threads
Page 1 of 3
Mazda Projects \  Search posse needed. . .

Search posse needed. . .

Mazda Projects
views 2415
replies 23
following 12
 
mazdatweaker   +1y
If you are reading this . . . you have been recruited.

Anyone who owns one of these 87-93 trucks knows that 80-86 horsepower is pretty anemic given the weight of the truck. There is a lot of efforts to either live with or upgrade away from the base powerplant. They are probably "ok" . . . but given alternatives, I think most anyone who could, would upgrade. Especially where an inexpensive, easy drop in upgrade were available.

I think there is. . . and I don't think it's as hard to find or do as a KIA. Because there are a lot more of these sitting in the parts yards with good engines in them.

A little information is helpful here . . . if you have read this far. . .

Some of you know that Mazda and Ford use some of the same parts.

As an example . . . the Probe uses a 2.2 manufactured by Mazda. There is a placard on the valve cover that says FORD, but the motor, when it is in a 626, says MAZDA.

So the motors will fit either chassis. They should . . . they were built in the same plant.

"The Ford Probe is a product of the joint Ford and Mazda venture called the AutoAlliance. Its unique body panels and interior were designed and manufactured in the AutoAlliance International Incorporated assembly plant located in Flat Rock, Michigan, the same plant that manufactured the Mazda MX-6 coupe and Mazda 626 sedan for the North American market."



The MX-6 carries the same motor. Which is basically the same driveline as a Probe. But in the case of the PROBE, you could get that vehicle with a V-6. Which means that it fits in the same hole, most likely on the same motor mounts.

By this logic, you could pull a V-6 from a Probe, turn it 90 degrees, and drop it in the trucks.

The good news here is that, according to the Wikipedia article:
. . . starting in 1990 the LX was available with the 3.0 L "Vulcan" V6, also used in the Ford Taurus, Ford Ranger, Ford Tempo, and Ford Aerostar."

That engine puts out 140 horsepower.

Seems to me that it would be worth further investigation.
sleepyspeed   +1y
my only reason to stay away from the 2.2 is how many blow up. there seams to be a over abundance of probes and 626's dead with spun bearings and such. Most of the ones I've seen in my neck of the woods are that way any way.

about the only 626 motor I would swap in would be the b18t, even if it was ran non-turboed you would know the bottom end to be a hair more trustworthy.
mazdatweaker   +1y


To clarify what I was posting. . .

The trucks which use a 2.2 motor, i.e. every B2200, uses the SAME shortblock as the Probe and 626.

What I am exploring here is the possibility to using the V6 as the drop in upgrade.
sleepyspeed   +1y
so my question is to why? $500 will get you a running turbo 4cyl, more power and less weight. I understand that not all are big fans of turbo motors, but the v-6 is never going to give more than the 115 hp, not worth time or money theres no more potential in the v-6 than our fe blocks
dirtracer14   +1y
I really thought about the probe motor many years ago,but never checked into it. Just because its the same motor it may have a diff block casting. I know the GM 2.8 v6 was used in many diff cars and trucks yet there are probally 6 diff blcok castings... the front wheel drive and rear were diff, also the jeep had a chevy 2.8 but with a crysler bellhousing. If i get time im gonna try and find a nice transplant for the b... not to much power just enough to get around with ease.
kaotickustomz   +1y
My 2 cents.
The Ford Probe was a piece of crap (which is why you never seen them anymore) and I am not that impressed with the 626 to be honest. For the money, if your going to do a swap for a V6, the Chevy 4.3l Vortec is the most bang for your buck! They make a shit ton of performance products for it and is 180 - 200hp STOCK NA! I have seen 2 swaps with this motor and both trucks were NUTZ FAST and theyre are tons of parts cheap! Find a wrecked Astro or S-10 and your set! I'd go with the Astro cuz most Soccer Moms arent raggin the shit out of the motor. Add to that, Astro's have no resale value so theyre CHEAP!

Here is Wiki info and cars/trucks they came in.

The Vortec 4300 is a 90
mazdawg(mikey)   +1y
i see where tweak is coming from. if the 2.2 will bolt up in the probe and the truck, the v6 should too. the only concern i have is the issues you ahve putting the 2.2 in a mazda, will you have them with the v6. like flipping the intake manifold, running no distributor, and things of that nature.
mazdatweaker   +1y
To those that have answered so far, thank you. . .
. . .but I wasn't taking a poll.

Or asking for reasons why this swap can not, or should not, be done.



deals with the manual transmissions that came in some of the Ford products.

The concerns about transmission bellhousing integration against an engine swap is valid.

Since Mazda designed some of the transmissions that were installed against Vulcan engines, perhaps getting a Vulcan 3.0 to work with a stock Mazda B series truck might involve swapping out the FWD bellhousing with the truck unit. . .like what has to be done with an RX-7 transmission, in order to use it.

And to clarify things. The purpose of the swap is to keep things simple. . . not modify motor mounts. . .have to run a GM transmission. . . cut and weld to fit. . . modify a driveshaft. . . pound out or back firewalls. . . etc.

The stock NA 2.2 in a truck is 86 HP
The stock NA 22 in a car is 115 (FI+12 valve head)
The stock 3.0 NA Vulcan is 140
The SHO Vulcan is a 24V-DOHC Vulcan on steroids. (220)
It is a at least a 54 HP increase, and if it fits easily, without modification of any kind to the engine bay. . .the swap means minimal downtime and work involved.
Additionally, since it is only a 3.0, and I think a fully aluminum block and heads setup, it is both lighter than a 4.3 and more cost effective, as it will use less gas due to it's smaller displacement and lighter weight.

So really what I am seeking here is help accomplishing the research necessary to make this happen, not searching for reasons why it should not.

I am not really interested in one up modifications, or doing some specialized customs fab-out.
If this is easier than pushing a Staples easy button, there are a lot of B trucks that could get a substantially new upgrade via inexpensive replication of a simple R&R.

I apologize for not making this clear at the outset.
Post was last edited on Jul 24, 2009 10:07. This post has been edited 1 times.
heavenly_blade101   +1y

PM me please I have a few questions
kaotickustomz   +1y
With a little cutting and welding... ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE! PM me your questions (I will do my best). I plan to drop a 4.3 in mine when my 2.2 lets go!