|
| mr_greenslade |
|
||
|
Hi Everyone,
Can someone tell me what difference there is between the 3.9 and 4.0 eb series motors. I'm looking at buying an eb xr6 series 1 with a 3.9 in it to start a turbo project on and am wondering if this will be a good move with the 3.9? Cheers Scott |
||
| Top | |
||
| raff-26 |
|
|||
|
Actually the displacment of all Falcons EA-BF Is 3.984 to be precise, but I know what you mean. There is no EB XR-6's with the MPEFI 3.9, They are all stamped on the rocker 4.0.
There is no such thing as a EB 1 XR-6 anyway. Only a series 1 eb-Falcon S XR-8(1991), which retained the s**t ea steering wheel, door buttons and crappy interior trim. The car u are talking about is a eb2 Falcon S- XR-6(1992-1993mid) the first of all XR6's- which had the normal front of an eb. This car was a Tickford enhanced 4.0 mpefi. After this the XR-6 ED received the quad lights. Hope this helps.
_________________ EF Ghia 5L V8 |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| smiley235 |
|
|||
|
The 4L have a bit more power, the 3.9 has a little swirl ridge on the cylinder side of the head which does SFA apparently. Go the 4L if you can.
_________________ 178.3 rwkw
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| mr_greenslade |
|
||
|
Okay thanks very much. I haven't seen the car in person yet but I am going to check it out soon. The owner told me over the phone it was 3.9 so that's obviously not right but he assures me it's a genuine xr6 eb.
Cheers Scott |
||
| Top | |
||
| Redford |
|
|||
|
smiley235 wrote: The 4L have a bit more power, the 3.9 has a little swirl ridge on the cylinder side of the head which does SFA apparently. Go the 4L if you can.
only the 3.9 head had the vapor swirl but it could be just a series 1 eb s-pac with a tickford head and badges. the tickford head has the tickford badge at the font of the head, if its not there then its just a eb s-pac series 1 wich is almost identical to the ea s-pac series 2. the xr6 was an eb series 2 s-pack conversion by tickford (4.0ltr) from 92 onward. if you check the numbers with the rta\m-roads u can find out if it has the original engine but its the vin that will confirm if its a genuine xr6.
_________________ Speed Safely! |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| mr_greenslade |
|
||
|
Yeah thanks thats exactly what i've heard from some others too so we'll see. Also It should have the different steering wheel and should have front power windows also.
|
||
| Top | |
||
| TROYMAN |
|
||
|
you can tell if it is the original engine by checking the engine number and it should be the same as the vin number..
and early e series ea/ed either had power windows all round or the didnt have them at all.. i think the ef/el was the first to have power windows in the front only. |
||
| Top | |
||
| Kenwood Maverick |
|
|||
|
hell yes, the 3.9 is more suited to turbos than the 4 due to its lower compression. of 8.8, the later e series ef/el had 9.3
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| ea_falcon |
|
||
|
the 3.9 mpfi has 139kw and the 4.0l mpfi has 148kw
_________________ 02 series 3 AU marline ute 5speed 347 stroker |
||
| Top | |
||
| sly |
|
||
|
raff-26 wrote: Actually the displacment of all Falcons EA-BF Is 3.984 to be precise,
EA and EB series 1 have displacement of 3.948, hence 3.9. The displacement was increased to 3.984 for the EB series 2, hence 4.0. The engine had a pretty thorough update at the same time, the changes were prompted by new drive-by noise emissions regulations. Drive a 4.0 and a 3.9MPEFI back-to-back and you will find the 4.0 smoother, quieter and freer-revving. IIRC the bottom end and crankshaft are stronger in the 4.0 and the crankshaft is better mounted to reduce flexing and vibration (and noise). The sump may be stronger as well to better brace the block. The 4.0 is all-round a better engine than the 3.9. If compression is an issue you can get dished pistons to make the comp ratio more boost-friendly. Given the age of the engine it'll need a rebuild sooner or later anyway.
_________________ AU1.5 Wagon, Raptor ProStreet kit, Pacemaker 4499's with 3" collector, 3" metal cat, 3" pipe, Pex BSO660 & BSO439, BA brakes, Sprintgas mixer LPG system, Airod variable-venturi mixer... stealth FTW Sniper tuned! |
||
| Top | |
||
| stockstandard |
|
|||
|
Kenwood Maverick wrote: hell yes, the 3.9 is more suited to turbos than the 4 due to its lower compression. of 8.8, the later e series ef/el had 9.3
I wouldnt say the 3.9 was better for boost. The pistons are weaker, crank has fewer counterweights (xf style), the head isnt terrific, and the 3.9's around would be a little more clapped out than the average 4.0. Personally id go an ef/el 4.0 over an ea/eb 3.9 for NA or turbo everytime.
_________________ Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests |
