A great flow mod was to simply machine the back of the inlet valves flat, as found out by david vizard, this mod flowed just as much as a fully ported head.
Absolutely Excellent. Thank you, Chris, for the magnificent correlative explanations of realistic life possibilities that can be achieved by any relatively handy weekend mechanic without exorbitant amounts of money. Thank you taking the time to record this video.
I built a Mercury Capri for autocross back in the late eighties and ran a 2.3 ford. With a stock bottom end, ported head and a Isky racing cam , on a chassis dyno it came out to 195 HP. It embarrassed a lot of mustang GTs and won some spectator races at the local short track
Raced the 2.3 in mini stocks. Everyone would mill the head right up to the intake manifold bolt holes. You could get the compression ratio to 12.5 to 1 with a steel shim head gasket. I believe you could take .120 of an inch off it. I only went .100 , saved a little for rebuilding. Those engines were bullet proof rev'ed to 7000 no problem with a stock bottom end.
In the US I had a PINTO SQUIRE station wagon with a 2000 and standard transmission. I filed the cam drive sprocket key ways to retard the cam. What a difference. It would easily out run a co--workers VW RABBIT .
On Pinto’s the inlet ports are cast too low in the head, so removing material from the lower face actually reduces flow. If you read Dave Vizards research, he actually builds up the floor of the port as it approaches the valve to encourage the air to turn whilst still maintaining laminar flow, rather than it detaching and creating chaotic flow.
@@7Spot556 didn’t mean it in a negative way, and certainly the back of the port and valve guide boss work you’ve done looks great, so should liberate more power. Equally, port matching makes a big difference on Pinto’s. Dave Vizard is definitely the guru when it comes to these motors, and his book on Pinto’s was my bible back in the day when building several Pinto’s for both fast road and hillclimbing.
This one? www.thriftbooks.com/w/hotrod-ohc-ford_fountain-press/1836573/item/53341298/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwurS3BhCGARIsADdUH53hre8L4TahisqvX4aPLpZoZnVlEUXcljtZO89si_9Pl1qN6wtsPpIaAj1pEALw_wcB#isbn=0895863650&idiq=53341298
You can actually build up the floor of the inlet port with something like Devcon epoxy resin putty and, although you'll reduce the port cross-section, you'll actually improve the flow rate with some subtle/intelligent contouring.
@@terryjacob8169 we used to use JB Weld, which is very similar I believe. Building up the port floor and re profiling also allows better charge distribution in the cylinder.
The inlet ports on the 1.6 head are smaller but you can take them out to a superior profile for better flow than you'll manage with 2.0 heads. If you go to Germany you might be able to track down a 1.3 Pinto cylinder head, which gives a lot of scope for both inlet/exhaust port and combustion chamber modifications. However, it does give you even more complications in keeping the valvetrain geometry correct than you'll encounter using the 1600 head, if you change valve sizes as most oversize valves are intended for the 2.0 head and have the shortest valve stem lengths, at 110.55mm for both inlet and exhaust valve, of all the Pinto engines. Another head worth seeking out is that from the 1.8 so-called 'ECO' version of the Pinto from the mid/late 1980's. From memory this shares ports sizes with the 1600 head but uses valves with lengths approaching those of the 2.0 item.
A great flow mod was to simply machine the back of the inlet valves flat, as found out by david vizard, this mod flowed just as much as a fully ported head.
Absolutely Excellent. Thank you, Chris, for the magnificent correlative explanations of realistic life possibilities that can be achieved by any relatively handy weekend mechanic without exorbitant amounts of money. Thank you taking the time to record this video.
Love your approach, well done... I will take some of that to my FF's
Thank you. We love your channel and especially the stuff you are doing to the MGA!
@@7Spot556 thanks mate....
Great video and presentation style - thanks!
Thanks for watching and thanks for the feedback too!
I built a Mercury Capri for autocross back in the late eighties and ran a 2.3 ford. With a stock bottom end, ported head and a Isky racing cam , on a chassis dyno it came out to 195 HP. It embarrassed a lot of mustang GTs and won some spectator races at the local short track
@@RodneyHayes-d3y amazing
That’s not a pinto. It’s a Lima, different engine
Raced the 2.3 in mini stocks. Everyone would mill the head right up to the intake manifold bolt holes. You could get the compression ratio to 12.5 to 1 with a steel shim head gasket. I believe you could take .120 of an inch off it. I only went .100 , saved a little for rebuilding. Those engines were bullet proof rev'ed to 7000 no problem with a stock bottom end.
Great video and great explanations as to how and why.
Very informative, thanks.
In the US I had a PINTO SQUIRE station wagon with a 2000 and standard transmission. I filed the cam drive sprocket key ways to retard the cam. What a difference. It would easily out run a co--workers VW RABBIT .
On Pinto’s the inlet ports are cast too low in the head, so removing material from the lower face actually reduces flow. If you read Dave Vizards research, he actually builds up the floor of the port as it approaches the valve to encourage the air to turn whilst still maintaining laminar flow, rather than it detaching and creating chaotic flow.
Didn’t know that.
@@7Spot556 didn’t mean it in a negative way, and certainly the back of the port and valve guide boss work you’ve done looks great, so should liberate more power. Equally, port matching makes a big difference on Pinto’s.
Dave Vizard is definitely the guru when it comes to these motors, and his book on Pinto’s was my bible back in the day when building several Pinto’s for both fast road and hillclimbing.
This one? www.thriftbooks.com/w/hotrod-ohc-ford_fountain-press/1836573/item/53341298/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwurS3BhCGARIsADdUH53hre8L4TahisqvX4aPLpZoZnVlEUXcljtZO89si_9Pl1qN6wtsPpIaAj1pEALw_wcB#isbn=0895863650&idiq=53341298
You can actually build up the floor of the inlet port with something like Devcon epoxy resin putty and, although you'll reduce the port cross-section, you'll actually improve the flow rate with some subtle/intelligent contouring.
@@terryjacob8169 we used to use JB Weld, which is very similar I believe. Building up the port floor and re profiling also allows better charge distribution in the cylinder.
Great help would you use a lighten flywheel on a road car
@@ozbrick498 I would if my road car weighed less than a ton.
Yes, the engine revs far quicker !
Known people to use the 1600 head on 2.0 as this raises compression
@@MegaReddevil71 didn’t know that
The inlet ports on the 1.6 head are smaller but you can take them out to a superior profile for better flow than you'll manage with 2.0 heads. If you go to Germany you might be able to track down a 1.3 Pinto cylinder head, which gives a lot of scope for both inlet/exhaust port and combustion chamber modifications. However, it does give you even more complications in keeping the valvetrain geometry correct than you'll encounter using the 1600 head, if you change valve sizes as most oversize valves are intended for the 2.0 head and have the shortest valve stem lengths, at 110.55mm for both inlet and exhaust valve, of all the Pinto engines. Another head worth seeking out is that from the 1.8 so-called 'ECO' version of the Pinto from the mid/late 1980's. From memory this shares ports sizes with the 1600 head but uses valves with lengths approaching those of the 2.0 item.
There are two different 1600 Pintos. Do they both have the same head?
See you at Newark Kit Car Festival !
Probably better off knowing what you have .So better it was not rebuilt when you got it......