Yes, you do in fact have a great point - I suspect you have an 88" wheelbase
truck.
I would also stay the heck away from a 6 cyl if I had an 88, a putting such
a large amount of weight on the front axle of a SWB would be asking for
trouble. Personally, I am not at all knocking using a 4 cylinder in stock
form, 120 hp is exactly what the doctor ordered for a light 88, but Adam was
discussing boosting the power output - before spending three grand building
a high strung racing motor, why not go for a real loafer six? The money and
time required is about the same, yes, a six is more of a tight fit, but it
works - the Ford is massive, but it fits pretty nicely, with some breakfast
massaging.
If you can live with a relatively stock motor, an Iron Duke is a good
choice. If you are looking for horses before even swapping it out, why not
spend all that time and energy putting in a motor that will give you the
power you want?
J-L
----- Original Message -----
From: Kirk Hillman <kdhillma@telusplanet.net>
To: <lro@Works.Team.Net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Engine/Trans Swap
> J-L,
> I don't know why someone else would want the 2.5 (Iron Duke), but I
know
> why I would choose it. Simplicity. The motor is small and fits in the
> engine bay terrifically. Weight, it's hard to compete with a small lump
> like that. Minimal modifications... to anything. Sure, it won't compete
in
> torque with the 250 or 300 inch monsters, but it isn't intended to. The
> Duke can reliably put out 120-125 Hp using production parts. Personally I
> would love to have an engine like that at the moment. I like the idea of
> keeping the weight down. The reason is simple to illustrate if you know
> what a Suzuki Samurai is. I could be wrong but I believe the 2.5 is
lighter
> than the 2.25. Parts are extremely cheap too. The bores are the same as
> the 350 as well as some other parts which vastly increases one's options.
> The other opinion (yours) would likely be to simply fit the 250 or 300
> as you did. Great! I would love that as well, but it involves much more
> work which I don't have time or money for. My fear is the destruction of
> other parts of the truck under the torque these engines put out. A few
> others on the list that might remember my incremental plan to modify my LR
> may also remember my thoughts on overcoming this problem. But again,
meant
> more time and money. Maybe someday, maybe never. :-)
> I say 'Good on Ya' J-L. Same goes for those planning on using the
2.5.
> Have fun.
>
> Kirk
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jun 12 2001 - 14:11:26 EDT