Project 1929 FES (Ford Ecoboost Special)

[RoosterBooster]

hi all ... not been active on this board in a while (life had other plans )

thanks to my best friend pushing me in the right direction (because he wants a copy of the car as well) I dusted off an older abandoned project.

I love vintage shapes and especially Aluminum & Rivets ... my Tow rig/ kinda daily driver is a 1952 DiamondT with an extended sleeper/mini moho made of salvaged parts from a 1954 aluminum Spartan Mansion trailer...

as much as I love my truck for towing my home/toyhauler or quick overnight trips (with the quad on the back) I'm kinda tired of driving the big truck to the grocery store
so years ago I fell in love with the "Specials" from the `30 (usually lightened and streamlined production cars ... the original hot rod idea)
intended as a Daily driver/grocery getter/ canyon carver it has to fit in the back of the toyhauler and needs to be reasonably light and compact
my earlier plan was a Bike engine (GSXR or similar) single seater along the lines of this 1930 Austin 7 Special ;

but finding lightweight drivetrain parts turned into a major problem... and the lack of torque (for moving the extra weight) as well as the high strung engine noise just didn't feel to go well with the look.

so fast forward to the present: I just bought this cute little 2015 Ford 2.0 Ecoboost Turbo engine

I always considered myself a V8 guy, but the power to weight ratio of this little guy got my attention (as well as the factory 3" exhaust on a 2 liter engine lol )

I also won a Ford Racing Power Pack on ebay for a killer price.
the (usually pricy) FRPP ECM is essential to run this variable cam/ direct injection and high compression engine (aftermarket EFI just don't have the "brainpower")
but the advantage of the FRPP kit is that it includes (among other things) the "fly by wire" throttle pedal as well as reduced "hot rod" wiring harness and fuse box.
and the best part is the tune:
unlike the production ECM that detunes the (usual FWD car) engine to reduce torque steer the FRPP ECM allows you to use the engine to its full potential
found this dyno sheet :

hp output of 252 is the same, but torque raises to a diesel truckish 360 lb-ft !!!

as of right now I'm still deep in CAD planning / parts gathering (and soon on my way to my summer location in the UT mountains), but I plan on finalizing the design over the summer and starting construction in the fall

keep tuned for more details (if you think this sounds interesting)

 

[paul7110]

Subscribed! I built a bike engined car about 10 years ago (from a kit) using an R1 engine. Manic would be an understatement. I love seeing alternative builds. Keep it up!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[RoosterBooster]

with this more potent engine (and the pressure of my friend) I decided to make it a 2-seater, but still retain the "boat tail" as well as the general "airplane fuselage" look and construction

body will be all aluminum (.065 6061-T6 stressed skin over longerons and bulkheads) over a steel tubing/formed sheet pan.

for ease of construction I'm using a `29 Ford model A grill shell reproduction (all holes filled)
the ecoboost fits perfectly behind the shell like it was intended for it

charge cooler is for a Toyota FRS and fits the curved grill shell like a glove ...

by using a slightly narrower `32 style radiator I should be able to squeeze the CC tubing in between the radiator and the grill shell

here is the front end in CAD;

and a concept side shot to show to show how it should roughly look like in the end

... surfing for ideas I found this pic that kinda reflects the Roadsters intend and purpose ;

 

[matt_i]

Very cool! Despite you already having the hardware and the programmable ECM box, I was going to point out that the Saturn Sky/Pontiac Solstice already have the 2.0T EcoTec engine with RWD hardware and either auto or manual boxes as production hardware (have to find the engine codes that apply to those, and not the more common FWD codes that would go into a HHR-SS etc) Comparable torque and hp as far as I recall, around 250hp/280ft-lbs. There is a GXP tune which might unlock some more spark advance or higher boost.... That probably isn't relevant but thought I'd throw it out anyway.

So while I'm digressing, this should go even farther off the track...it won't fit your concept but one of my favorite non V8 engines is the GM 3800 supercharged (L67). There is ~'00 F-car (Camaro) rwd hardware for the naturally aspirated L36 (like exhaust manifolds, etc) that should mostly apply to an L67. This is older technology and heavier of course being *all cast iron* but I can report its fairly bulletproof having wrung it out quite thoroughly

 

[RoosterBooster]

matt I
lol.... funny thing is that I was actually looking really hard into the Solstice drivetrain,
but the Mazda/Ford Ecoboost won partly because of the great aftermarket support at the clutch/transmission end;
The Ecoboost block shares its bell bolt pattern with the Miata MX5 NC generation.
the (iirc 2006- 2012) Miata 6-speed is a direct bolt on and HD clutch/flywheel selection is great.

with the very wide powerband (huge low end torque mixed with rev happy DOHC) of the EB I could get away with less gears, but unfortunately the guys over at the turbo Miata forum all seem to agree that the 5-speed is just not up for the torque
they agree that the 6- is good for up to 350 ft-lbs , so I'm pushing the limit there,
but on the other hand my low target weight of 1500 lbs and the look- and purpose wise limited tire size and stickiness are helping to ease the strain.

I made a spreadsheet of (almost) all the part weights and I'm right now at ~1300 lbs ... I'm sure I missed a couple things, but 1500 sounds very doable

yeah, the temptation to just stuff a LS2 in it was great (due to demand it would have been a more expensive engine, but the Chevy control pack is significant cheaper)
however, it would have started the domino effect of wider body, heavier trans, heavier/complex exhaust system, beefier rear axle etc ... and I'm sure it would have creeped over my size (under 11 ft overall) and weight limit of my toyhauler trailer

another pic that I use for inspiration ... ;

btw
the 4 banger does have a huge advantage over building with V8`s that I'm used to :
the "direct head mounted" turbo and single exhaust port on the pass side leaves the driver side "cold"
... lets me place the foot box very tight up to the engine

 

[theoldwizard1]

I am not sure how much "tuning" you can do with that ECM, but all turbo engines running well on E85 with the boost cranked up !

I don't remember if the 2.0L or 2.3L EcoBoost has an open deck. When really pushing the power, this is a problem. One of the Detroit aftermarket companies (Livernois Engineering ?) makes a press fit spacer to fill the void between the cylinder walls and the outer block walls.

 

[Kent_B]

Subscribed! I really like seeing alternatives to the ubiquitous small block Chevy.

 

[RoosterBooster]

I am not sure how much "tuning" you can do with that ECM, but all turbo engines running well on E85 with the boost cranked up !

I don't remember if the 2.0L or 2.3L EcoBoost has an open deck. When really pushing the power, this is a problem. One of the Detroit aftermarket companies (Livernois Engineering ?) makes a press fit spacer to fill the void between the cylinder walls and the outer block walls.

oldwizard
yes, I think the FRPP ECM allows "mild" tuning via OBDII port, but I don't know how much power could be gained
I actually plan to not mess with the engine besides deleting the bolt on balance assembly in the oil pan; from what I'm reading on Focus ST forums it is hardly noticeable even on a DD, but it removes 18 lbs of mass (large part of it rotating mass) as well as making room for more oil volume in the oil pan .... may add a trapdoor baffle with the delete kit to keep oil sloshing at bay.
but other then that I don't see a need for any modifications... I'm even going to run the stock air filter box as recommended by FR

that light little thing should be stupid fast as it is anyway

btw another pic I like to look at for inspiration;

a photoshop I made years ago of that little Austin 7 special with wider tires

 

[RoosterBooster]

Subscribed! I really like seeing alternatives to the ubiquitous small block Chevy.

Kent
yeah, I like to be different

seriously, I actually got a large part of inspiration from this pic I found over at HAMB ;

notice the original "ecoboost" engine ; the old "pinto block" 2.3 turbo
... wish I remembered who`s pic/car that is to give proper credit

 

[TimeWarpF100]

hi all ... not been active on this board in a while (life had other plans )

thanks to my best friend pushing me in the right direction (because he wants a copy of the car as well) I dusted off an older abandoned project.

I love vintage shapes and especially Aluminum & Rivets ... my Tow rig/ kinda daily driver is a 1952 DiamondT with an extended sleeper/mini moho made of salvaged parts from a 1954 aluminum Spartan Mansion trailer...

as much as I love my truck for towing my home/toyhauler or quick overnight trips (with the quad on the back) I'm kinda tired of driving the big truck to the grocery store
so years ago I fell in love with the "Specials" from the `30 (usually lightened and streamlined production cars ... the original hot rod idea)
intended as a Daily driver/grocery getter/ canyon carver it has to fit in the back of the toyhauler and needs to be reasonably light and compact
my earlier plan was a Bike engine (GSXR or similar) single seater along the lines of this 1930 Austin 7 Special ;

but finding lightweight drivetrain parts turned into a major problem... and the lack of torque (for moving the extra weight) as well as the high strung engine noise just didn't feel to go well with the look.

so fast forward to the present: I just bought this cute little 2015 Ford 2.0 Ecoboost Turbo engine

I always considered myself a V8 guy, but the power to weight ratio of this little guy got my attention (as well as the factory 3" exhaust on a 2 liter engine lol )

I also won a Ford Racing Power Pack on ebay for a killer price.
the (usually pricy) FRPP ECM is essential to run this variable cam/ direct injection and high compression engine (aftermarket EFI just don't have the "brainpower")
but the advantage of the FRPP kit is that it includes (among other things) the "fly by wire" throttle pedal as well as reduced "hot rod" wiring harness and fuse box.
and the best part is the tune:
unlike the production ECM that detunes the (usual FWD car) engine to reduce torque steer the FRPP ECM allows you to use the engine to its full potential
found this dyno sheet :

hp output of 252 is the same, but torque raises to a diesel truckish 360 lb-ft !!!

as of right now I'm still deep in CAD planning / parts gathering (and soon on my way to my summer location in the UT mountains), but I plan on finalizing the design over the summer and starting construction in the fall

keep tuned for more details (if you think this sounds interesting)

Very Cool Concept/Project! I will be watching for sure.

At 1500 lb with 350 TQ it will be a total blast to drive. The 2.3 versions they are getting 600 hp out of and are a rear wheel drive platform. That sure would be fun on 1500 lb or so . .

Looking forward to more updates . .

 

[Abeo]

Ranger transmission should bolt up too. I've wanted to swap in this motor and control pack into a ranger for a long time... Very interested in how this turns out

 

[awdblazer]

subscribed for an awesome build

 

[RoosterBooster]

Very Cool Concept/Project! I will be watching for sure.

At 1500 lb with 350 TQ it will be a total blast to drive. The 2.3 versions they are getting 600 hp out of and are a rear wheel drive platform. That sure would be fun on 1500 lb or so . .

Looking forward to more updates . .

TWF100
yes, the 2.3 starts to get available at junkyards, but its still a little pricy (the ones I found have been in the $2000 to 2500 range) ...
sadly so is the FRPP to run it (iirc $1900 list price )
I'm on a tight budget so I settled for the 2.0 ;
I got the fully dressed low miles Lincoln MKZ engine for $940 shipped ... and got lucky on the FRPP kit on ebay (got it for $1000 shipped instead of the $1700 list price)

however, (kinda typical for Ford ) I discovered that Ford changed the engine wiring harness on 2014- engines and it is not compatible with the (2013) FRPP ECM ....
thankfully a new 2013 style replacement harness is available at Ford dealers for ~$210

btw the 2.3 seems to use the same trans as the V8 ... definitely strong, but maybe a little big for my projects tight body

 

[RoosterBooster]

Ranger transmission should bolt up too. I've wanted to swap in this motor and control pack into a ranger for a long time... Very interested in how this turns out

Abeo
yes, your right; the 5 speed out of the 4-140 Ranger also fits the 2.0 ecoboost and from what I was reading it is up for the torque , but the forward shifter location is maybe a problem ...
but I guess that could be fixed with a Z-shaped shifter stick

I don't have the trans yet so I'm still researching what would be best

one advantage of the Miata trans is that it is clocked to maintain the 10 degree tilt to the pass side of the (original for FWD designed) engine.
this engine rotation seems to works well for my projects tight nose
(more room for master cylinders and steering shaft)

 

[nonhog]

Love it! Always wondering
about how to repower my kids 66 Volvo estate. (Amazon) this thread has me thinking.

 

[Abeo]

From what I recall, you can swap the guts from an M5OD R1 HD (2001 4.0 Ranger trans, 210 hp, 240 lb-ft) into a M5OD R1 case (2.3 and 3.0 Ranger trans, ~150 hp). Only the bellhousing from the duratec 2.3 (2001 and newer) will bolt up to the 2.0 EB.

M5OD R1 HD holds up fine behind supercharged 4.0 V6's in 4500 lb trucks, I don't think it'd have a problem with a light car making the same torque. Also, super cheap and plentiful compared to a miata, but probably less refined.

Edit:
http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1596869#post1596869

Lots of knowledge on the ranger forums. From what I recall, the M5OD R1 HD was an upgrade to the regular M5OD R1, but that may need verifying.

 

[RoosterBooster]

Abeo
I appreciate the info ... still not sure what to do trans wise

wish somebody would make a reasonably priced bell to just slap a T5 on it
Quad4rod (or whatever that company name was) used to make an aluminum bell, but they went under .... and I don't see me buying a $999 Quicktime steel bell

the easy bolt on thing would be the miata 6 speed
but I was just reading on a rally racing forum about a guy that dropped an ecoboost 2.0 into an XR4 and already shredded two 6 speed transmissions (3th gear each time) ...
he is working on adapting a T5 onto it now ...
but I guess he is a lot heavier then my little toy

 

[RoosterBooster]

at least I have the rear end already;
grabbed this Mustang 8.8 a couple weeks ago:

gearing is maybe a little long (bought it mainly for the LSD)
but 8.8 gears are cheap ...
I like the triangulated 4 link so I'm going to basically copy the layout but with slightly longer aluminum tube/CM spherical rod end links

besides the (hidden) high tech engine and EPAS my friend and I agreed that we want to keep this visually on a strict "traditional" hot rod level;
no ifs/irs, no radio, no gadgets, no billet, no chrome everything ...

 

[HOTFR8]

Now this will be fun to see.

 

[RoosterBooster]

Now this will be fun to see.

there is a name I remember ; hi there HOTFR8

 

[RoosterBooster]

talking about EPAS; this is the Toyo (Chevy Equinox) electric power steering column I'm going to use :

kinda too big and the large motor is definitely on the heavy side, but cant beat the junk yard availability & price
I could get away with a smaller UTV sourced EPAS unit, but they are usually more $$ then I want to spend.

I'm still not sure if I should go with the manual adjustable assist controller or with the new speed sensitive one
(don't even know if I'm going to have a speed sensor at all ; may go the simple GPS speedo route like I did in my truck)

 

[36truck]

This will be a cool project. I've thought of many a ecoboost engine in old cars. It's just time & money.

 

[bluebolt]

at least I have the rear end already;
grabbed this Mustang 8.8 a couple weeks ago:

gearing is maybe a little long (bought it mainly for the LSD)
but 8.8 gears are cheap ...
I like the triangulated 4 link so I'm going to basically copy the layout but with slightly longer aluminum tube/CM spherical rod end links

besides the (hidden) high tech engine and EPAS my friend and I agreed that we want to keep this visually on a strict "traditional" hot rod level;
no ifs/irs, no radio, no gadgets, no billet, no chrome everything ...

Sounds like a great project!

Now as for the rear axle and Mustang triangulated 4 link it *****. It is also referred to as the Quadra Bind. The main problem is the upper control arms bind bad. More length as you are thinking about would help but wouldn't fix it plus packaging in a short wheelbase car might be difficult.

Check out these for some ideas:

Factory Five 3 Link https://www.factoryfive.com/galleries/challenge-car/3-link-rear-suspension/

Steeda 4 link: https://www.steeda.com/steeda-mustang-5-link-rear-suspension-system-555-2501.html

Maximim Motorsports Torque arm: http://www.maximummotorsports.com/Mustang-Torque-Arm-C89.aspx

You could also consider a 3 link 2005-2014 Mustang style with the third link on the top center of the housing. Use the stock style lower links and add the 3rd center link. Sounds like you have the fabrication skills.

 

[bluebolt]

Here is a Factory Five 33 Hot Rod chassis, it has the 3 link and might give you some packaging ideas.
https://www.autoblog.com/photos/factory-five-33-hot-rod/#slide-384748

 

[HOTFR8]

there is a name I remember ; hi there HOTFR8

Nice to see you tackling a great project with a difference.

 

[RoosterBooster]

bluebolt
I appreciate your input and suggestions,
but please excuse me for being a little weary whenever somebody on the internet tells me this or that *****
...without knowing you or your background I just don't know how much it relates to my intended purpose or driving style.

talking about background; mine is mostly sand/desert offroad, and I usually like IFS/IRS...
I already started drawing/mocking up a-arm/aluminum spindle setups for this project ....

(btw the spindles are Jaguar/Lincoln LS with Mazdaspeed 3 aluminum calipers and mazda 3 rotors)

but my friend (rightfully) talked me out of it.
it probably would have been awesome for handling, but the look would have been just not right

we are talking recreational driving on public roads and not exploring the limits on a closed race track, so I settled for a very traditional solid forged front beam on 4-link/ panhard bar and the solid 8.8 rear axle on triangulated 4 link (no panhard mainly because I do not have any chassis structure beyond the rear axle)
yes, the suspension will have its limits, but for the bumpy and twisty mountain and canyon roads around here I'm mostly interested in low as possible CofG, reasonable travel (5" front, 6" rear) as well as zero bumpsteer
(panhard bar will be the exact same length and parallel to the cross-steer R&P tie rod link)

even more traditional is the use of quarter elliptic leaf springs on all 4 corners .... they actually offer a lot of adjustability and keep the CofG low (there is virtually no suspension parts above the axle centers)

I don't know where your beef with Triangulated 4-link comes from, but it is a well used and regarded setup (at least in the go-fast offroad world) and the packaging works just about perfect for this tight little car

 

[BMW Rider]

I can concur that the four link Mustang rear setups are know for binding. They are most prone to it with stiffer bushings in the arms. The common wisdom is to run hard bushing only in the lower arms and keep the soft rubber ones in the uppers to allow them to flex. In addition to bind, too stiff bushings can cause damage to the mounting points on the chassis. Better setup is to use just one upper arm and a panhard bar, best is no uppers with a panhard bar and torque arm which is what I have on my Mustang.

 

[RoosterBooster]

oh, now I see where the binding comment is coming from;
the stock mustang links are all barrel bushings and restrict free travel due to the bushings only allowing limited twist (and higher durometer bushings amplify the problem)

so no, I'm not going to us the stock mustang links;

all my links (front and rear) will consist of a free moving high misalignment spherical heim joint on one end and a PU bushing (for noise/harshness isolation) on the other.
this virtually eliminates the binding issue completely (at least for the range of axle movement/articulation I'm looking for)

 

[bluebolt]

RoosterBooster, I assume PU bushings means Poly Urethane?

The stock Fox chassis Mustang rear suspension upper control arms don't have great geometry and the harder the bushings the more it would bind. The cheap fix was poly urethane bushings. Straight line drag racers didn't have a big problem but street driving and hard cornering would literally tear out the torque boxes because the metal had to flex.

The stock rubber bushings actually allow decent articulation but when you start adding horsepower and traction they start to fail and are not "precise"

Firmer rubber (higher durometer) bushings were used on the Police Mustangs upper control arms.

Some of the manufacturer's lower control arms had a 3 piece PU bushing on the front, a hard center and softer outers to allow some articulation with less binding.

Other lower control arms had poly or Delrin on one end and a spherical bearing on the other.

The car (1983 Capri) I built years ago had Global West lower control arms with a spherical bearing on the front and Delrin on the back.
High durometer rubber bushed upper control arms were used.

The difference in articulation over the stock lower control arms was amazing.

If I wanted something a little more "racy" I would switch the upper control arms for some with spherical bushings like the QA1 #5255 adjustable arms. I would add fresh Ford Racing rubber upper bushings.

Only if the car was an all out race car would I run the PU upper axle bushings and would keep an out for them going bad or "pushing out"

Your plan with HM heim joints on one end and a PU bushing on the other sounds good.

Can't wait to see it setup with the quarter elliptics!

 

[bluebolt]

RoosterBooster, what do you think of Johnny Joints or similar urethane bushed rod ends?
Currie used to offer a Mustang upper control arm with a Johnny Joint that I wanted to try. Sold the Capri a few years ago.

 

[gte718p]

So what I want to know is what happened with the '54 pickup/vette?

Rooster does amazing work, but his threads never seem to come to a conclusion.

 

[RoosterBooster]

So what I want to know is what happened with the '54 pickup/vette?

Rooster does amazing work, but his threads never seem to come to a conclusion.

yes, your right, I fail at updating my build threads when life gets in between

the "C6 Corvette that thinks she is a Truck" had its maiden testdrive a couple weeks ago …
she is getting upholstery done right now and body work/paint is scheduled for next winter

wiring was a nightmare , but now (almost) everything works;
keyless doorlock/start, traction control, ABS, dual zone HVAC, etc …
basically we did not just use the drivetrain & suspension,
we actually packed a complete C6 with ALL its gadgets into that `54 Truck

with the low CofG and even weight distribution of the rear transaxle she handles extremely well
(will be my friends DD when finished)

and obviously my DiamondT Truck is also a lot different then it was
(still not "finished" … always changing something on it)

she has now a turned up Cummins 8.3 together with an Allison MT654 and a beefier Spicer N175 rear axle …
we travel a lot (im a full time RVer now and she is towing my "home on wheels")

I guess I should dust off that build thread as well

 

[yaidunno]

Very cool project! I really like the drive train you are going with. Should be a blast to drive.

 

[RoosterBooster]

Very cool project! I really like the drive train you are going with. Should be a blast to drive.

I think (hope) so too

just entered the Miata 6-speed ratios into the Tremec gearing calculator;
looks like I was wrong that the rear axle ratio (3.27) is too long
here is the ratios & speed at 2500 rpm / 5500 rpm engine speed:

1st - 3.76 - 17/37 mph
2nd - 2.27 - 28/61 mph
3rd - 1.65 - 39/85 mph
4th - 1.26 - 50/111 mph
5th - 1.00 - 64/140 mph
6th - 0.84 - 76/167 mph

first is still a short "loading it up into the trailer" one ,
but I do like the 6th cruising speed @ 2500 rpm

 

[mp_tx]

Glad to see you back and posting. Another great build I will be following.

 

[OOBER]

Awesome builds! Keep posting pics.

LOVE the C6 pickup.

 

[kellymc]

Any update?

 

[Ohmthis]

I don’t know how I missed this! This is a sweet project, very cool look!