JohnCh

I researched the Duratec several months ago and posted a some pertinent information about it in this thread that some of you might find interesting. Based on my research I bought a 2.0L Duratec last Fall to replace the crossflow in my Westfield. I had originally hoped to have the engine in place by now, but I recently bought a new tin top and so need to sell a car to make room in the budget. BTW I have a couple of photos of the engine with the cam cover and sump removed that I will upload to my website if people are interested. -John Throttle Steer Edited by - JohnCh on 6 Mar 2003 16:03:12

Is this problem on the front and rear of the car, or only the rear? If the latter, then I may know the problem. Evidently Westfield produced two chassis that differ in the rear shock mount spacing. When I ordered my AVOs I was told to jack up the rear of the car and with the shock fully extended measure the distance between the mounting bolts. This distance would either be ~12" or ~14". It could be that your chassis requires the shorter shocks, but you were sent the longer ones. -John www.throttle-steer.com

I am going for the 2.0L for the reasons AMMO mentions, and also because the 2.3L I can get here in the states uses milder cams (the US 2.3L is used in a truck and so needs the torque down low) and a lower compression ration (9.7:1 vs. 10.8:1). Since I plan to leave the engine internals alone for another year or so, I think the more aggressive cams in the 2.0L will respond better to the increased breathing offered by the throttle bodies and provide a more "entertaining" power curve -John Throttle Steer Edited by - JohnCh on 23 Oct 2002 02:38:42

I am planning on installing a Duratec this winter and so thought I would jump in here with some additional information that I have gathered over the last few weeks: Raceline are just making their conversion parts available. They include the bellhousing to connect to a Type-9, lightened flywheels (two different weights available), barrel throttle bodies, wet sump, exhaust (4-2-1), and a few other things that I am forgetting. Chris read off some of the prices and they are similar to those charged for the same Zetec parts (some were higher, others lower). They also made the decision to sit the engine a little farther back, so it is in a similar position to where Caterham now fits the K-series. They hope to have all of this information on their website soon. Scholar claims that they have seen 192 hp on their 2.0L Duratec with only TB and an ECU, but Chris told me that they are getting 180hp in that configuration. Given differences between dyno's, the real power figures are probably the same (although the differences in TBs, exhaust, and ECU programming could also account for a bit). Chris also said that with a cam change, but no head work, they are getting 210hp -- add headwork and you can see the potential of this engine The Duratec engine is currently available in 3 sizes: 1.8L (125 hp @ 6000 rpm, 125lb/ft @ 4800 rpm, 10.8:1 compression) 2.0L (145 Hp @ 6000 rpm, 140 lb/ft @ 4800 rpm, 10.8:1 compression) 2.3L (140 hp @ 5050 rpm , 155 lb/ft @ ~4200 rpm, 9.7:1 compression) Mazda will also have their own versions of these motors available. They differ from the Ford versions in that they employ S-VT (sequential valve timing) and the 2.3L uses balance shafts. The power figures for the Mazda are: For the European market: 1.8L (118hp -10.8:1), 2.0 (145hp-10.8:1) , 2.3 (160hp-10.6:1) For the Japanese market: 2.0L (145hp-10.8:1), 2.3 (175hp- 10.6:1) For the US market: 2.3L (150hp- 9.7:1) Bore and stroke for the three engine sizes and valve sizes (intake/exhaust) are: 1.8L - 83.0 x 83.1, 32.5/28.0 2.0L - 87.5 x 83.1, 35.0/30.0 2.3L - 87.5 x 94.0, 35.0/30.0 The 2.3L uses a 14mm taller block to allow for the longer stroke, and the crank uses 8 counterweights versus 4 in the smaller motors. Given the above, the 2.3L sounds like a slightly heavier engine, and with the longer stroke, it may be a bit less "revvy." The 2.0L supposedly weighs 18KG less than the 2.0L Zetec, however, I am not sure if that delta is between longblocks, or fully dressed engines (it sounds like Ford may have saved weight in additional areas such as the intake manifold). The chain-driven double overhead cams now actuate the valves via mechanical tappets. The tappets are reportedly "precision-fit" during assembly and require no shimming. -John Seattle, USA http://www.throttle-steer.com

Because after the Phssthpok thread, I was afraid no one would respond! Ooh... I 'm probably better off posting my response to that on the WSCC boardroom 🙆🏻 😬 Thanks to everyone for their responses. After a lot of number crunching, I've decided to go for the 200 hp kit and use the savings to buy a Quaife differential. I figure with that much horsepower, traction will become an issue -John

Thanks Ammo, you actually did help Your points on learning how to drive the car are well taken. In fact three of my friends who have offered to help me do the swap are all instructors with the major car clubs in the area and each has promised to teach me how to drive the beast next season. Hopefully I will get in 7-10 track days at Pacific Raceways and Bremerton next year, and I will try to make myself a regular visitor to the local indoor kart track this Winter. I agree with you that 200 hp in a Caterham is enough for most people, but my car is actually a W******** so... Seriously though, I really want this car to scare me a little bit in the acceleration department. Juvenile I know, but then again so am I. As Paul points out, the 220 hp version still produces more torque than the 200 hp version at the point in the curve where it dips, and it also produces more torque (~7 lb/ft) at 3000 rpm. If the extra power doesn't come at the expense of the low end, then I may want to go for the 220 hp kit rather than wait until upgrade-itus rears its ugly head again in another year or two. Steve, although I am going to miss the sound of Webers, I already have an Emerald M3D sitting in my garage, so I am going to make the switch. I spent the last few years learning how to tune Webers (built up an Alfa 2.0L fitted with 45 DCOEs, see http://www.throttle-steer.com if you want to bore yourself) and now that I have finally become moderately competent at it, I am looking forward to the new challenge of learning the Emerald system. Thanks, John

This winter I am swapping out my crossflow for a Zetec modified with Raceline's components, but I am not sure if I should go with their 200 or 220 hp tuning kit. On paper, I like the idea of the latter's 10% power increase, but it will bump up the budget by 20% (I know, I know: Speed costs money -- how fast do you want to go?) and according to the dyno charts it has a big dip in the torque curve around 4000 rpm. The 200 hp torque curve by comparison is nice and smooth. Does anyone have experience with both kits? If so, is the higher power version worth it for a road car that only sees a few track days per year? Thanks, John