LocostUSA.com

All my goodies arrived for the front end ..
here are pics of the 12.19 X 1.19 rotors and hat ,
also a test fitment of the spindle(original Mii ), ball joints, tie rod end ,rotor and caliper

BTW i am switching to the 2" drop Mustang ii spindles as they gave me better camber curves in wishbone

On to my next task as I head from font to back on the car is to acquire a Duratec D25 I4 .. I have a line on one out of a 2016 Fusion with only 2.8K on the clock..
I already have the transmission an M5OD-R1, But Im trying to pin down any reliable info on clutch/flywheel and starter options..any suggestions would be welcome
and as far as I can tell the 09-present D25 is the same and will bolt to the M5OD-R1..if any one has any other/ conflicting info please let me know..thx

here is a good read about parts for a D25 swap in to a Miata
https://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.php?t=522719

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

heres for any ones future references concerning a duratec 2.5 or variant to M5OD- R1

http://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13496
thanks driven 5 for all your work on this..

http://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=15080&start=75
thx saltracer for the info..

heres one for fun .. maybe some day a D25 to T5
http://www.turborangerforums.com/archive/index.php/t-5599.html

one more ref.
https://forum.miata.net/vb/archive/index.php/t-137682.html



so as it stands right now im going for the stock ranger flywheel,clutch,pressure plate and TOB
..KISS it.. keep it simple

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

Well, I'm not sure how deserving I am of thanks just yet...It's been 5 ( ) years now and I still don't have a solution yet...Or even the stock-replacement flywheel I bought and 'loaned' out to them for measurement.

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie

My Ford Duratec showed up yesterday !!!!..
what a deal I got this motor with only 2,800 miles on it, yes its so new that the original ford factory oil filter is still on it !!
at the same time they sold me the alternator and ranger starter as part of a package deal..next step will be getting the fly wheel and clutch parts.

Original my plan with the motor was to retain the stock ecu and pats parts .. with the connections I had at the salvage yards no one was to keen on pulling the parts as a unit or letting me do it and return what was left of the car ..so I started to weigh the options and at the moment have decided to use a standalone ecu for the motor and lock the vvt. I figure the stand alone will give me better options as I update the motor for more power ..I have my eye on the AEM EMS-4 it looks to be a good fit for the build. I need to do some more home work to see if its compatible with my stock sensors and if it has enough I/O ports to run every thing...

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

If you are happy with VVT being just on or off (not variable) you can use a MS2 v3.0 (not a MicroSquirt and not a v3.57 and no relay board) and it will do full sequential injection and spark. For a lot less moneys.

I am doing my V6 Duratec with a similar system.

It will use all the stock sensors, you will need to add a dual VR sensor board and a 4 way output board (to get full sequential).

Like this http://jbperf.com/dual_VR/v2_1.html

and this http://jbperf.com/quad_ign_inj/index.html

My Duratec did not have VVT but does have a dual runner intake flapper I will just set that on off.

_________________
Honey anyone?

What controls the VVT? Is it a PWM signal?

Ford uses a PWM signal to control the fuel pump output - the MS3 can output the signal if the VVT operates off of the same principle.

_________________
-Andrew
Build Log
Youtube

thx bent wrench for the links.. I am quite apprehensive of the mega squirt for a few reason..
but mostly the "open source" nature of the system I do realize this offers extreme flexibility and options
at a very fordable pricing..but I dont have the resources or inclination to deal with a modular set up both in
construction and programming.. I dont want to get lost on the project simply because of programming or interface issues
i do realize that many use it with great success..I did a quick look and the ms3 is running $380 un soldered vs
the aem ems 4 for around $600.. I know that the difference is around $220 and I still have a harness $120 and
possible sensors and what not and for me in this part of the project I am willing to shell out a few hundred more
to save a possible loss of interest , major delay or learning something im not particularly apt to do the hard way..

a.moore
Im not sure what the vvt on the ford uses, but i do recall some type of bench test for the came phasers on the 5.4l v8s.. in the article they had mentioned some type of duty cycle that allowed oil in and out of the phaser .. I wouldn't be surprised if the 2.5l used some thing similar. I do not plane on removing the vvt parts just locking them down for now if I am unable to get it to work initially then go back latter and attempt to get them working or skip it all together and do a cam upgrade in a year or two.
the AEM EMS 4 dose have four pwm out puts I have been thinking of how I will handle the different sub systems to make the car run...as of now I may use one pwm out put to run a PWM driver for the radiator fan. I have helped build several 350-400+ hp cars and we used a on/off cooling fan for the radiator they always ended up being very noisy and some times short cycle to keep the temps in range , I never cared for all the noise of it, so on this car Ill attempt to integrate a PWM driver for the fan.
A second I could use for the fuel pump, but was contemplating the ability to run a return less system with pressure regulator at or in the tank..
I am wondering about the gauges and if ill need to reserve some PWM out puts for gauges ?
as always more home work needs do bee done..

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

heres an excerpt from a ford forum taking on the vvt issue

I really regret not doing everything I wanted to do the first time around with the engine build and set-up.

I have about another 10k before I will do a routine clutch disc replacement and this is when I plan to swap motors out and keep the primary one taken out as a back up and save it's specific calibration files increase I ever have to swap back to it, the 2nd engine though will be different enough in a mechanical sense I cannot rune them off the same file, the ve of this engine should be quite a bit more radical....and I 'm guessing it will also use a different cps tooth pattern.
This isn't a big deal with a standalone I'll just reconfigure the pattern, the car would have to be re tuned regardless.

I mentioned this before in my build thread but we did interface with the vvt occ via a duty pulse signal output and spent the better part of 2 hours tuning it through different load cycles on a dyno and it just didn't really make much of a difference, that is probably the most import information I can bring to this thread....that on this engine vvt if not something worth the trouble of going through to retain or retrofit for.... on some engines it seems to make a huge difference like Honda ivtec and Mitsubishi mivec

http://turborangerforums.com/showthread.php?t=1788&page=19

and here is the vvt or vct (as they call it) delete kit ... $30 not to bad

http://massivespeedsystem.com/_massive-speed-system_/massive-speed-vct-delete-systems/mamc3511/i-2293833.aspx

along with this..

http://massivespeedsystem.com/genuine-ford-parts/cam-timing-gears/mccm16257/i-2108899.aspx

if it is true there is little gain from using vvt and its mostly an emissions game there playing than Id probably go this route or some thing similar..

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

Hey everyone Im back again ..
Well it's been about two years a lot of things have changed in life but in all truthfulness I haven't forgot or stopped loving this car...I believe that no matter what happens in life if you always go back to something you truly love it and should follow through with it.... if it isn't for the fame, money, brag rights, exc..exc...it was because of true love and only then is it a noble cause..

So as it stands nothings changed over the last 2 yrs except my mind.. my original plan was to use the 2.5D and the M5ODR1 transmission BUT.. it's a very bulky transmission compared to a T5, there are nearly no gear ratio options, first gear is worthless (if I calculated correctly) and the shifter placement is awful..
The idea has been growing on me to fabricate a bell housing that would mate the T5 and 2.5duratec I4 using a ranger flywheel and starter along with the hydraulic through out bearing from the ranger..By switching to the T5 there are HUGE amounts of gear ratios and aftermarket support "mustang".. this all came about as I have the parts for the 27 sitting on a shelf next to the original 2.3l I4 T5 transmission that was intended for the car .. I know there not he same as the v8 but its all internal differences as far as shafts bearings and synchros so I can rebuild mine to V8 spec with my specified gear ratios to fit the car and rear end ( rear end is 3.73 ford factory lsd)..I know this is overkill but I will always have parts available..

Here's how I think this can work..
.5 make sure there are no economical options for a bell housing to do this (don't reinvent the wheel)
1. v8 mustang input shaft slightly turned down for pilot bearing.. used because of clutch disk availability.. I believe the 289 ford falcon??(have to re check my notes) had the correct spline and correct
diameter to fit the ranger pressure plate and flywheel..
2.the input shaft bearing retainer would be done away with and in its place a plate the would retain the bearing and allow for the right spacing and mounting point for the TOB (through out bearing)
3. a simple starter cut out on the bellhousing to allow for the ranger starter. the ranger starter mounts to the block.
4. after all that the bell housing simply needs to be designed around the components.. find a cmm or do a measurement lay out by hand of the block and T5 and other parts.. design in cad make a
pattern and head off to the friendly local foundry for a casting and then to the machine shop for machining ..

It seems like such a huge advantage for only having to fabricate 2 parts.. I Know there are downsides and pitfalls but does any one see a FATAL flaw to this thinking..
And any suggestions / thoughts on gear ratios especially for first gear..

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

So here are the official specs that I have obtained

the 88 turbo coupe T5 transmission output shaft has a .59" dia od for the pilot bearing..
the 05 ranger M5OD-R1 ALSO has a .59" od for the pilot bearing.
the mustang T5 has a output shaft dia of .668
(v8 T5 could be turned town to fit stock M5OD R-1 bearing or find an alternate bearing)

the 88 turbo coupe output shaft is .25" longer than the 85-93 mustang T5 output shaft and the 94-04 mustang output shaft is .6875 ( 11/16) longer than the v8
( not sure of the interchange because of one piece bellhousing and transmission)
thus making the 94-04 mustang output shaft .4375 (7/16) longer than the 88 turbo coupe transmission output shaft.

Next was the available throw out bearings
the 05 ford ranger TOB In the M5OD-R1 mesures 2.69" from the bearing face that goes against the pressure plate to the end of the output shaft with a stroke of 1.365"
this means the 05 ranger pressure plate may need 1.365" of movement before it releases.

with this same M5OD-R1 throw out bearing mocked up in the available 88 turbo coupe T5 I had 2.35" form the TOB face to the end of the output shaft
at this point there is a difference of .34" from the TOB face to the end of the output shaft when comparing the M5OD-R1 to the turbo coupe.
and when switching to or using a mustang v8 T5 transmission there would be a difference of .59" because of the mustang T5s shorter output shaft

the question is now is there a lower profile TOB that won't break the bank and is a factory Item ?

I ordered up a 05 ford focus 2.3L TOB to measure and compare thinking the packaging would be smaller to fit in the transverse lay out.
the packaging is indeed smaller the total depth is only 2.72" compared to the M5OD-R1s 4.475" but the TOB stroke on the focus is only .75"
if the pressure plate on the M5OD-R1 needs the 1.365" of travel to release the clutch the focus TOB is to short by .615"
(I have not measured the miata TOB which at the time of writing this has come to mind..does anyone have access to one in hand? or the 05 mazda 3)

so the next question becomes can I bolt a focus or miata? pressure plate to a ranger flywheel..I believe keeping the ranger flywheel will side step a lot of issues with matching a starter to it..

I do believe that there is a simple combination of bolt up parts that could be cost effective and stay with in the OEM parts bin. so I will endeavour to continue my quest BUT ...
I have decided that I want to FINISH this car and not get caught in endless searching, so as of right now the plan will be to stick to the M5OD-R1 and 3.73 8.8 rear end and BUILD the car ..
once I am able to drive it "then " I will have a good base line to judge what Items should be changed or replaced ..M5OD-R1 to T5 or 3.73 to a 3.08?

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

Exedy makes a lightweight (12 lbs) steel flywheel for the Focus destined Duratec but if you use it, you will need a Focus starter as the Bendix gear doesn't throw far enough on the Ranger version of the starter. Ask me how I know? I have an unused Ranger start available (very reasonably priced). The factory flywheel weighs a little over 19 lbs. Everything bolts up perfectly and accepts any Focus/Ranger clutch package.

After a bit of thought or should I say origanizing all other thoughts pertaining to the car I have decided on a plan of action....

1 assemble all large components already purchased for the car.. engine ,transmission ,rear end , hubs, spindles, axels, exc.,exc...

2 complete an accurate mock up of said parts using the rear axle width as a starting point for my track width and design the front to match accordingly.

3 mockup front spindles and ball joints to get accurate numbers to run in wishbone suspension calculator

4 design around how I as a 6'1" human being fit in the car and function in the car..

5 modify original F27 frame for a modest roll cage subbing out 1x1 tube for larger roll cage tubing where applicable...

6 work from the outside in on control arms using place holders to locate ideal suspension pickup points and fabricating the frame to fit..

7 build body work to accommodate major components..as for the other thing I'm sure it will be a bit of chicken and the egg

at this point Id only be using the original F27 frames dimensions and design as guidelines for my own car

here are a few pic from the day..

_________________
DESIGN ICONICALLY - DO EPICALLY

I think you have a pretty good plan. As you're doing a one-off, I think some level of mocking up is warranted. I did it with mine, and it allowed me to solve some problems before cutting steel and welding. You may not need something as detailed as mine (below), but making sure you have enough room to sit comfortable, and have enough room for the pedal box (and your feet) is crucial.

Laying out the rear suspension (I used a live axle with the Haynes Roadster architecture) was the thing to do. Also, I layed out the transmission tunnel using blue painters tape. I put the engine and transmission in place in the mock-up. It took me 3-4 tries laying it out to get a good all-around layout. Still a roll of painter's tape is a lot cheaper (and easier) than trial and error using steel.


By the way, having your kids help out is really great. They're going to feel a real sense of pride in what you have all done together. You'll create a lot of great memories for them.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886

If you still end up really set on the T5, there is always this option: https://www.holley.com/products/drivetrain/bellhousings/bellhousings/parts/RM-8090

However, once you've gone through the trouble of packaging the M5OD and building a remote shifter, I don't think there will be enough reason to change it out for a T5. On paper, the ratios really do look reasonable to me, and I think that the 3.73 could actually be pretty good with your larger wheel/tire package too. Along with that, I don't know if you ever saw the outcome of my flywheel escapade, but Spec now sells this beauty:
https://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18943

_________________
-Justin

"Orville Wright did not have a pilots license." - Gordon MacKenzie

I think the little guy is going for "Bang shift to second, bark rubber and haul a$$"... He probably doesn't know those words yet, but the concept is there. You can see it in his expression. That gives me renewed hope for the next generation. I LIKE THAT KID!!! Send him on down, I'll let him drive the Slotus.


"Uncle Bubba"

_________________
JD, father of Quinn, Son of a... Build Log
Quinn the Slotus:Ford 302 Powered, Mallock-Inspired, Tube Frame, Hillclimb Special
"Gonzo and friends: Last night must have been quite a night. Camelot moments, mechanical marvels, Rustoleum launches, flying squirrels, fru-fru tea cuppers, V8 envy, Ensure catch cans -- and it wasn't even a full moon." -- SeattleTom