MG-Cars.com
MG MGB Technical Ford Pinto Conversion? BBS discussion at MG-Cars.net
MG-Cars.net
Welcome to our resource for MG Car Information.
Recommendations
Parts
MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.
|
|
MG MGB Technical - Ford Pinto Conversion?
| hi all, just a quick one, has anyone ever done a 2.0ltr pinto conversion on an mgb? they seem pretty popular with most kit cars and have been used for many other classic conversions. some used the type 9 gearbox which is a popular 5 speed conversion for the mgb, just wanted to know if anyone's kept the engine on the end of it when they put it on. cheers, joe |
| J P Connor |
| I believe there is a site detailing such a conversion. Quite a fast car from what was posted. I do not have the URL but maybe someone else saved it? |
| Pete |
| In order to do a correct *Ford* Pinto conversion, one would have to relocate the fuel tank into an area more prone to damage in a rear-end collision! ;-) rick |
| rick ingram |
| Hi Joe, A friend of mine have a 2,3L pinto engine in a kit car with an Holley 4 barrel carburetter. A nice torquey engine. Cheers, JGC |
| Jean Guy Catford |
| rick, yeah i just read up about them exploding on impact! |
| J P Connor |
| Yeeeccckkk! Oh sorry, couldn't help myself. Leaking, noisy, prone to fail, etc, etc,. Why not just 'tune up' the stock engine? I did! Or if you want power, do the GM 60 degree V6 conversion? http://www.bmcautos.com/ My son Brian's web-site. Or at least something that has some degree of sophistication, like a 16 valve twin cam, Rover , or Honda, or even Saturn? Safety Fast Dwight |
| Dwight McCullough |
| I did not know there were any Pinto's left. All the ones they shipped to Wisconsin rusted away years ago. |
| Bruce Cunha |
| Dwight, i mean the 2.0ltr version from the much loved sierra, escorts etc. My dad had an old sierra 1.8 LX (not exactly something to rave about) with a pinto engine. it did 250,000 miles and broke down once due to the engine in the 10 years we had it. the older ones were seriously prone to cam failiure and did blow up. but, that was all sorted out in the later engines. they must be ok, loads of people use them in modern kit cars. i've never seen a B series engine in a kit car. don't worry i am just tuning up the stock engine with a V8 popping in a bit later. just want to see if there's any examples of this conversion. |
| J P Connor |
| The 2.0 liter Pinto engine is capable of being tuned to make 200 Hp. How many MGB's produce 200 hp? http://www.grmotorsports.com/pinto.html Go to any Saturday night oval dirt track and check the mini stock class. You will find Pinto's are still being raced and some are still winning races. http://www.fordpinto.com/yourracers.asp I believe there is an SCCA regional class for Pinto's FWIW, Clifton |
| Clifton Gordon |
| thanks gordon for supporting my point! a standard 1800cc pinto produces around 90bhp, thats not bad, lets be honest. like clifton said, a 2.0ltr can be tuned up to about 200bhp. so i'm guessing no one has really done this conversion? cheers, joe |
| J P Connor |
| Having participated in many engine conversions over the years, it is so much easier to 'tune up' the stock engien. Unless of course, you need 300 HP in a 'B' I'd bet you could get fairly close to that with a finely tuned engine, and then add the super charger. Probably for less $$$$$$ too. How much is it worth to turn a MGB into a MIata? Front & rear suspension, engien treansmission. where does it endz/ The it truly wouldn't be an MG anymore. The results that I get with my 'tuned' stock engine at competition events, impresses many people. Wth the 60 year old engine design and 'ox-cart' suspension. Safety Fast Dwight juss my 2 cents |
| Dwight McCullough |
| if i'm honest i think that dwight is probably right. the pinto engine tuning parts are relatively expensive in comparison to the B's standard motor, and with some real expertise, it would be possible to get a B series engine into the 200bhp range. joe |
| J P Connor |
| Just out of curiosity, what do you have to do to an MGB engine to get 200 reliable, streetable, horsepower out of it? Ball park cost estimate? |
| Dan Masters |
| Dan, My opinion a cost of more than $8,000 to modify a B engine, like: overboring to 2,0L engine, cam, piston, connectig rod, crossflow head, Hi-perf valvetrain, light flywheel, balancing, blueprinting, diff carb set-up, etc,etc. In that area I vote for a V8 302 swap but no B has ever been design to cope with so much HP without major structural and suspension reinforcement. Cheers, JGC |
| Jean Guy Catford |
| a 200bhp mgb roadster was in retro cars magazine a few months back. bored out to 2.0, aluminium cross-flow head, twin weber 45's etc etc. it is do-able but like jean said, just whack a v8 in there. job done. it would sound alot better anyway! |
| J P Connor |
| http://www.britishclassiccarspares.com/engine.html here's the guys site. joe |
| J P Connor |
| Well, here I am probably suggesting heresy, but if I had to do a re-power, I'd avoid v8's. The size, ignition access and mostly the lumpity lumpity sound do them in for me. I really don't like the sound of v8's especially when they've got some time on them and are getting sloppy and going Chugity-chugity. SO I come to the big question. Why not a Mazda RX7 rotary? Clean, small, bags-O-power, torque and I'll bet the costs are small too. The gearboxes are very good and the ratios are excellent. I drove one in Colorado in the early ninties, it was a dream car and it sounded like a 6 or 12 ie. smooooth! My little 4-banger is about to be rebuilt for the 4rth time in 500'000 miles. I had to retire the crank, too many grinds. We are loyal to each other and she does 0-60 in 13 seconds, a veritable blur :) Stewart |
| stewart |
| stewart, what do you mean by ignition access? in all the V8 conversions i've seen it looks to be ok. i guess you either love the sound of a V8 or hate it, it's like a lot of things really. i love the sound so i can't relate to what you're saying at all!!! the new rx7's and 8's sound pretty meaty, how comes you like the sound of them? joe |
| J P Connor |
| How could anyone not like the sound of a V8 engine. especially one in a nicely tuned MGB. I think you need to get out more and smell the exhaust, hang with real car guys, drink better beer. |
| Jimmy P. |
| i second that jimmy |
| J P Connor |
| How about the turboed 4 cylinder Merkur engine that was in Thunderbird SCs in the uS? Lotsa power and cheap as sh*t to buy. |
| Mike MaGee |
| There is a guy in Arizona that is putting a Ford 2.3L turbo engine & T-5 in a '79 MGB. Don't know if he visits here or if he has a website. |
| Carl Floyd |
| Huffaker and Crowther and other engine shops that supported Race MGB engines, claimed they got more than 180 hp out of a race engine using the cast iron head. Of course that was with the engine turning some 7000+ rpm and no power below 3500 rpm. With a 4 intake port alloy head and fuel injection, among other mods, a drivable 160 hp sounds feasible. Reducing weight makes a difference too. I figure I've taken nearly 120 lbs off my 67 gt engine and tranny. Overdrive to 280z trans, alloy engine back plate, gear drive starter, alternator instead of generator, 5 port alloy head with alloy rocker stands and rocker arms, Alloy flywheel, Small 7 blade plastic fan, Tube header instead of factory cast iron manifold and Lighter/smaller old style front engine pulley, among other items. Additional weight reduction for fiberglass springs, 1 battery rather than 2, no oil cooler, and a compact lightweight spare tire and wheel. Altogether I'm close to 200 lbs lighter. Stock dry 67 MGB GT weight according to the factory was 2190. A 9% weight reduction is equivalent to 9% more horsepower. The car also handles better. If I diet and lose the 50 lbs I need to, that would improve performance too. Barry |
| Barry Parkinson |
| I got to say if your going to put another 4 banger into a B go with a ford zetec or duratec or a mg k-series (same company for originality purposes if this concerns you). All these engines are vastly better than the standard B engine even if it uprated to fast road spec. They produce more power as stock and more efficient engines. Consider this a 2.0 duratec produces 135 bhp as standard, put a weber alpha system on it and it will produce 165 bhp easily for a cost of around £3000 tops. To get this sort of power out of a standard B engine would require quite a bit more money spending, the crossflow engine requires in the region of £4k. At the end of the day the more modern engine should give you 35-40 mpg easily where i have rarely seen any better than 28 out of my B with 20-23 more likely on the B roads i like to play on. And yes the stock answer given by most people is fit a V8, yeah nice engines but imo not really an engine suited to the style of a B, personally i have always regarded B's as sports cars hence deserving a tuned 4 cylinder, if i wanted a grand tourer i would fit a V8.....since i don't i will probably go with a 2.0 zetec sometime next year. Should be good for 170 bhp with the option to turbo charge it to 270 if i ever feel the need (unlikely - after all if i wanted big power i would buy a different type of car). Just my opinion l8ers Julian |
| JB Charlesworth |
| Still, the original engines for their time are hard to equal. And with all the problems of a conversion, I still prefer the original. I own a '77, with a '72 engine that has been tweaked. When I 'lose' the very heavy rubber bumpers, and then a few other things, to get the car to below 2000 pounds. The power to weight ratio will be very good. Back in the days before pressure oiling, high compression ratios, and poured bearings, it would be easier to rationalize converting to a 'modern' engine. I'll stick with the 'B' engine. Safety Fast Dwight |
| Dwight McCullough |
| Why anyone would consider putting a Pinto into a B escapes me. Use the B series or a V8 but the Pinto was always a noisy engine that didn't have a lot going for it. Yes the bottom end was almost unburstable but the top was noisy and prone to problems. Leave it out and go for the Rover V8 |
| Iain MacKintosh |
| i'm still a bit confused though. why do so many people opt for pinto engines in kit cars etc? why not a B series? the tuning parts for the pinto are more expensive in comparison to the B and from what i can see and everyone seems to hate it! |
| J P Connor |
| J P Why do people put the pinto in kit cars- same reason they put small block chevy's in everything here in the states- They are cheap, available, and make good power. I think the objection you're seeing is based more on the premis of- If you're going to install a non-standard engine, or one that is infrequently installed (at least here in the states), you're going to be doing some custom fitting. If you're going to do custom fitting, put the effort in the best package you can get, so you reap the most reward from the change. No one will sit here and tell you a pinto is junk- Ford made way too many. Most would agree the performance potential of the pinto is higher than that of the B- if for no other reason, the larger displacement. What they are questioning is the improvement enough to justify the effort you would expend. If it was a great idea, I would think there would be swap kits coming out your, well they would be common. |
| greg fast |
| There's always the Cosworth Turbo powered B Roadster put together by Falla Classics. The following link should work but at the time of writing the link is down. http://www.fallaclassics.co.uk/project_cosworth.htm As far as I remember it was 300bhp, disc brakes front and rear but I could be wrong. I did hear that they've recently put together a 5-link kit for the B. Rick |
| Rick Haynes |
| greg, you have made some very good points there. I agree that If the engine was to produce the performance and reliability that made all the modifications worthwhile, it would have been done a long time ago. Rick, i've visited that site frequently and it's one of my favourite conversions. Tasty. |
| J P Connor |
| I heard tell of a chap who is grafting the entire 4 wheel drive running gear from a sierra cosworth into his MGB. Should be quite a force to be reckoned with when it's finished! Can't beat a good bit of turbocharging :o) -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| sounds pretty impressive! do you have any more details on it? joe |
| J P Connor |
| "Can't beat a good bit of turbocharging" Oh, yes you can! Easily. |
| Dan Masters |
| With what, Dan? More displacement? I'm quite happy to turbo that for you too, you know :o) J.P, I don't have any more info I'm afraid - I just heard it from someone who had heard it from the chap who was doing it, I haven't seen the car myself. I prefer not to gut cars completely in order to achieve a swap - I'm happy with my 200 horses with an unmodified engine, and I needed only a couple of small 'notches' in the shell :o) best of luck, -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| I have a B series Motor running 167 and about to get to 180, 200 Bhp think your pushing it abit unless you go turbo route but even so the bottom end wont last very long at all. 180 is bad enough and requires a custom Cam |
| Nathan Notts UK |
| "I'm quite happy to turbo that for you too, you know" Olly, Yes, that would work, but then I'd just come along and replace the turbo with a supercharger and have a much nicer engine. ;-) Seriously, though, that doesn't resolve the issue. The issue isn't how much power you can get (how about a 16 cylinder locomotive engine with over 7,500HP?), the issue is how is the best way to get the power you want (or need). Before that detemination can be made, criteria have to be defined: Most power? Most reliabilty? Most economy? Cheapest cost? Easiest installation? Least amount of modifications to the car? Street use? Road racing? "Gee-whiz" factor? Personal preferences? Given the assumption that we are talking about an MGB for dependable use on the street, with power in the 200 - 300HP range, I contend that a turbocharger is not the most desirable route to take. Can you get 200 reliable, streetable HP from an MGB engine with turbocharging? At what cost? 300HP? Forget it, it ain't gonna happen. How about the Ford turbo 4 cylinder? Take a look at this site: http://www.geocities.com/gocartmg/ Is this what you'd want under the hood of your MGB? I haven't seen this installation for myself, but I have seen this same engine in a TR6, and I can tell you it took a lot - and I mean a LOT - more work to get it installed than a V8 takes. And we're only looking at 205HP at that. If you're going to go to that much trouble for more power, why not go all the way and install a V8? Take a look at this site: http://www.eclecticmotorworks.com/miatab2.html For the same amount of work and modifications, he could've had a V8! Weight concerns? A Rover V8 will weigh less than the stock engine, and can get you 200 or more HP easy. A Ford 302 will weigh the same or less than a turbocharged B engine, and probably a lot less than the turbo-Ford 4-banger. A Rover V8 will weigh a LOT less! And don't forget - there are currently no DIY turbo kits available for the B engine, and no kits available for the Ford turbo either. That means you have to do all the design and development work yourself. If someone would develope such a kit, similar to the supercharger kit the Moss sells, that would change the discussion dramatically. Still would fall short of our 200 - 300 HP goal though. Of course, if you just want a turbocharger, for whatever reason, go for it - end of discussion. That's the best reason I can think of for using one. Yes, whatever displacement I can come up with, you can one-up me with a turbo addition, but if we want to go that route, I would suggest a supercharger is a better choice. But that's a discussion for another day. Cheers! PS: What engine are you running in your MG? 200HP unmodified? Sounds interesting. |
| Dan Masters |
| Ah, belt-driven supercharging! So, no way of modulating boost, no way of flattening the torque curve, and worst of all no cool PtChhhh noise when you change gear! :o) Only kidding - I'm sure belt-driven blowers have their moments, but turbos are more efficient (lower overall stress on the engine for given amount of power). If you're worried about lag, you're living in the last century - my T25 spools up quicker than the dash pots can get out of the way in the SU that is, I believe, used in the B supercharger kits. Current cutting-edge turbos are even better, as the T25 is 1990s technology. I have a Rover T16 turbo motor in mine - 2 litres, 2 cams, 16 valves, and up to 12 psi of boost. 175 foot pounds of torque from 2100 rpm all the way to 6000 rpm. 200 horses at the red line (6700), 220 foot pounds available with a change in boost modulation, and way way more to give when I can afford to tune it. Plus, it's a b-series derivative so true to MG parts-bin ideologies! It doesn't half shift, by the way :o) -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| oliver, what gearbox did you use for your conversion? also, how much work was it to shoe-horn that t16 motor in? joe |
| J P Connor |
| JP, I used the 4-synchro MGB box - it being the biggest thing you can squeeze down the Mk1 tunnel, with the exception of the type 9 conversion which I cannot afford at the moment. It was lots of work - much more so due to having done this to a Mk1 car as there is no room for anything! Cheers, -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| Olly, My every day car is T16 turbo powered. An R reg Rover Vitesse. So I know what the 200bhp feels like even though I have a heavier car. Looking at your pictures I was surprised to see the heater still in place. I thought the induction system would conflict with it. Have you turned the plenum chamber around in some way? Or is the one from the 620TI different? David |
| David Witham |
| Yes, my throttle body is at the front of the car - done by using a land-rover plenum. These are, to say the least, somewhat scarce :o) Makes it neat though. -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| Olly Out of interest will you be taking your car to Stoneleigh this year ? Kind of interested in the T16 as a power source :) |
| JB Charlesworth |
| Erm... when's stoneleigh? I'm having new rear wings at the moment and I'll need to do some painting when I get it back... though it might show up in primer! -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| Stoneleigh is on 20th Feb :p hehe u may be struggling to make that methinks :p |
| JB Charlesworth |
| joe i am puting a 2300 out of a 74 mustang two same as a pinto into my 76 b and a later mustang t-5 will bolt to the same bell, i was quite a pinto fan back in the 70s and watch many of them on the mini stock tracks around here. the problem with the 2000 engine in the us anyway is that it was made in europe and they stoped shiping it to the us in 1973. all 74 and up pintos over here were 2300.(or v-6,v-8) plus the 2000 and 1600 had differant bells the trans out of a 74 and up will not bolt to the older motors. but i think any of the ford 4 cyl will perform as good as the stock mg with more pep. i have mine seting in the car now it fits great no body problems at all do have to change oil pans to a rear sump all pitos and mustang twos were front sump. bob |
| bob dudley |
| sounds pretty good bob, do you have any pictures yet? joe |
| J P Connor |
| There was a comment or two about a Pinto powered MGA a few years ago on the MGA board. Apparently it is an easy fit, so the same should be true to install the engine into a B as the A and B engine mountings are identical. The owner raved about the performance. Do I understand that this Pinto engine was used in the Ford Sirra? If so, then a complete transplant may be possble, because the Sierra gbx is also used for MGA five speed conversions using a special bellhousing. |
| dominic clancy |
| it was used on most of the sierras i believe. the 16V cosworth (turbo) engine was based on the pinto block fitted with a 16V head and turbo'd, that was used in the sierra cosworths. Fully tuned you can be looking at 500bhp. the basic sierras used the type 9 gearbox which is used for 5 speed conversions on B's quite commonly, however the cosworth version used the borg warner T5. |
| J P Connor |
| 500? This one hyur makes 779 ponies... http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/sunny/779BHP/779a.jpg The YB block isn't quite the same as the Pinto one. It's based on it, but as far as I can remember there are some detail differences that prevent you just swapping a cosworth head onto it. Cheers, -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| 500 was a rough figure, but yeah there are differences. There are two main types of block, the '20' or the '205', the 205 is the basis of the 16v cosworth motor. The later standard pinto engines used the 205 block which has a different casting and is quite a bit thicker. You can bolt on a 16V head onto the 205 block no problem, you just need to change the pistons and components which make up the belt drive (obviously, changing from 8 valves to 16). Nice picture, try squeezing that into a B engine bay! Joe |
| J P Connor |
| 779..... it's enough to make you weep with joy. |
| J P Connor |
| > try squeezing that into a B engine bay! I'd have a go if I could afford it :o) Thanks for the block info, 'tis good to be more clued up on these things. Cheers, -- Olly |
| Oliver Stephenson |
| No problem, i made your fridge cake by the way a few weeks ago. Very nice, my girlfriend loved it! I swapped the condensed milk for some extra thick cream though, i thought it would be sweet enough with all the chocolate and biscuits. I had to leave the sultanas out though, she doesn't like them :( Joe |
| J P Connor |
This thread was discussed between 12/01/2005 and 22/02/2005
MG MGB Technical index
This thread is from the archive. The Live MG MGB Technical BBS is active now.