• Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.

    You can register to join the community.

drove a full 3L swap....impressed but yet not?

T

TRicker

Hard-core CEG'er
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
3,931
Location
Center City, MN
i drove a CEG'ers car with a 3L swap. i wont say whos it was unless he comes on and says. anyhow..... it is a full 3L with a spec clutch and LSD. it was fun to drive, definately had low end torque that is not there with my 2.5L. however, on the top, it felt flat compared to my 2.5. of course this 3L we are talking about had no bolt ons, where my 2.5 does. nonetheless, i believe my car would make more torque on the big end, or at least it feels that way. why is this?

dont get me wrong, the 3L rocks but i'm not overall impressed with it in comparison to the 2.5. the power is so low on the 3L it seemed to want to burn out, and it felt flat on top, where as my 2.5L has much less on the bottom but after secondaries open it is a whole different car. the power of my car is much more usable it seems. why does it feel that way?
 
TRicker said:
it does, but the whole top end is 3L stuff. intake manifold, TB, etc.
Click to expand...


There is your answer. THe Oval manifold does NOT compliment the SVT cams at all. The oval manifold cannot flow what the split port manifold does and especially not a dual honed intake.

Not only that, what kind of tune used to dial it all in, what bout exhaust, etc.

Just corking the exhaust with a bigger motor can reduce the efficiency and it won't perform as well as an opened up 2.5L with better intake and exhaust.

You should drive a different 3L, it will be much better.
I've seen a lot of basic 3L swaps with much better low-end but not better high end. Like you say it is still "Fun" but could be much more.
 
I'd bet he is untuned. With a tune the last few 3L SVT's I've built have been picking up upwards of 40whp. Without intake and exhaust mods he may be choking off the top end.
 
i drove a full 3L w/ svt cams, intake, headers, catback, & hms trans/lsd... the car is MUCH faster then my 2.5 and had MUCH more torque and is MUCH more fun to drive imo then the 2.5. makes me wonder why in the heck the 2.5 was put in to begin with.

i mean when you have so much more tq, who really cares about top end grunt? :shrug: for me at least, to drive a 3L svt was a special experience.
 
Well at 200km/h(120mph) the 3L still pulls much better than my 2.5L did! So I'm happy :).

Aaron
 
Last edited:
well blackcoog you would know much about this car you built it.

and umm......it only had 5 bolts connecting the trans to the block???!!!?? what's that about?
 
TRicker said:
well blackcoog you would know much about this car you built it.

and umm......it only had 5 bolts connecting the trans to the block???!!!?? what's that about?
Click to expand...

If you use the 3L oil pan off the taurus, a couple bolt holes will not line up with the trans.

I don't know what blackcoog did or how his build was, so I'm not saying he did this, just saying thats 1 way to not have all the trans-to-engine bolts in.
 
Thats probably why. I drove aarons full 3 liter w/out svt cams. Its fast, but it doesnt necessarily feel as fast as it is. The power is smooth and tq is there through the midrange, it doesnt hit all at once like a 2.5 or a 3.0 with secondaries and SVT cams
 
Yeah, to make the car complete, I'd be nice for a S/C or the bottle in the higher end to make that Duratec sing!
 
nope just wondering. chris is my friend, i'm not bein an azz to him at all. just wondering, i knew there was a reason. and kyle, i wasnt even using your name because i was tryign to see why it doesnt have the top end like mine. i do forget that i have a tuned fuel curve and bolt ons.....and you just started modding your car. we should find SVT cams though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top