Hotroding a 3 Ltr. Ficht block

[RUDERIOT]

Has anybody tried to do much with one of these yet? I aquired one & it looks to me like a REALLY good starting point for a radical 3 Ltr. Nitrous buildup.

[BenKeith]

Block it the same as that year model 3.0 carburated just has some additional machining done on if for the Ficht parts and the popet valve located in a different spot. In 2000 they added more metal at the entrance to the rod slots and it has a big squared off shoulder there. I was told this was because the Ficht's had a problem with them cracking there. I cut it down a good bit and radius'd the air flow into the rod slot the same as I do on the earilier 3.0. Not sure if that was a good or bad thing. It added a lot of stuffing being there but it made a sharp right angle charge to had to make getting into the rod slot. I opted for a straighter charge path.


Now, if you had a 3.3 block, you whould have something, that makes a monster motor.

[jphii]

Now, if you had a 3.3 block, you would have something, that makes a monster motor.

I'm going to try one, I picked up and E Tec block & front half. Should be interesting.

[BenKeith]

I would love to get one myself but it will probably take two or three to get the porting right on it. That big bore and being ported for a different rod length in stock form is going to make figuring out the best port combination a challange unless you know someone that has gotten it figured out and willing to share that info. Depending on the rods you run, charge times and blow down are going to be totally different than anything you've run in the 3.0 blocks.

[jphii]

I'm thinking 3L rods and Monty pistons. Somebody figured it out. I wasn't that somebody. I'll have to post some pics.

[DSP1]

The DFI versions of the 3.0 FICHT block that I've seen also have a sleeve that is 100thou thicker than the standard/carb'ed version. This is ideal for running +40 wiseco's which puts you just on 3.1lt

[H2OPERF]

Joe that e-tec front aint worth the beer cans it was made from,send it to me and ill show ya why.Dave:D

[jphii]

Hey Dave, I took a good look at the porting today. I really have to get a picture up, I like bottom fed blocks!

[H2OPERF]

Yea i like it too.Do u know if the 3.3 pistons monty is selling have any holes in them? I would like to get some made up from wiseco for the big rods 3.3 with no skirt holes/flat on the top/no locator pins. I want to get this efi workin on my powerhead then put it on a 3.3, may sleeve an older block or use a newer one like u have if i can find one.Im scarfin parts now for the project want toi keep mine running while i do it so im not in a hurry.Im flyin into raleigh wed leave sat hangin with the my daughter is it cold up there yet?

[RUDERIOT]

Thanks guys for your opinions.
From what I've seen it is without a doubt the stiffest most rigid block they've ever built. Not worth talking about if it's used as a "lake motor" but in the case of a blown, or fuel, or both:eek: application it should really come into play. This could also be true in a heavy nitrous/high compression set up.

It looks to me like the sleeves must be 3/16 if not 1/4'' thick - a big plus
in a highly stressed motor. I'm guessing that the 3.3 is just this block bored out, hence the thick sleeves.

The behind the liner boost & transfer port areas are HUGE.

I'm thinking this will probibly be next years motor.

[jphii]

I don't know what Monty's pistons look like before they get worked, I've only seen one & it was cut. I talked to him 2 weeks ago and haven't ordered a set yet. I need to talk to him again but the Carb race motor needs to be done first.

I thought about doing the 3.3 with carbs but why put an old front half on an E-Tec? Wayne doesn't think the new front would be good with carbs (you should have heard THAT conversation!). I think once the E-Tec stuff is more available we're gonna see some serious power out of these blocks.

I will take some pictures tomorrow.

And Dave, it is cold here now, we're down in the 50's. If I can make it up to Raleigh do you have time to get together for a beer?

[racer]

The ficht block sleeves are a step sleeve and are only that thick for about .200 at the top of the block.

[RUDERIOT]

Thanks Al. Did they use the 3.3 long rods in the 3.0 Ficht?

[BenKeith]

Stock 3.0 and 3.3 use different length rods. The is no comparison between the 3.0 and the 3.3 block other they can both use the same crank. Totally different porting. If you want to increase a 3.0 block to 3.3, you would be better off using the open deck block. I would think if you want to play with the big boys, you would need the same toys they play with and I think most of them have gone to the 3.3 blocks. Racer and several others are now building 232 cubic inch motors, kinda hard to go up against that with a 3.0, don't care what you feed it with. Rest assured, they are feeding those big motors with something bigger and more potent.

[H2OPERF]

I think the steped/flanged sleeve was a good move lets the sleeve grow and not distort into the port runners as bad when supported from the top only.Joe Im not sure on my/daughters plans in NC. Dave

[racer]

ALL 3.3 blocks are bottom fed including the 3.3 ficht versions. These block make good power but run out of exhaust at a little over 9k

[jphii]

Al, if you use Wiseco 3180's and 3.3L rods can you get the same power/rpms? Are the 3.3 rods as strong as 3.0?

I can get a hold of a set of 3.3 rods but I haven't seen one in the flesh to do a side by side with a 3.0 big rod.

[6Killer]

Racer, are Ficht 3.0 liter sleeves (the thick ones that go in the 3.3 style block) available from Bomb?

6

[Instigator]

Al, if you use Wiseco 3180's and 3.3L rods can you get the same power/rpms? Are the 3.3 rods as strong as 3.0?

I can get a hold of a set of 3.3 rods but I haven't seen one in the flesh to do a side by side with a 3.0 big rod.
no. I've been hearing they shut off @ 8500.
They all use 3.0 rods and 3.3 bore pistons with relocated wrist pins.
Gordon is supposed to have them from Wiseco.

[jphii]

no. I've been hearing they shut off @ 8500.
They all use 3.0 rods and 3.3 bore pistons with relocated wrist pins.
Gordon is supposed to have them from Wiseco.

You would be wrong about this. Except about the Monty pistons, he does have them to run 3.3 pistons on 3.0 rods.

[Instigator]

You would be wrong about this. Except about the Monty pistons, he does have them to run 3.3 pistons on 3.0 rods.
"they're" wrong.

[jphii]

Good point, because at this point, I'm still going on "they" too.

[Freddie Webb]

I am not sure what you are asking but I have both rods and the 3.0 rods are longer than the 3.3 rods. The wrist pin in the 3.3 is located lower in the piston (closer to the crank). The 3.0 rod is a heavier built rod. Did I answer your question?

[jphii]

Trying to figure out if the 3.3 rods and pistons will turn as high & be as "reliable" as the 3.0 rod & Monty piston.

[bigbore]

Trying to figure out if the 3.3 rods and pistons will turn as high & be as "reliable" as the 3.0 rod & Monty piston.
good to here it's durable:cool:

[Instigator]

The OEM 3.3 piston has the wrong rods (too long I think) and pistons to turn up.
The OEM piston has the wrist pin in the wrong location as well. (piston spends too much time @ TDC I think)
Monty had Wiseco make him 3.3 pistons with the wrist pin relocated to accept the 3.0 heavy rods.
Rrevinrude went 8500 w/3.3 rods and 93/9400 w/3.0
Same for B.Pesos etc, etc.
Don't know anyone turning a 3.3 rod/piston past 8500.

[racer]

Standard 3.3 rods are a 1/2 inch shorter than the 3.0 and the pin is thus lower in the piston, shorter rod spends less time at tdc/bdc. The shorter rod requires different porting than the long rod as piston accel and decel is different as is port timing required to make them run. A gain with longer rods is partially due to a better port timing.

[H2OPERF]

Regardless of porting a shorter rod sucks for big rpm in any engine.Short rods are good for torque in the lower rpm ranges, they increase intake velocity due to increased piston speed just before and after top/bottom deadcenter. This is probably the reason bom did it to make up for lazy airflow in these motors at lower rpm ranges.longer rods impose much less stress on the crank train,less piston side loads,and accel/decel the piston slower allowing for higher rpm.My opinion anyway Dave

[6Killer]

Even at 6 inches CC, the 3.3 rod really isnt that short as far as rod/stroke ratio goes. The problem is, with only a rod length change and no block redesign, now the pin hole is way low in the piston. If the rod length change had been done along with revised port locations in the block, shorter pistons etc, the 6 inch rod would be fine. In my opinion, OMC cheap screwed the 3.3 deal at the design process. For anything over 6800 rpm, the low wrist pin causes the load on the piston skirt to be excessive.

If you compare the looper to the 2.0/2.5 Mercs, the Merc's stroke is 2.65 inches, the Loopers is only .200" longer at 2.85". The Merc uses a 5.5" long rod, the short 3.3 rod is 6.0". Half inch longer rod in the 3.3 looper for only .200" more stroke. That is not out of line. Its the piston design that sux in the 3.3.

Gordon has the cure at a reasonable cost.

6