O2 sensor.
Side note: I'm not a huge fan of the fitech stuff. When I was researching before upgrading to self learning tbi, I found that fitech has only a 3x3 map x rpm fuel map. That is 9 cells. Holley has 31x31 fuel and spark map and typically learns in a 3x3 area. That, and the customer service at fitech was a nightmare. I'm glad I went with Holley.
I have an in-line 170 what breather cover are you using I have an aftermarket carburetor because the original one kind of bit the dust but it was 60 years old lol so I have a new carburetor on there with a smaller breather
My bet is the air flow through the Fitech and intake, wet flow is tough, might work better if they take advantage of the bosses on the head or intake to mount multiport injection and just push air alone through a throttle body and intake, it may make a huge difference.
Sometimes the position of angel of the boost reference line in the carb hat. If it dosnt see full pressure or worse makes a venture it can be hard to figger..
@DropDstar ya i shortend a rod in my blowthrow carb application due to not picking up boost pressure acuritly. Defenetly want the point of pickup facing incoming boosted air, and not in a area of turbulence
Richard need your help! I trying to get my brother to go with the 4.9L in his ‘64 Stang! Get a 300 inline on the dyno!!! Need to convince him he doesn’t need a 5.0!!
I love 5.0L V8s, but the Other Guys 300 I6 will draw way more attention
Very similar to my 70 Mustang coupe. 200 L6 + 3 speed standard on the floor, manual drum brakes, no options. Progressed to 302 + 4 speed toploader then later a 460 + C6. 4 point cage and subframe connectors. Nothing exceeds like excess.
Too much power is only just enough.
I watched an old video from Brian Tooley and he explained that you don’t want boost to escape through the exhaust and that he actually made a lot more power by catching the boost with less overlap I’m sure every cam is a turbo cam but some are more efficient with boost ?
Old school 6 cyl svo! Its an anomaly and thats what makes it cool. 👍
Who makes the wheels??? Need to know. Anyone know? Deep plain steelies that actually look good. Any help would be appreciated.
Ford made a 250CI version of this motor for use in the Maverick. I put one into a '63 Falcon after having several modifications done to it. Head machined for 2 more 1BBL carbs(3 total), a Clifford Engineering cam and header. SBF valve springs and retainers. Over size valves, porting and polishing the intake and exhaust runners. I don't know what horsepower it made, but it gave a lot of grief to stock small block Fords and Chevys!
I got a 200 In my 74 maverick its a cool engine gutless but cool but I like to see what you do with a 300 6 the big 6
I had one too! Lol. 25 mpg though. Had it very well tuned. 95 top speed
Incorrect, they're not Lima pistons. People put pistons from the 2.3 HSC from the Tempo in these. Ford made a lot of fours with 2.3 liters of displacement, in fact there were two different 2.3s in the Tempo alone, during the same production period. There was an HSC, which stands for "high swirl combustion," and an HSO, or "high specific output." It's the Tempo's HSC that has pistons of the proper bore size, pin height, and they're flat top as stock.
Anyway, I always do love when somebody saves a six instead of swapping for a V8.
I'm putting a 200 in my '87 Thunderbird, almost entirely because as I was pondering it my coworker told me I can't do that. Gotta put a V8 in it. If I don't it won't be a Thunderbird, it'll be a Thunder-chicken. Even if the six is stronger and faster than the period correct 302. It'll be a Thunder-chicken. Even if I build it, and it revs higher and pulls harder than any factory V8 in a Thunderbird, ever. It'll be a Thunder-chicken.
Guess what, bud.
I'm building a ThunderChicken.
How to install acarbarator on a Ford ranger 2.0 85 Ford ranger
A lot of people forget that a well balanced combo can beat the big boys. The 6 doesn't make a lot of power compared to a V8 but it doesn't need the heavy drive train either, the car can be lighter and make the most of what it does have, smart choice to keep the 8 inch. Just a nice car overall and it's cool to be different.
Where I can buy a stock 200 engine? Mine was stolen 😢
When are you going to make a Ford 300 video? I have seen you talk about it in many of your videos.
'was the fuel pump big enough?
Wow that is a wicked clean build whoever built it did a awesome job
It's the carb hat.Those narrow low profile hats cause big problems especially on blow thru carb setups.Airflow goes nuts inside those things.Fi Tech setup prob has same issue as a blw thru carb..
Wasn't there also a 300 i6 that came in trucks I think Richard show turbo one of those torque motors
I plan on running a 300 Ford (EFI)
Ultra Cool, Brother..
And yes
The 200 is the BEST small block Ford finer Inline.
Have A terrific..
Oh, BTW...
HERE around Chitown, by this time next, we COULD have feet OF SNOW And bitter winds .
Got a few twisters for loan?
God Bless!!!
BRIAN.
WOW!...AWESOME BRO!!! Thank you SO very much!!! And THANK YOU to Gus...THAT is one cool car! I think, it's the blow-thru design AND the unequal runner lengths that is causing fuel starvation. I think he needs a nice throttle body with an injector per runner, and that will save his intake (albeit drilling for those injectors). Good luck Gus...and thank you again bro, for bringing some awesome content.
It has the spots to drill out and put individual injectors in each port of the intake, I'd probably do that and just use a throttle body.
Then he would need a bigger intercooler
I am thinking needs port injection. Also a larger intercooler with proper flow to the end tanks. Not 90 degree t fittings.
How to intol a carburetor on a 2.0 from ranger
I love the car I specially love the steel wheels! They are really nice looking. I also like the idea that he souped up a 200 as opposed to just doing another V8 swap. Don't get me wrong I like V8s a lot too, but I love inline sixes as well. This is a really nice car. The only thing I would have done different personally, is I probably would have just gone all in and got the 250 and built it up. I know the 250 has a slightly taller deck height but visually it's indistinguishable from the 200 and the extra 50 cubic inches would really be nice.