Crazy motor "fit" question

Sure, somebody out there has probably asked this question before, OR, I'm just nuts altogether and this is the first time, but....

The Maverick obviously comes equipped with an inline six or a V-8. QUESTION: Will a 4 cylinder motor fit in it (that is, bolt in direct)? I'm thinking out loud here, you know, like a Hi-poed Pinto 2.3L or a later Thunderbird turbo motor....certainly it's not a fit issue, there would be enough room.

Anyone? I think it would be something interesting and different....please, no "why's" - like I said, it's a crazy question.

Chris

 

This has been discussed before. If you want to bolt-in the 2.3, you need the brazilian maverick engine mounts. Another way would be to fab all the stuff. My uncle did this swap in the 80's with his '68 Falcon, and I haven't asked him what shop did the job. Maybe they knew what parts to use or maybe they made their own.

Someone around here has a set, I guess he imported them from Brazil.

Personally, I'd love to have a 2.3T Maverick. SVO Maverick FTW!!!.

 

With all the skill sets on this board and as many times as I have seen one of the custom car/hot rod TV shows either use a set of engine/frame mounts from a different car or just make a set from scratch I don't know why it is such an issue to get a set of mounts either fabbed up or a set of existing ones modified to work for this application and get a 2.3 put in one of these Mavericks.... I am not saying that I could do it because frankly I don't have the tools or the time, but with all the car building talent on this place I bet if someone got serious and stayed on this project it could be done in little to no time

 

I have a running 2.3L in my '69.5. Hit the key, fires right up. Reason it's not driveable? Motor mounts! Engine is just sitting in it, not really bolted in. I may try to finish it one of these days, just have other projects and don't really have any desire to mess with it right now.

 

Jamie:

Interesting - did you do any mods to the motor? Cam? Headers? Head work? Intake? Curious....

Chris

 

It's totally stock out of a 1980 Mercury Capri. I stuck it in there just to see how it would fit. The EGR valve hits the drivers side shock tower.

 

I'd really love to see a video of an up and running 4 banger mav. Seems like a cool thing. I've been thinking about this for awhile. Is it feasible? Would it be slow as heck? Would it have decent mpg? (I wanted to start a thread to ask all this, but I'm seizing this opportunity.)

 

With mine, I'm not really thinking about speed. I was looking at it from an economy point of view. My ultimate goal is to build a Maverick that gets 30+ mpg, preferably around 35. Weather that will be with a 2.3 Lima or not, I do not know. If it runs with the general flow of traffic, I'd be happy. If you want to get technical, I'd consider the general flow of traffic to be somewhere around 16 or 17 seconds in the 1/4 mile, with a top speed of at least 85 mph, and a general hwy cruising speed of 65-70. I just enjoy driving my Maverick, I've got my Spider if I want to go out and blow some doors off.

 

Sounds like what I'm thinking of when I think 4 cylinder maverick. Just a good looking mav you could cruise around awhile in or drive to work without breaking your wallets back. Would the cars weight be a real issue? I know mavericks aren't necessarily humongous cars.

 

Weight is one thing we got going for us. These are relatively light cars. You figgure your average small bumper Maverick probably weighs around 2,800 pounds. My brother's '92 Sentra weighs around 2,500 and gets 38-40 mpg without breaking a sweat. So the weight is not too bad. The distance between the shock towers, and the big one, aerodynamics, are the things we have going against us. I don't know how the aerodynamics of our cars compare to an average modern economy car, however when I run my car up to 80 mph and the hood lifts up 3/4 of an inch in the back, and when I'm cruising along at 50 mph and a gust of wind hits the car from the front and you can literally feel the car slow down, I'd guess the aerodynamics are pretty much a joke. I'll bet these cars are more aerodynamic going backwards then forwards.

 

I never really thought about it like that. i think you're right. I figured the weight would not be much of an issue. Well, anyway I'm sending you well wishes on getting your 4 cylinder mav up and on the road. You'll be nice enough to share your findings, won't you?

 

Also, would there be a lot of fabbing involved? The drive shaft wouldn't fit and all would it? It'd be kind of a headache, huh? What all would you have to deal with?

 

I can't really say about the drive shaft. The transmission in my car is the SROD, which is a manual 4 speed overdrive transmission that came behind the engine in the Capri. I figure if the 2.3 works out well, then I would probably install a T5 in the long run (and convert to EFI), in which normal T5 swap procedures into these cars should apply as far as the drive shaft and transmission cross member go. But I have not tried to install a drive shaft yet. I will definitely post about it more when I get the car drivable.

Probably the hardest thing to find parts wise, would be a front sump Pinto oil pan for the 2.3.

 

Can't wait. My wheels have been turning a lot about 4 cylinder engines lately anyway. Thanks for giving me some solid answers.

 

I'm not 100% sure, but you may want to look at the 2.3 Volvos, but I guess noting is interchange-able