221 crank

[Grimmy 312]

Can a 221 crank fit a xflow ?

What mods / rods / Pistons ect would be required ?

[slydog 7,873]

No Grimmy is doesn't work. I looked into it and and understand what your thinking about but TBH by staying 250 cubes and giving it enough compression camshaft and induction it will make the needed HP without needing to be revved as hard as I have revved mine in the past.

 

Back to original topic,its easier to get your crank de-stroked but it still doesn't remove the harmonics induced by the oil pump drive and looooong crank and camshaft in a inline 6cyl. A change to crank trigger will help but I have to ask do you spit fly wheel's off your engine? If not if you ever move to a auto you should do so with a billit flex plate as weight seems to help these big shit box lumps. 

[gerg 10,871]

I was thinking about this driving home, and how you make an undersquare engine perform. You're best off working within the mechanical limits of it instead of pushing it way past them.

 

If you wanna make the numbers with a crossy, you need to boost it, otherwise, NA is a challenge that will have you throwing cubic dollars and time at it, then it's a cranky bitch that you won't want to drive anywhere except down the race track.

 

Sly just curious what was the reason for the 221 not fitting a crossy? I've wondered about this myself.

[MNTL.XD 3,831]

A turbo'd 200ci was the quickest 6cyl in Australia wasn't it? Was in a blue Cortina from memory. Would've revved nicely. lol. Would probably be a good thing to have, quick as fk and a bit different to everyone else.

[slydog 7,873]

I was thinking about this driving home, and how you make an undersquare engine perform. You're best off working within the mechanical limits of it instead of pushing it way past them.

 

If you wanna make the numbers with a crossy, you need to boost it, otherwise, NA is a challenge that will have you throwing cubic dollars and time at it, then it's a cranky bitch that you won't want pto drive anywhere except down the race track.

 

Sly just curious what was the reason for the 221 not fitting a crossy? I've wondered about this myself.

 

It will physically fit but there is no benefit on reduced harmonics and RPM power making gain for $$$ spent to make happen.To make a smaller cube engine work you want a bigger bore to help spread RPM power band,or stick with 250 cubes and make a bigger bore. The potential gain for $$$ needed to make it work is not there. Jase Ghillier tried to steer me down this path but as shown by all the QLD boys 250 cubes works and has the benefit or more torque and a wider RPM band that they need anyway.

 

They just need compression,induction,camshaft and cyl head.The rest is exhaust ignition driveline blar blar blar but I do rate Grimmy's thinking. Partly because I reckon if I did a another more race specd xflow I'd over bore it to beyond possible limits,fit some new liners/sleeves,grout most of the block,run a good oil cooler and fit studs kits top and bottom.Then machine the cyl head to suit a cazy fat bore and as big a inlet valve as possible. Prob only around 1.94 would be it but it all helps and matching cyl head flow with 12 plus comp,big solid roller and current induction exhaust ignition and driveline and I bet it would make more use able torque and power curve though HP potential would be higher but how much so I don't know? And yes before it gets said yes a turbo would make more power easier but thats not the topic here.If people want to,good on em let em go.But I'm yet to be beaten by a turbo xflow,just saying.

 

Cubic $$$ is a time proven formula that will never change cos fast costs money and how fast do you want to go?       

 

A turbo'd 200ci was the quickest 6cyl in Australia wasn't it? Was in a blue Cortina from memory. Would've revved nicely. lol. Would probably be a good thing to have, quick as fk and a bit different to everyone else.

 

No it wasn't but it was the fastest xflow powered car in Aust for a very long time. Zammit boys went 7's in a turbo 6 10 years before Joe Gauci went 8's.They even went deep 9's or 8's in a Nitrous Holden 6 powered Torana many many year ago.Did a skid @ a early Summernats (like SN 2) and it sounded so dam serious. 

 

Back to topic,yes it was a 200 cube Falcon engine but you add boost as the replacement for cubes as proven by BA to current turbo 6 Falcon's and the RPM gain is only advantageous with boost as cyl head flow limits power potential.Can't compare the 2 via boost v's NAT ASP as boost makes cube realistically.     

[matt_lamb_160 252]

You would want a pre-86DA crossflow, or the rear seal could be a pain. Deck height will not work with std. Rods and piston. You can probably find an off the shelf combo that will fit (most likely not Ford) or get custom rods and run crossflow pistons.

 

Any one have pics of a 221 crank versus a crossflow crank? I don't think I have ever seen a 221 crank.

 

Make your own mind up it you want to do it or not.

[matt_lamb_160 252]

Doing the opposite:

 

http://fordsix.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=69393

[ando76 4,354]

Finding a 221 crank will be the issue. Then having it crack tested and praying that a very old cast crank will take the power you want to make.

 

About 13 years ago Alan tried a 200 cubic in crossflow as a skid car engine. Thoughts were that the 200 loved to rev and would be a good thing for burnouts, once the tyres were alight. Granted it was nothing flash. Just a petrol 140t tighe flat tappet wit ha c2 head, Cain 4 barrel and ran on avgas. It was great once you had it spinning but if it hit a grippy part of the track it would bog and had to be downshifted to get back up to speed.

 

Proved to me that there is no replacement for displacement. Deal with the harmonics in the big 250 and you will never look back