Why do the engines in these cars sit like most 4 cylinders?
continental is FWD isnt it?
Not sure about the mark, I just looked at a pic and it seems normal to me.
THe Marks have a traditional RWD layout:
(http://memimage.cardomain.com/member_images/9/web/2949000-2949999/2949461_10_full.jpg)
Contis were in fact FWD
(http://cdn.getauto.com/photos/3/24023/7c/1LNHM97V3XY625447-7c.jpg)
to be honest, I didn't look at the Mark's, I just knew they had the same engine so I figured the way they were set up would be the same.
Why would they make one FWD? That doesn't make sense to me at all...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is my query
*sarcasm enclosed*
My 4-cylinder cars are both RWD.
Your query is flawed. :p
The 1988+ Conti was based on the Taurus, which was/is FWD. It replaced a much better (imo) Continental that was based on the fox chassis.
Interesting. But I still think a 32valve v8 has no business being FWD.
According to Wikipedia, this thing shares the same platform as a Windstar. D186, and uses the same tranny as a Taurus/windstar of that era. Idk if I like that...
I would guess that the tranny would be a weak point in the Continental.
They are pointed in the correct direction in the Marauders(yeah this one is mine)...
(http://members.pen 15s.net/turbocoupe50/mmsc.jpg)
Cadillac sold FWD 32 Valve V8's from 1992 until now. The 88-94 was sold as a competitor to the Seville/STS. With the V6 it failed miserably, so for '95 Ford tossed the Inteech in. And it still failed miserably.
It is the weak point. They were shiznit in the Taurus as well. The Conti engines are detuned quite a bit for this reason.
Show-off!
FWD V8 is only acceptable when there is another V8 at the rear axles.
So it has a Taurus trans? Cross that one off the list....
According to Wikipedia. I thought the same thing too when I read that...
Although wikipedia claims that the power,torque output in the conti is still 275,275. Wikipedia also claims they've reninforced it in some way, but it's still a taurus tranny.
If you polish a turd, its still a turd...
And keep in mind that the Intech FWD engine has very little in common with the Intech RWD engine. The blocks are even different. However, they are a good source of 24# injectors.
The 24s I'm running came from a Continental. They are the old blue top style. Do the later black stick ones work in out cars? There's a 00 Continental in the yard near me that still has it's injectors and they are the newer black plastic ones.
Actually, the block is pretty much the only difference. The intake is different of course as well, but they are more alike than different. 1999 saw the introduction of the C-heads. These cars are a great place to look for the head upgrade. Just like the Mark VIIIs, they are cheaper than the Mustang counterparts and the only plus to the Mustang is the forged crank.
I dunno about the black top newer style injectors. Im not even sure they are 24# units. If they are you will need the adapters to make them plug and play for the Fox chassis injector harness.
I think the accessory drive may be different also. I dunno a whole lot about the 4V stuff unless its 03/04 Cobra junk. I do know that the MK VIII blocks are nice and strong though
It is different, but that's not considered part of the engine, so I didn't include it.
The blocks up to around 2000 were cast in Italy, can take approx 1000Hp, later blocks are cast in US and not as strong...
The Teksids made it into early 01 cobras and FRPP crate engines as well.
Teksid blocks were up until 98. After that it is the WAP block. The WAP block is the only block used by Ford for Modular crate engines in short or long block form. The WAP block is just as strong, if not a little stronger than the Teksid block.
Like i said, Teksids have been proven to have made it into Cobras as late as 01. My FRPP crate engine is in fact a Teksid block. WAPss are very strong but rarely would you hear anyone say they are stronger then the Teksids.
"officially" yes, 98 was the last year for Teksids as this is the year Ford dumped the contract with Teksid of Italy in favor for producing their own blocks for the 99 production year. They still had plenty of the Italian blocks laying around.
I have a friend with a 99 Cobra. Upon teardown, we found a WAP block. I've never seen an FRPP engine with the Teksid block, so I would like to see this. The Teksid did have the reputation as being the better block, but the WAPs have been proven and there is even an article floating around in the Primedia publishing world with an FRPP exec who swears the WAP block is better. Now, this may just be marketing, but they have proven to be just as reliable as the Teksids.
I didn't say they all had Teksids. I said they made it into cars as late as 01. I'm not going to debate weather or not the WAP is as good. Everybody has their opinions based on different reasons. They are both great blocks. One article floating around the web certainly doesn't make the rule now does it? For most uses, particularly street both blocks are plenty strong with plenty of head room to go.
Not sure how many FRPP crate engines you have fondled but again, just because you've never seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Like i said, I have FRPP part #M-6001-C460 sitting under my hood and as i said, It's a Teksid.
I never stated none of them existed, I just stated what I've seen. And there was no debating, just stating facts on both ends. Someone stated the blocks were cast up until 2000 and stronger than the new ones cast in the US, but they weren't. I stated that they were not cast past 98; hell the new blocks aren't even cast in the US, they're cast at the Windsor Aluminum Plant. I never said they were not used in anything past 98. As for the article, it's an interview in a very popular Mustang publication with an executive from Ford Racing, so I am sure it is valid, but like I said it could be marketing. Both blocks have been proven plenty strong.
Oh, okay? Well, I'll go out on the limb and disagree with you saying the Teksids are stronger than the windsors. Common knowledge along with trends and the metallurgy suggest the Teksids are superior. The WAPS are not the weak point in the average high HP engine. I'd wager to bet their are much more Teksid based 2K hp engines out there than Windsors. Regardless, it's kind of a moot point.
[INDENT]
[/INDENT]You stated none of them existed. YOU said the Teksids were up to 98 AND crate engines only got WAPS?
You can't state facts on both ends. Somebody has to be wrong and I'm afraid it isn't me. It's really not a big deal nor worth arguing over. I also don't care about any interveiw or article. I would bet every single time (everything else equal) that a WAP block would fail before any Teksid block would. Does it matter? No because i'm sure neither of us are looking to build thousand plus hp engines. Under 1000 HP the rotating assembly and tune are the weak points.
I'll even take it a bit further to say that i bet, had Ford kept the contract with Teksid that the Terminators would have been aluminum Teksid blocks if they were still available rather than the cast iron blocks.