E-Series quiz! - Page 22

NZ · 05-10-2005, 12:37 PM

ef xr8

Paris Hilton · 05-10-2005, 12:43 PM

sportsman?

bprint xr8 · 05-10-2005, 12:53 PM

correct nz. Your go

NZ · 05-10-2005, 03:11 PM

What was the primary reason for the swirl port in the ea cyl heads?

Walkinshaw · 05-10-2005, 03:46 PM

(1) to reduce chamber volume to bring the CR up to 8.8:1
(2) to keep intake and exhaust charges seperated

eb2fairmont · 05-10-2005, 04:21 PM

To increase swirl promoting better mix of the fuel and air.

Walkinshaw · 05-10-2005, 04:58 PM

Thing is the 4.0 heads do not have the swirl port. Traditonaly a swirl port is used to promote better cylinder charging and to pull intake charge away from the chamber walls.

NZ · 05-10-2005, 07:13 PM

eb2fairmont: your on the right track it does do this but theres a reason why they wanted this.

Walki: may be correct answers but not the ones I want.

EFFalcon · 05-10-2005, 07:16 PM

coz its a bad idea... as was the EA :P

Walkinshaw · 05-10-2005, 08:42 PM

Karl, was it a way of achieving emissions?

EFFalcon · 05-10-2005, 08:47 PM

Boost

mcflux · 07-10-2005, 09:38 AM

As an real-time means of destructively testing the longevity of head gaskets?

Kenaz · 07-10-2005, 10:14 AM

Some of these questions are way too technical.

santoitaliano · 07-10-2005, 08:47 PM

attempt to improve fuel economy?

NZ · 07-10-2005, 09:17 PM

Argh where's my reply go!

The swil chamber was there because EA was orginally going to get EGR. Its primary reason was to mix the exuast gasses properly. It turned out they were meeting emissions without EGR so it was canned. It was too late to change the head casts to the swirl stayed and the heads were changed for the 4.0.

AU is also the same deal. I haven't seen an AU head but apparently they have a half swirl. Same deal as ea, was designed for EGR but didn't need it again.

Walkinshaw · 08-10-2005, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NZ

Argh where's my reply go!

The swil chamber was there because EA was orginally going to get EGR. Its primary reason was to mix the exuast gasses properly. It turned out they were meeting emissions without EGR so it was canned. It was too late to change the head casts to the swirl stayed and the heads were changed for the 4.0.

AU is also the same deal. I haven't seen an AU head but apparently they have a half swirl. Same deal as ea, was designed for EGR but didn't need it again.

I'm gonna take that as a win!!

so.......Here's one which extends into the AU.

What is the diffrence in the BBM from EF==>EL

and

What is the diffrence in the BBM from EL==>AU

montyv8 · 08-10-2005, 05:56 PM

EL===>AU the maf/air temp sensor is different.
cant remember the difference between ef/el

Perana · 08-10-2005, 06:06 PM

EF, EL and AU all had different mountings for the piping as well as the EF/EL --> AU had different temp/Map sensors

LUXO_8 · 08-10-2005, 06:07 PM

the casting on the EF BBM is different to EL, as it has the mounting holes for the EF dual pipe plastic intake.

no idea on AU though

edit..bah too slow

1TUFEA · 12-10-2005, 12:01 AM

NEXT ! no au Q's Please !

micksta · 12-10-2005, 06:39 PM

what was the answer to the question ?? since it was EA->EL related...

Thanatos · 13-10-2005, 11:17 AM

All three have different castings for the upper half of the manifold.

The difference between EF-EL was the mounting points on the top of the manifold for the intake piping.

The AU manifold has the same mounting points as the EL one, but it has no pipe coming out for the MAP sensor hose to connect to (as the AU had an IAT and MAP in one). The hole where the IAT sensor goes is smaller and doesn't have a thread in it. The area immediately after the throttle body is different (EF & EL look like they have a space for something to be mounted there, but the AU doesn't). And the steel vacuum tree is different (although that can be unscrewed so i don't know if it technically counts as a difference :P).

The lower halves of the manifold are all indentical ;)