Ford Cologne V6 engine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Ford Cologne engine)
Jump to: navigation, search
Ford Cologne V6
Manufacturer Ford Motor Company
Also called: Ford Taunus V6
Type: V6
Block alloy: cast iron
Valvetrain: pushrod overhead valve

The Ford Cologne V6, also known as the Ford Taunus V6, was a 60° cast iron block V6 engine built by the Ford Motor Company in Cologne, Germany, hence the name. It was closely related to the Ford Taunus V4 engine, adding two cylinders and no longer requiring a balance shaft. Over the years, the Cologne V6 was available with engine displacements of 1.8, 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9 and 4.0 litres. All except the Cosworth 24v derivative and later 4.0 litre sohc engines were pushrod overhead valve engines, with a single camshaft between the banks. The Cologne V6 is still in production, and is scheduled to be replaced in 2007.

Originally, the Cologne V6 was installed in cars intended for Germany and continental Europe, while the British "Essex" V6 was used in cars for the British market. Later, the Cologne V6 largely replaced the Essex V6 even for British-market vehicles. These engines were also used in the United States, especially in compact trucks.

The fuel injected Cologne engine is lighter and more powerful than the equivalent Essex V6 even though its maximum engine displacement is smaller, but it produces less torque (Cologne V6 162 ft·lbf (220 N·m) versus Essex V6 174 ft·lbf).

The Cologne V6 was made to be very compatible in installation with the Taunus V4, having the same transmission bolt pattern, the same engine mounts, and in many versions, a cylinder head featuring "siamesed" exhaust passages, which reduced the three exhaust outlets down to two on each side. The latter feature was great for compatibility, but poor for performance. The 2.4, 2.9 and 4.0 had three exhaust ports as in the photos, making them preferable.

The engine was available in both carburetted and fuel injected form.

Contents

The smallest version of the V6 was the 1.8 (1812 cm³) with a 80,0 mm bore and a 60,14 mm stroke. Its output was 82 hp (60 kW) and 135 Nm. Its only application was the

The original displacement of the V6 was 1998 cm³ with a 84,0 mm bore and a 60,14 mm stroke. Output was 85 hp (63 kW) and 151 Nm or 90 hp (66 kW) and 158 Nm.

Applications:

The first enlargement of the V6 appeared in 1967. It was the 2.3 (2293 cm³) with a 90,0 mm bore and a 60,14 stroke. Output was 108 hp (79 kW) and 185 Nm or 125 hp (92 kW) and 187 Nm.

The largest first generation V6 was the 2.6 (2550 cm³) introduced in 1969. It had a 90,0 mm bore and a 66,8 mm stroke. Output was 125 hp ( 92 kW) and 205 Nm.

Applications:

There was a special high performance version with 2637 cm³ with a 90,0 mm bore and a 69,0 mm stroke. With fuel injection, it produced 150 hp (110 kW) and 219,5 Nm. It was the only first generation engine with fuel injection. Its only application was the

The second generation Cologne V6 was introduced in 1974. It displaced 2.8 L (93.03 mm Bore, 68.5 mm Stroke, 2792cc). The European version used a "siamesed" two-port exhaust manifold, identical to the one used on the I4. This was useful in that existing cars with the I4 engine could be upgraded with relative ease. Despite the siamesed design in the European version, performance was largely indifferent to the US version with a three-port head. The engines also shared a geared camshaft design. Output was rated at 90 to 115 bhp (86 kW) for the US market and anywhere from 130 to 160 bhp (119 kW) for the European market, depending on the model.

In Europe the 2.8 was produced with carburetor (132 bhp), mechanical fuel injection (Bosch K-Jetronic, 160 bhp), and electronic injection (Ford EEC-IV, 150 bhp). Electronic injection only featured on the 2.8 Granada models for one year before being replaced with the 2.9 unit.

Tuning options are very limited with the Bosch K-Jetronic models. The siamesed inlet and exhaust ports of the 2.8 only respond well to forced induction or an overbore; normal tuning will yield only minor power results. The MFI 2.8 Cologne ( Capri / Sierra 2.8i ) uses a very restricted induction setup, and there is no open air kit available due to this.

TVR Tasmin/280i used the Cologne 2.8 with Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection, as did the early TVR 'S' series in 2.8 and revised 2.9 efi injection form.

Applications:

Above view of a 2.9 litre; front is to the right. Note the pronounced stagger of the cylinder banks. This is a fuel injected engine. The plenum chamber is silver, and the fuel rail is painted green.
Above view of a 2.9 litre; front is to the right. Note the pronounced stagger of the cylinder banks. This is a fuel injected engine. The plenum chamber is silver, and the fuel rail is painted green.
View of a 2.9 litre from the rear, flywheel side; note the 60° between the cylinder banks.
View of a 2.9 litre from the rear, flywheel side; note the 60° between the cylinder banks.
Left side of a 2.9 litre. Unlike the 2.8, the 2.9 does not merge the three exhaust ports into two manifold pipes.
Left side of a 2.9 litre. Unlike the 2.8, the 2.9 does not merge the three exhaust ports into two manifold pipes.

The 2.9 L shares the same basic design as the 2.8 L model, bar a few subtle differences. The camshaft is chain-driven rather than gear driven, so it rotates in the same direction as the crankshaft. The arrangement of the exhaust valves is different, eliminating the "Hot-Spot" that existed on the 2.8 L model. The cylinder heads also sport a more conventional three-port exhaust manifold. Output was rated at 140 hp (104 kW) @4600 rpm for the Light trucks (1986-92 Ranger & 1986-90 Bronco II) and 144 hp (107 kW) @4800 rpm for the Merkur Scorpio in the US market and anywhere from 150 to 160 hp (112 to 119 kW) for the European Market.

Bore was 93 mm (3.7 in) and stroke was 72 mm (2.8 in) for a total displacement of 2.9 L (2935 cc/177 in³).

In Europe, this engine was commonly fitted with the Bosch L-Jetronic fuel injection system, married to Ford's EEC-IV engine management. Because of this difference over the 2.8 L model, this version was a more popular candidate for after market modification (typically turbocharging) from such well known companies as Janspeed and Turbo Technics.


Applications:

The North American version of this engine suffered from several serious reliability issues over its lifespan.

Cylinder head cracking was common in early models. Compared to the relatively stout European heads, the North American 2.9 had apparently been subject to a reduction of material around the valve stem guides and rocker shaft mounting pedestals. Some engines would suffer from this failure after overheating only once.

The cylinder heads underwent a redesign for the 1989 model year, receiving additional material in problem areas, largely eliminating this specific failure. These head casts are commonly printed with the "89TM" designation. After-market heads are also available from World Products, with similar design improvements to the early OEM design.

Additionally, oiling problems were common, and added to the poor reputation of the North American 2.9. Many poorly maintained or high mileage engines exhibit serious valve train noise. This problem is due to a number of design faults. Valve train oil pressure was entirely dependent upon a supply fed through the two center cam bearings. Even slight bearing wear could cause complete loss of oil pressure to the hydraulic valve lifters, rocker shaft, and rockers. Excessive internal "bleeding" through the half-moon camshaft thrust plate also contributed to this, though this can be remedied by reinstalling the thrust plate in an upside-down position.

In the event that a cylinder head crack occurs, coolant can often enter the crankcase, contaminating the oil. This quickly led to cam bearing damage, triggering valve train oil pressure loss. As a result, these two design faults led to catastrophic engine failure in many North American 2.9s.

Regardless of these problems, many of these engines are still on the road in the US, and when maintained properly, are highly reliable powerplants. Use of synthetic oil and proper cooling system maintenance is essential if owners of early-model 2.9s wish to avoid trouble.

A special DOHC version of the 2.9 was created by Cosworth Engineering in 1991. Although it shared the same block as the standard 2.9 (with a few machining operations left out to improve strength), power output was up to 195 PS (143 kW) and torque was boosted to 203 ft·lbf (275 N·m) at 4500 rpm. This engine was used in the Ford Scorpio Cosworth 24V. It was always mated to an improved A4LD automatic gearbox. No manual versions were available.

The engine used an almost 3 meter long duplex chain to drive the camshafts, tensioned by a hydraulic tensioner. The oil pump was driven by a shaft located where the camshaft previously was. The ignition was replaced by a distributorless EDIS-6 system which had no moving parts at all.

The engine was known for its substantial increase in power delivery above 4000 rpm relative to the unmodified version; in recent years the engine has become a popular choice as a replacement engine for Ford Sierras.

An improved version of this engine was available in the restyled 1995 Ford Scorpio. Differences included two simplex chains with two hydraulic tensioners and the addition of a variable length intake system called VIS. Power output was increased to 210 bhp (157 kW).

1992 4.0 from a Ranger.
1992 4.0 from a Ranger.

The 4.0 version, although produced in Cologne like the others, was only fitted to American vehicles. The pushrod OHV engine was produced until 2000 and was used in the Ford Explorer and Ranger. Output was 160 hp (119 kW) and 225 ft·lbf (305 N·m). Though there is some variation, typically 155 hp (116 kW) is quoted as horsepower for 1990-92 applications.

This evolutionary redesign of the American 2.9 solved many of the reliability issues that plagued its predecessor. A beefier cylinder head design eliminated the 2.9's common failure of cracked heads. Hydraulic roller lifters replaced the simple hydraulic lifters used in the 2.9, which were sometimes overly sensitive to oil contamination, often requiring the lifters to be replaced prematurely. However, one major design fault was not completely eliminated: Valve rockers and upper pushrod tips still received poor oil supply, resulting in eventual wear to these areas, and consequential valvetrain noise as a result of the increased clearance. Required replacement of these parts is common in older engines.

The OHV 4.0 is well known for its exceptional low-end torque and reliability.

Applications:

Bore is 100.4 mm (3.95 in) and stroke is 84.4 mm (3.32 in) for a total displacement of 4 L (4,009 cc/245 in³).

A somewhat-related SOHC version was introduced for the 1997 Explorer alongside the pushrod. It uses a jackshaft in place of a camshaft to drive a timing chain to each cylinder head. Three timing chains are used, one from the crank to the jackshaft, one in the front of the engine to drive the cam for the left bank, and one on the back of the engine to drive the cam for the right bank. The SOHC version is the last Cologne engine still in production, though it will be phased out starting in 2007 in favor of the new Cyclone. It featured a variable length intake manifold and was good for 210 hp (157 kW) and 245 ft·lbf (332 N·m)f. Ford Power Products sells this engine as the SOHC-640.

A version of the SOHC engine as used in the Land Rover LR3 and is good for 216 horsepower (161 kW) and 269 ft·lbf (365 N·m)f of torque at 3000 rpm.

Applications:

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cologne_V6_engine"
Advanced Search
Included Web Search Engines


Safe Search

close

Top Matching Results

Occasionally Search.com will highlight specialized results that are based on the context of your query. Examples of specialized results include specific links to news, images, or video.

Top Matching Results may highlight information from other Search.com pages, content from the CNET Network of sites, or third party content. The listings are based purely on relevance. Search.com does not receive payment for listings in this section but our partners that provide this data may get paid for listing these products.

Sponsored Links

This section contains paid listings which have been purchased by companies that want to have their sites appear for specific search terms and related content. These listings are administered, sorted and maintained by a third party and are not endorsed by Search.com.

Search Results

Search.com sends your search query to several search engines at one time and integrates the results into one list which has been sorted by relevance using Search.com's proprietary algorithm. You can customize the list of search engines included in your metasearch from the preferences.

The search engines that are used in your metasearch may allow companies to pay to have their Web sites included within the results. To view the Paid Inclusion policy for a specific search engine, please visit their Web site. Search.com does not accept payment or share revenue with any search engine partner for listings in this section.