3.0 or 3.8 into 70s Torino

[occupant]

Cheap engineless Torino headed my way, new radiator, new exhaust, and all sorts of goodies. So I'm thinking about gas prices and about how small an engine I can get away with in a 3800-4000lb car. The car came with a 351 originally (I assume a 351W but it could have been a 351C) and has an FMX transmission still under it. Car was driveable 3 months ago before the motor was pulled for a truck, so the transmission should be fine. 351 in 1974 had 158 horsepower and around 245lbs-ft of torque. The base 302 in the Torino had 141 horsepower and around 205lbs-ft of torque.

The 3.8 Essex V6 matches the 302's numbers in CFI form, and the various EFI/SFI forms do better. I think the motor would be a great swap into the car. A 3.0 engine is a little more anemic, but if I remember my 1975 351W Torino I had in high school which was a bone-stock grandma sedan, it had more than enough power and delivered 15-17mpg. I'm wondering if putting a 3.0 in this car would be worth any trouble to install and if it would do better mileage wise than a 3.8.

3.0 likes to rev, 3.8 likes to cruise. But can a 3.0 bolt up to an AOD or FMX transmission? I think the car has 2.75 or 3.00 gears in the 9-inch, so that won't let it rev well, will it? But if it'll bolt up to the stock FMX, it'll turn decent once up to speed without overdrive, right?

3.0 is fuel injection only, probably needs 2 or 4 cats, 2 or 4 O2 sensors, etc. What else will I have to put in to make it work? If the FMX/AOD won't work, I'll have to find an A4LD and make changes to the drivetrain, right?

 

[fiftyfordfloored]

How about the 3.8L S/C out of a '94-95 Thunderbird Supercoupe? Torinos (like the '70-71) were very close to the weight of the Supercoupe... so it would deliver the power (230 HP / 330 TQ) and MPGs. Not to mention be cool as hell.

Just a thought...

 

[Psychopete]

I believe the 3.8L RWD was a Windsor bellhousing pattern. The FWDs are a Vulcan pattern, like the 3.0L. Whether anything else will line up... ?

Pete

 

[AllanD]

Actually I have seen thinfgs that strongly suggest that the Essex-3.8RWD engine is made in a pattern more like a Modular pattern as well.

I have an M5R2 trans from a supercoupe that I was given in-trade
and it WILL NOT bolt to a windsor block.

I got the trans with expectation of using it in a friends 2wd 5.0 ranger
project. The main idea was that the Supercoupe trans uses a hydraulic
clutch (the same slave as an '88-up ranger) making the trans setup FAR easier.

But it wouldn't bolt to a bare 5.0 block we had here.

Shit, even the dowel pin spacing was different.

all that being said a 3.8 might work in that car but trust me, you won't like it.

there isn't anything that has been mentioned that'll bolt to that trans.

a 4.9liter six cyl engine would...

It's in the same power ballpark (165hp) and is capable of 22+mpg
in an F-150, in a more aerodynamic torino...
and though a bit heavier than you might have wanted it'll certainly fit.


AD

 

[Teoma]

what year torino exactly because a lot of them ran the 351M which has a big block bolt pattern and definately won't bolt up to any 6 that I know of. You could try fabricating an adaptor plate to make it work

 

[baddad457]

If anything you'd want the 3.8 or a 4.2 V6 in a heavy car like a 70's Torino. Those things weigh at least 4000 lbs. Just don't expect the mileage you think, heavy vehicles need gobs of bottom end torque to get em moving with the least effort, that's going to get you the gas mileage you want. Put a 3.0 in there and you'll have your foot in it so much that the mileage will be less than a bigger engine.

 

[occupant]

I've been very satisfied with the 3.0 engines I've owned/driven. I know the long body Aerostar with the 3.0 I owned before was plenty fast enough and it was heavy. The A4LD was the weakest link on that van and it was rebuilt before I did anything else to the van (and there was MUCH else done). I just wish it would bolt up to an AOD.

I may want to stick with the 3.8. I can pull a Mustang/Thunderbird/Cougar powertrain and use the whole thing, belts to tailshaft, all the wiring, intake, etc. It should all fit right since the FMX and AOD are very close to having the same case size. The A4LD looks longer in pictures anyway.

I guess the next thing to do is decide which 3.8 to use. They had some carbureted ones in 82-83, throttle body injection for a few years, some are fuel injected, some are split port, there's all sorts of options. I don't think I want to deal with a turbocharged or supercharged setup since this is for fuel mileage. My first choice would be a 94-95 engine, since it's got the latest fuel injection system but isn't OBD II. I'll still have to work around airbag, ABS, and electronic cluster issues. I want to keep the stock gauges (speedo, fuel, temp, oil pressure, idiot lights) and maybe add a vacuum gauge where the clock would have been if the car had one.

I don't know about a 4.2 engine, those would be OBD II for sure (they came out in 97, right?). And the 4.0 engine from an Explorer wouldn't do so well for mileage, I never see people claiming 20+ in those.

 

[AllanD]

An aerostar is far lighter than you think it is.

It's also fairly aerodynamic as such a boxy vehicle can be...

AD

 

[pillen140]

arent aerostars made of cardboard?

 

[bobbywalter]

put a bb in the torino.

aerostars are heavier then torinos.
try a 3.0 powertrain if you have one there just to see. do you have a complete powertrain of some sort?