Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

255 V8 in a box??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    needs a short crank, super high flow heads, short cam, reinforced mains... set it up to rev to 9K... then it'll be fun

    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -- Albert Einstein
    rides: 93 Crown Vic LX (The Red Velvet Cake), 2000 Crown Vic base model (Sandy), 2003 Expedition (the vacation beast)

    Originally posted by gadget73
    ... and it should all work like magic and unicorns and stuff.

    Originally posted by dmccaig
    Overhead, some poor bastards are flying in airplanes.

    Comment


      #32
      I had a 255 in my 82 MGM 2 dr. 212,000 miles on the original motor. It ran good and got decent mileage. 18-22 mpg. VV carb was my only problem. Mostly highway miles. Under powered. When I ordered the car I should have got the 302. Sadly, the car has passed away.

      Comment


        #33
        There was actually a guy selling 255 cranks on Corral for a ton of money, claiming they were some kind of gold. Aside from being a destroke crank, they were made in the early '80s so i wouldn't expect them to be some great material. Honestly i don't know but sounds like horseshit but if you wanted to build a crazy high-revving destroked motor maybe that's the ticket. Put it in a Dart block with 4.125 bore and have a 10,000rpm solid-roller screamer. Or just build a normal motor like the rest of us, lol. The 255 lived and died in a 2-year span for a reason i reckon. Enough said.

        Comment


          #34
          The 3.8 V-6 replaced the 255 V-8. No need to have 3 small block V-8s then.

          Comment


            #35
            302 CAN BE built to turn 10,000 rpm. one issue with the 255 bore is too small to run heads with bigger valves. Ran into this building 260 back in the day if i remember right the 255 has a smaller bore than the 260s did. havent thought about it since 79 when i got the cobra mustang
            Scars are tatoos of the fearless

            Comment


              #36
              no replacement for displacement... imo anyway.. i know others disagree. im fine with a torque monster that redlines and 5k lol
              Charlette - Brown 1977 Ford LTD - 351 Windsor 155K, Full Custom Pioneer system, green HID, interior & underbody
              Alesha - Black 1982 Mercury Marquis - 255ci 178K, full custom Kenwood and Infinity system, lowered, dual exhaust, LED all the things
              Tangerine Dream - Orange 1988 F-150 Custom - 300 i6 82k, Ghetto sound system, 5spd, 2WD, #farmtruck

              Comment


                #37
                Speaking hypothetically here, would a SEFI intake bolt onto the 255?

                Assuming Mass Air, would such a setup make for a usable engine, if a bit underpowered?

                Panthers: 83 GM 2dr | 84 TC | 85 CS | 88 TC | 91 GM
                Not Panthers: 85 Ranger | Ranger trailer | 91 Acclaim | 92 Jaaag | 05 Focus
                Gone: 97 CV | 83 TC | 04 Focus | 86 GM
                | Junkyards

                Comment


                  #38
                  I think the 255 and 302 are identical except for the cylinder bore... so the intake should bolt on... someone may correct me.

                  Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. -- Albert Einstein
                  rides: 93 Crown Vic LX (The Red Velvet Cake), 2000 Crown Vic base model (Sandy), 2003 Expedition (the vacation beast)

                  Originally posted by gadget73
                  ... and it should all work like magic and unicorns and stuff.

                  Originally posted by dmccaig
                  Overhead, some poor bastards are flying in airplanes.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    IT might bolt on but would be a lot wiser to go with a 302 SEFI ECM and all the wiring than convert a 255 and need a different tune etc. Then there is fuel pump etc to complete it.

                    Easier would be an aftermarket CFI 2 bbl set up.
                    BTW crank is different to
                    Last edited by turbo2256b; 01-29-2018, 06:19 PM.
                    Scars are tatoos of the fearless

                    Comment


                      #40
                      What they said. Fits, but probably not worth the effort. I believe the ports on the 255 heads are a fair bit smaller than 302 stuff so you'd probably run into some odd turbulence problems because of it.
                      86 Lincoln Town Car (Galactica).
                      5.0 HO, CompCams XE258,Scorpion 1.72 roller rockers, 3.55 K code rear, tow package, BHPerformance ported E7 heads, Tmoss Explorer intake, 65mm throttle body, Hedman 1 5/8" headers, 2.5" dual exhaust, ASP underdrive pulley

                      91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC grandpa spec white and cranberry

                      1984 Lincoln Continental TurboDiesel - rolls coal

                      Originally posted by phayzer5
                      I drive a Lincoln. I can't be bothered to shift like the peasants and rabble rousers

                      Comment


                        #41
                        What heads did the 255's use?
                        -Phil

                        sigpic

                        +1982 Ford LTD-S Police Car. Built 351w, Trickflow 11R 190 Heads, Holley Sniper EFI, RPM Intake+ Hyperspark dizzy, WR-AOD, Full exhaust headers to tails. 3.27 Trac-Lok Rear. Aluminum Police Driveshaft. Speedway Springs+Bilstein Shocks, Intermediate Brakes, HPP Steering Box.

                        +2003 Acura CL Type S 6-speed

                        Comment


                          #42
                          Originally posted by Brown_Muscle View Post
                          What heads did the 255's use?
                          Terrible. I honestly don't know though.

                          Comment


                            #43
                            FROM WHAT i have looked up they were smaller and more of an oval port.
                            Scars are tatoos of the fearless

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Originally posted by turbo2256b View Post
                              FROM WHAT i have looked up they were smaller and more of an oval port.
                              X2
                              Heads would need port matched at minimum. And they have itty bitty valves? 1.68 intake is what my reference guide says. The cranks are lightweight/hollow or something silly like that. Who wants a hollow crankshaft? Ford probably made junk special heads just to reduce power to keep the crank alive.
                              1990 Country Squire - under restoration
                              1988 Crown Vic LTD Wagon - daily beater

                              GMN Box Panther History
                              Box Panther Horsepower and Torque Ratings
                              Box Panther Production Numbers

                              Comment


                                #45
                                All of the above makes sense. Kind of like my half-baked idea to EFI swap my Lima 2.0.

                                I was thinking MAF SEFI because Speed Density CFI (or even Speed Density multiport) might be a bit upset about all that mysteriously missing displacement.

                                Not like I have a 255, or would do this, but it was a thought that occurred to me.

                                Panthers: 83 GM 2dr | 84 TC | 85 CS | 88 TC | 91 GM
                                Not Panthers: 85 Ranger | Ranger trailer | 91 Acclaim | 92 Jaaag | 05 Focus
                                Gone: 97 CV | 83 TC | 04 Focus | 86 GM
                                | Junkyards

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X